Proposed Rule2023-17423
Rules for FM Terrestrial Digital Audio Broadcasting Systems
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
August 22, 2023
Issuing agencies
Federal Communications Commission
Abstract
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, in which it seeks comment on proposals to change the digital audio broadcasting technical rules that would permit additional FM stations to increase FM hybrid digital effective radiated power (FM Digital ERP) beyond the existing levels without the need for individual Commission authorization, as well as allowing asymmetric digital sideband operation. These specific rule changes were proposed based on two consolidated Petitions for Rule Making filed in 2019 and 2022.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57033-57043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17423]
[[Page 57033]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 22-405; FCC 23-61; FR ID 161601]
Rules for FM Terrestrial Digital Audio Broadcasting Systems
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission or FCC) adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, in which
it seeks comment on proposals to change the digital audio broadcasting
technical rules that would permit additional FM stations to increase FM
hybrid digital effective radiated power (FM Digital ERP) beyond the
existing levels without the need for individual Commission
authorization, as well as allowing asymmetric digital sideband
operation. These specific rule changes were proposed based on two
consolidated Petitions for Rule Making filed in 2019 and 2022.
DATES: Comments may be filed on or before September 21, 2023 and reply
comments may be filed on or before October 6, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 22-405,
by any of the following methods:
<bullet> Electronic Filers: Federal Communications Commission's
website: <a href="http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs//">http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs//</a>. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments.
<bullet> Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing.
<bullet> Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although the
Commission continues to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal
Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
<bullet> Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive,
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
<bullet> U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
<bullet> Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the
Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings.
This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety
of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19.
<bullet> During the time the Commission's building is closed to the
general public and until further notice, if more than one docket or
rulemaking number appears in the caption of a proceeding, paper filers
need not submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number; an original and one copy are sufficient.
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#672124245257532701040449000811"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="03454040363337436560602d646c75">[email protected]</span></a> or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 888-835-5322.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert Shuldiner, Chief, Media Bureau,
Audio Division, (202) 418-2700; Thomas Nessinger, Senior Counsel, Media
Bureau, Audio Division, (202) 418-2700. For additional information
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) information collection
requirements contained in this document, contact Cathy Williams at 202-
418-2918, or via the internet at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4f0c2e3b27366118262323262e223c0f292c2c61282039"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9eac8ddc1d087fec0c5c5c0c8c4dae9cfcaca87cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order
and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), MB Docket No. 22-405; FCC 23-
61, adopted on July 31, 2023, and released on August 1, 2023. The full
text of this document is available for public inspection and copying
via ECFS at <a href="http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs">http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs</a> and the FCC's website at <a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-61A1.pdf">https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-61A1.pdf</a>. Documents will be
available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe
Acrobat. Alternative formats are available for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), by sending an
email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fd9b9e9ec8cdc9bd9b9e9ed39a928b">[email protected]</a> or calling the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432
(TTY).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
The NPRM in document FCC 23-61 seeks comment on proposed rule
amendments that may result in modified information collection
requirements. If the Commission adopts any modified information
collection requirements, the Commission will publish another notice in
the Federal Register inviting the public to comment on the
requirements, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, Public Law
104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. In addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the Commission seeks comment on
how it might further reduce the information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. Public Law 107-198; 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
Synopsis
1. Power Increase Petition; History of Digital FM Power Limits. In
2002, the Commission selected in-band, on-channel (IBOC) technology, at
the time developed and manufactured by iBiquity, to enable radio
broadcast stations to commence digital broadcasting. At that time, the
Commission adopted notification procedures allowing existing FM radio
stations to begin digital transmissions immediately on an interim basis
using the IBOC system. The iBiquity FM IBOC digital system includes
several hybrid modes and separate all-digital modes. In the hybrid and
extended hybrid modes, a station simultaneously transmits both the
analog and digital signals. In the all-digital modes, the station drops
the analog signal and is able to increase the capacity of the digital
signal. The Commission initially limited digital operations to the
hybrid digital mode, which permits the simultaneous transmission of
both the analog and digital signals within the current spectral
emissions mask of a single FM channel, placing redundant blocks of
digital information in the sidebands on both sides of and immediately
adjacent to the analog signal.
2. iBiquity and several independent parties conducted extensive
field and laboratory tests of the IBOC system prior to Commission
adoption. Based on the National Radio Systems Committee's (NRSC)
evaluation of those test results, in December 2001 the NRSC approved
the NRSC-5 standard, which specifies a digital FM effective radiated
power (ERP) equal to one percent of authorized analog FM power (20
decibels below carrier or -20 dBc). Subsequently, the Commission
adopted this as the maximum digital power level for the hybrid digital
mode of the FM IBOC system. In 2010, the Commission's Media Bureau
(Bureau) released an Order increasing the allowable power level of the
FM station's digital sidebands from -20 dBc to -14 dBc, upon electronic
notification to the Commission. The Bureau further allowed certain FM
stations to increase digital power above -14 dBc, to up to -10 dBc,
upon a showing that such power increase would comply with the formula
in the Bureau's 2010 order, and therefore would not cause harmful
[[Page 57034]]
interference to adjacent analog FM stations.
3. Petitioners in this rulemaking proceeding state that digital FM
receiver penetration continues to grow: according to petitioners, there
are over 90 million autos in the U.S. with digital receivers; receiver
penetration has exceeded 40% in some markets; and almost 60% of new
automobiles sold in the U.S. are equipped with digital IBOC receivers.
Petitioners National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) and Xperi
(successor to iBiquity) contend, however, that many stations have
resisted adopting IBOC technology due to the inability to replicate
their analog signal coverage with digital coverage, owing to the limits
placed on digital sideband power. They maintain that the Commission, by
its own admission, overprotected adjacent-channel FM analog stations
when implementing the allowable FM digital power table set forth in the
2010 Bureau Order, and further state that 12 years of experience with
the current FM digital power levels has yielded few if any complaints
of interference from hybrid digital FM transmissions. As evidence for
its contentions, petitioners NAB and Xperi attached an analysis of
existing digital FM stations transmitting at the current allowable
limit of -14 dBc, but whose digital signal substantially overlaps that
of adjacent analog FM stations. They assert that in none of these real-
world situations have there been any instances of digital-to-analog
interference. NAB and Xperi further attached the results of their own
field test, conducted under experimental authority, using three
stations in the New York market, two adjacent ``interfering'' stations
and one ``interfered with'' station. In this study the adjacent-channel
digital stations operated first with FM digital signals at -14 dBc, and
then at -10 dBc, while recordings were made of the adjacent channel
analog station under each condition. According to a panel of
listeners--consisting of NAB and Xperi employees--who evaluated the
recordings, there was ``no significant change or degradation of the
desired [FM analog] signal when the 1st-adjacent channel interferer
went from -14 dBc to -10 dBc'' even though these stations were
operating at levels far in excess of the levels permitted under the
current methodology.
4. Asymmetric Sideband Petition. The Commission's existing rules
assumed that digital power would be the same on both digital sidebands.
NAB, Xperi, and National Public Radio (NPR), in the 2019 Asymmetric
Sideband Petition, assert that with asymmetric sidebands a digital FM
station could protect one adjacent analog FM station while concurrently
increasing power on the other sideband frequency in order to expand its
digital coverage and building penetration. These petitioners conducted
a study that they state demonstrates that many more digital FM stations
could increase power above -14 dBc on at least one sideband. Out of
10,875 digital FM stations studied, petitioners contend that 6,120
could increase power to -10 dBc under the current rules, whereas if
asymmetric sidebands were allowed, an additional 3,496 stations could
increase one sideband to -10 dBc, with another 532 being able to
increase one sideband's power to between -14 and -10 dBc. These
petitioners also noted that, under the current rules, stations may only
request asymmetric sidebands under an experimental authorization. They
argued that the need to request experimental authorization, and the
temporary nature of such authorizations, discourages use of asymmetric
sidebands, which in turn limits digital FM stations to the power level
needed to protect the closer or higher-powered adjacent-channel analog
FM station. Petitioners thus requested that the Commission amend its
rules to allow FM stations to operate with asymmetric digital
sidebands, without having to request experimental authorization to do
so, in order to remove unnecessary regulatory barriers and promote
broader adoption of terrestrial digital FM broadcasting. The Bureau
sought comment on the consolidated Power Increase Petition and
Asymmetric Sideband Petition in a Public Notice released November 28,
2022.
5. After review of the two consolidated petitions for rulemaking
(Power Increase Petition and the Asymmetric Sideband Petition), and the
comments filed in response, the Commission concluded that the record
discloses sufficient reasons to justify the institution of a rulemaking
proceeding seeking further comment on these proposals. The Commission
tentatively concluded that the proposals in both the Power Increase
Petition and the Asymmetric Sideband Petition represent steps toward
improving the terrestrial digital FM broadcast radio service. The
Commission seeks comment on its proposal to allow additional stations
to increase FM digital power levels, to authorize asymmetric sideband
power levels without the need for experimental authorization, and to
rely on existing interference mitigation and remediation processes, and
notification procedures.
6. Power Increase Petition. The Commission proposed to amend its
rules to change its power increase methodology and notification
procedures, consistent with the Petition. Specifically, it proposed to
change the methodology used by digital FM stations to determine whether
they are eligible to increase digital FM power up to -10 dBc, or 10% of
analog power. It also proposed that such increases be allowed without
the need for additional individual special authorization, but upon
basic notification to the Commission. It further proposed that stations
notify the Commission of a power increase up to -10 dBc in the Bureau's
Licensing and Management System (LMS), using the same notification
procedures as currently used to notify the Commission of digital
operation up to -14 dBc.
7. Maximum Permissible FM Digital ERP Table. The Commission
proposed to amend its rules to modify the methodology a digital FM
station must use to determine whether it is eligible to increase its
power above -14 dBc. This modification, if adopted, would allow more
stations to increase power up to -10 dBc without the requirement of
submitting a contour analysis. Secondary services such as LPFM and FM
translators are eligible to operate in hybrid mode. To the extent that
such a secondary service station seeks to increase its digital power,
it would use the same methodology set forth herein. As summarized
above, currently a digital FM station may operate with digital power up
to -14 dBc. Additionally, a digital FM station could apply to operate
with power of up to -10 dBc (10% of analog power), pursuant to the
current methodology. Petitioners asserted that the intervening dozen
years of experience with the established 2010 power limits, as well as
follow-up field tests and other studies, demonstrate that most digital
FM stations should be able to operate at power levels of up to -10 dBc
without special Commission authorization, and without causing
interference to adjacent channel FM facilities. They proposed an
updated table for determining maximum permissible FM Digital ERP as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proponent analog F(50,10) field strength
at first adjacent station's analog 60 Maximum permissible FM
dB[micro] F(50,50) contour (symmetric digital ERP
sideband operation)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
57.9 dB[micro] and above.................. -14 dBc
56.5 dB[micro] to 57.8 dB[micro].......... -13 dBc
55.6 dB[micro] to 56.4 dB[micro].......... -12 dBc
54.1 dB[micro] to 55.5 dB[micro].......... -11 dBc
54.0 dB[micro] or less.................... -10 dBc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 57035]]
8. Currently, a licensee desiring FM Digital ERP in excess of -14
dBc must calculate the station's analog F(50,10) field strength at all
points on the 60 dB[micro] F(50,50) contour of a potentially affected
first-adjacent channel analog FM station. This calculation must be done
using each station's licensed analog facilities and the standard FCC
contour prediction methodology. Once the most restrictive analog
F(50,10) field strength of the proponent station has been determined,
the licensee will use the updated table to determine the proponent
station's maximum permissible FM Digital ERP.
9. Petitioners studied pairs of stations in which the digital FM
station operated at -14 dBc, yet the station's signal strength at the
protected contour of the adjacent analog FM station is greater than
that allowed by the current methodology. Despite this, petitioners
stated that none of the studied analog FM stations reported any
significant interference from the digital FM stations, in spite of
signal strengths higher than permitted by the current methodology. The
Commission noted that it had not received any interference complaints
from any of the adjacent channel stations most likely to experience
interference from the stations that petitioners studied, with greater-
than-normal power ratios. The Commission requests comment on the
methodology or interpretation of petitioners' studies, and whether they
support petitioners' claim that use of the proposed revised table will
not result in harmful interference.
10. The majority of commenters supported the proposals set forth in
the Power Increase Petition. Most agreed with petitioners that allowing
more stations to increase digital power would assist FM digital
stations to expand their digital service areas, as well as improve
building signal penetration. Two commenters expressed concern about the
effect of increased digital FM power on Low-Power FM (LPFM) and smaller
Class A FM stations, contending that such stations serve listeners
outside the protected 60 dB[micro] contour.
11. The Commission tentatively concluded that the record collected
to date supports the proposed methodology change. The Commission
initiated the process of authorizing digital broadcast operations in
1999 with the eventual goal of moving terrestrial broadcasting from an
all-analog to an all-digital world. Although it stated repeatedly that
there is no timetable for this eventual change to all-digital broadcast
radio, and did not alter that stance in the NPRM, its objective is to
advance the progress of digital radio without causing harmful
interference or disruption to existing analog operations. This is
especially true given the record evidence of increased digital FM
receiver penetration, even while recognizing that such receivers are
far from ubiquitous, and that the record was less complete with regard
to non-automotive digital FM receiver penetration. It is this desire to
encourage continued adoption of digital FM broadcast technology that
informed the Commission's tentative conclusions and proposals in this
NPRM.
12. The Commission tentatively concluded that the proposals set
forth in the Power Increase Petition support the goal of furthering the
progress of digital FM broadcast radio. It therefore proposed to amend
its rules to change the methodology used by digital FM stations to
determine whether they are eligible to operate with allowable IBOC
power up to and including -10 dBc, and to permit any existing FM
digital station currently operating with power below -10 dBc that
satisfies the table proposed to be adopted herein, to increase
allowable IBOC power without seeking prior Commission authorization and
without the requirement of submitting a contour overlap analysis. It
further proposed to adopt the petitioners' table for calculating
maximum allowable FM IBOC power set forth above. The Commission seeks
comment on this proposal. Are the contours and power levels set forth
in the Maximum Permissible FM Digital ERP Table reasonable from an
engineering standpoint? If not, how would commenters modify the table?
To the extent that any such modifications are proposed, the Commission
requests that commenters detail the engineering rationale underlying
any such modifications. If commenters generally support providing
greater flexibility for stations to increase their FM digital power but
disagree with the use of the Maximum Permissible FM Digital ERP Table,
what other methods would they suggest for calculating maximum FM
digital power?
13. Interference and Proposed Interference Remediation Procedures.
The Commission also seeks comment on whether changing the power
increase methodology will create an unacceptable risk of interference
to adjacent-channel stations. Most commenters agreed with petitioners
that interference has not been and would not be an issue with the
proposal to broaden the number of stations eligible to increase digital
power levels. Petitioners, and those who concurred with them, based
their contentions on the technical analyses and field studies they
cited. Some commenters, however, expressed caution surrounding digital
interference to FM analog stations, especially smaller stations. These
commenters argued that the proposed change to the methodology could
harm smaller stations such as Class A FM stations, LPFM stations, and
FM translators and AM stations rebroadcasting over FM translators, as
well as other entities beside FM stations, such as broadband providers.
14. The Bureau previously set forth detailed procedures to identify
and remedy complaints of digital-to-analog FM interference among full-
service FM broadcast stations. Those procedures require, first, that an
analog FM station receiving verifiable listener complaints of digital
interference within its protected contour contact the digital FM
station, and that the stations cooperate to confirm the interference
and attempt to eliminate it using voluntary tiered FM digital power
reductions. If the stations are unable to agree on appropriate
interference remediation measures, the affected analog FM licensee may
file a complaint with the Bureau. Bureau staff will review each
complaint and order appropriate action within 90 days of filing the
complaint. If the Bureau has not acted within 90 days, the interfering
station must reduce its digital power, and ongoing complaints of
interference may require subsequent stepped reductions of digital
power.
15. Like the petitioners and commenters, the Commission has noted
few interference complaints from full-service analog FM stations
resulting from adjacent-channel digital transmissions. Given the
paucity of interference complaints, the Commission tentatively
concluded that the interference remediation procedures outlined above
will continue to suffice to handle such digital-to-analog interference
complaints as may arise between full-service FM stations. These
interference mitigation and remediation procedures would therefore
remain in place to guard against any instances of actual interference
to other facilities. The Commission seeks comment on this tentative
conclusion. To the extent that commenters believe that these current
procedures would be inadequate to deal with the increased power levels
proposed in this NPRM, they are asked to state specifically where the
current system is deficient, and describe in detail the interference
identification and remediation measures they feel are needed.
16. As secondary services LPFM and FM translators stations are not
eligible for the interference remediation
[[Page 57036]]
procedures outlined herein. Because secondary services are not
protected from interference from full-service stations, the Commission
did not propose to modify this approach such that secondary services
can use these interference remediation procedures to claim interference
from full-service stations. However, although the number of secondary
service stations employing hybrid digital operation to date is small,
the Commission invites comment as to whether it should adopt any
digital interference remediation procedures for secondary service
analog stations claiming interference from secondary service digital
stations. All full-service stations, including Class A stations, may
take advantage of the interference remediation procedures proposed
herein.
17. Commenters may wish to address whether the station complaints
described above should be based on objective criteria such as ``agreed-
upon [mathematical] formulas,'' rather than listener reports. Should
the number of reports of ongoing interference required (currently six)
be increased or decreased? Should a complaining station be allowed
instead to submit studies and/or measurements demonstrating that the
digital FM signal within the complaining station's protected contour
exceeds allowable limits? Additionally, how should a digital FM station
that has increased its digital power be treated if and when an
adjacent-channel analog FM station subsequently increases its analog
power, and/or moves its facilities closer to the digital FM station?
Should we give precedence to the analog FM signal? Alternatively,
should the digital FM facility that now seeks a power increase be
protected over a subsequent facility modification by an adjacent-
channel analog FM station?
18. Two commenters raised the issue of how a digital FM station
power increase would affect protection to incumbent stations,
expressing concern about its impact on LPFM and other smaller stations.
They argued that protection to the 60 dB[micro] contour is insufficient
for analog FM stations on adjacent channels that, they contend, have
listenership well beyond that contour. The Commission tentatively
concluded that there is no need to provide protection from actual
interference outside the protected contour of an analog FM station from
the digital signal of a full-service FM station, and seeks comment on
this conclusion. Should protection of incumbent analog FM stations on
adjacent channels be increased beyond the 60 dB[micro] contour and, if
so, to what contour? Commenters are asked to give detailed evidence for
or against increasing the level of protection to analog FM stations on
adjacent channels from increased FM digital sideband power proposals.
Commenter Press Communications, LLC (Press), offered a number of
proposals to remedy what it sees as the problems the Power Increase
Petition would cause to smaller, coastal FM stations, including: (i)
allowing such stations to move up to three miles inland under certain
conditions; (ii) adopting a universal analog 60 dB[micro] protection in
Zone I for all co-, first-, and second-adjacent analog Class A to Class
B station-to-station separations; and (iii) extending protection beyond
the 60 dB[micro] contour for Class A stations to the 45 dB[micro]
contour or even a 50 dB[micro] Longley-Rice contour. While noting that
Press's proposed solutions appear to be geographically targeted and
class-specific, the Commission invites comment on Press's proposals.
Finally, the Commission invites comment as to the potential effect of
the proposed change in the methodology for calculating digital FM power
levels on all stakeholders utilizing the 88-108 MHz frequency band,
whether they are broadcasters or providers of other services.
19. Superpowered FM Stations. The Commission proposed to continue
to limit the power level for previously authorized superpowered FM
stations to the station's class maximum. One commenter noted that
allowing a legacy digital superpowered FM station meeting the proposed
new table to increase its digital ERP up to -10 dBc, or 10% of the
analog ERP could allow certain stations to increase digital power to
above the class maximum, resulting in harmful interference. The
Commission tentatively concluded that a superpowered station's digital
ERP should continue to be limited to the class maximum provided in 47
CFR 73.211 and 73.511. Thus, it proposed that a superpowered FM station
seeking to increase its digital power above -14 dBc may request
experimental authorization or special temporary authorization (STA) to
do so, and the staff would review such requests on a case-by-case
basis. The Commission solicits comment on this conclusion and proposal,
and requests that commenters opposing this view detail the reasons why
they believe that a digital FM station whose power greatly exceeds its
class maximum will not cause excessive interference to adjacent channel
analog facilities.
20. Notification of FM Digital Power Increase. The Commission seeks
comment on the type of notification, if any, that should be required of
a digital FM station increasing digital power, and whom should be
notified. One commenter urged that any adopted notification procedures
also include a provision that the FM digital station increasing power
notify the licensees of first-adjacent channel FM stations at least 30
days prior to implementation of the power increase, but in no event
after the power increase has already taken place. The International
Association of Audio Information Services (IAAIS), representing radio
reading services that use analog FM station sub-carriers to provide
audio versions of publications for print-disabled individuals, likewise
requested that a host station increasing digital power to -10 dBc
provide written notification to any radio reading services on that host
station's sub-carriers, as well as to all radio reading services
broadcasting over any adjacent channel stations' sub-carriers.
21. Under the current system, stations increasing symmetric digital
sideband power to levels up to -14 dBc need to submit LMS Form 2100,
Schedule 335-FM, FM Digital Notification (Schedule 335-FM), without any
further showings or analysis to be submitted to the staff for approval.
The digital FM station must electronically notify the Media Bureau of
increased power FM digital operation within 10 days of commencement of
operations at increased power. Although these notifications are
available to the public from the FCC's database, the staff takes no
action on the notifications, and they do not appear in the Commission's
public notices of broadcast applications or broadcast actions.
Symmetric digital operation at power levels between -14 dBc and -10 dBc
currently require both notification on Schedule 335-FM and a showing
that the contours generated do not overlap with the protected contours
of adjacent-channel FM stations. Such showings are confirmed by the
staff. Under the Commission's proposal herein, such showings would no
longer be required for power increases up to -10 dBc--the station
seeking a power increase would only have to provide notification by
filing Schedule 335-FM, and the staff would neither grant nor deny such
notification. The Commission tentatively concluded that this
notification-only procedure should be sufficient for digital FM
stations increasing digital sideband power the additional 4 dB it
proposes to allow in the NPRM, and seeks comment on this conclusion. It
likewise tentatively concluded that Schedule 335-FM notification should
be required for any digital FM station permanently reducing
[[Page 57037]]
digital power, and further tentatively concluded that any such
notification of digital FM power reduction be accompanied by a short
statement of the reason(s) for the power reduction (e.g., interference
complaints, inadequate signal coverage, etc.), and seeks comment on
this tentative conclusion.
22. Although the filing of Schedule 335-FM does not generate a
separate LMS Public Notice, all filed LMS forms are searchable, and are
thus available to the public using the LMS ``Search'' function. The
Commission thus seeks comment on whether this accessibility should
provide adequate notice to other stations and interested parties that a
first-adjacent channel FM digital station is increasing its digital
power. It seeks comment on whether Schedule 335-FM filings in LMS will
provide adequate notice or if it should adopt any other notification
procedure. Commenters holding differing views should explain why the
Commission should require additional specific notice, i.e., to first-
adjacent stations or entities other than the Commission, than is
currently required. Should it require direct notice to all potentially
affected first-adjacent channel FM stations in addition to that
provided by the notification filed in LMS? Should potential direct
notice to first-adjacent channel FM stations be given a certain period
of time, such as 30 days, before the digital station is allowed to
implement the digital power increase? In the alternative, should the
station increasing digital power be required not only to file Schedule
335-FM, but further be obliged to wait a certain period of time before
implementing the power increase, so as to give interested parties an
opportunity to comment and/or object? The Commission asks that
commenters provide reasons for their positions regarding notice, and
further to provide specifics as to both the type of notice that should
be given and the key recipients of that notice.
23. IAAIS expressed concerns about digital FM sideband power and
its effects on radio reading services. Radio reading services, using
primarily volunteer staff, provide valuable services by reading daily
and weekly newspapers, magazines, current books, and other programs of
interest to blind, visually impaired, physically disabled, and other
print-disabled persons, who cannot easily access or consume written
media. While these important services employ a variety of methods to
deliver their content, the majority of IAAIS members broadcast over
analog FM radio subcarriers. With regard to IAAIS's concerns about the
effect of increased digital FM sideband power on such subcarriers, even
absent a general requirement of direct notice of digital power increase
to potentially affected stations, should such radio reading services
receive special notification from the station proposing to increase
digital power, whether that is the station hosting the radio reading
service or a nearby adjacent channel station? If so, what form should
that direct notice take? If, after reviewing comments, the Commission
determines that a station increasing digital power must notify all
first-adjacent channel stations of the increase, should it further
require that any first-adjacent channel station receiving such notice
notify any radio reading service(s) that it hosts?
24. Asymmetric Sideband Petition. The Commission proposed to grant
blanket authorization to digital FM stations to originate digital
transmissions at different power levels on the upper and lower digital
sidebands without having to request experimental authorization. As with
any digital FM power increase resulting from the proposed revised power
table, discussed above, it proposed that a digital FM station need only
notify us of asymmetric sideband operation by filing notification
(Schedule 335-FM) in the Bureau's LMS database.
25. Asymmetric Sideband Operation/Interference Issues. Currently,
digital FM stations must use the same ERP on both the upper and lower
digital sidebands. Thus, as pointed out by petitioners, any digital FM
station's digital power was limited to that needed to protect the
nearer of the adjacent channel analog FM stations, regardless of
whether there was a need to limit power on the other sideband.
Petitioners contended that allowing calculation of the maximum
allowable digital FM ERP on a per-sideband basis allows such stations
to optimize their digital signal coverage while still protecting analog
FM stations on adjacent channels. For example, a digital FM station
with an analog station only on the first adjacent channel above its
frequency could selectively reduce power on the upper sideband to avoid
causing interference, while maintaining or even increasing digital ERP
on the lower sideband to enhance signal coverage without interfering
with a nearby station. Alternatively, a digital FM station in the same
situation could maintain its digital ERP on the upper sideband while
increasing power on the lower sideband. The 2022 Power Increase
Petition proposed a new formula to calculate maximum digital power per
sideband, updated to comport with the Power Increase Petition proposal.
The proposed new method for calculating per-sideband FM Digital ERP
yields the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proponent analog F(50,10) field strength
at first adjacent station's analog 60 Maximum permissible FM
dB[micro] F(50,50) contour (asymmetric digital ERP
sideband operation)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
54.9 dB[micro] and above.................. -14 dBc
53.5 dB[micro] to 54.8 dB[micro].......... -13 dBc
52.6 dB[micro] to 53.4 dB[micro].......... -12 dBc
51.1 dB[micro] to 52.5 dB[micro].......... -11 dBc
51.0 dB[micro] or less.................... -10 dBc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. When operating in symmetric mode, each digital sideband
contributes exactly half of the total authorized digital power for that
station. For example, a station that is authorized to operate in
symmetric mode with a total digital power of -10 dBc operates with half
that power (-13 dBc) in each digital sideband. When a station operates
in asymmetric mode with one digital sideband having more power than the
other, it is necessary to ensure that each sideband is limited to the
appropriate contour-limited value from the table, and that the total
digital power in both sidebands together does not exceed the total
amount of digital power that would be authorized if the station were
operating in symmetric mode. Accordingly, the Effective Radiated Power
at each sideband must be adjusted so that the total sideband powers do
not exceed the total power that would be authorized for that station
operating in symmetric sideband mode.
27. Those commenters that addressed the Asymmetric Sideband
Petition uniformly supported it, although Press, which filed ex parte
presentations after the commenting period expired, questioned whether
these proposals, if adopted, would actually protect adjacent FM analog
stations to the extent it believed is required. Many of the supporters
noted that eliminating the need to seek experimental authorization for
asymmetric sideband operation would encourage more stations to adopt
this operational mode.
28. Given the general lack of commenter objection and the record as
presented by the petitioners and certain commenters, the Commission
proposed to authorize asymmetric sideband operation for FM digital
broadcasters operating at any power level, without the need first to
seek experimental authorization. As with any potential FM digital power
increase, the Commission proposed that a digital FM station seeking to
operate with asymmetric sidebands must notify the Bureau using Schedule
335-FM. It reiterated that the filing of Schedule 335-FM with the
[[Page 57038]]
Commission does not trigger the release of a separate Public Notice in
LMS, but that, like all LMS forms, the filing is searchable and thus
available to members of the public using the LMS ``Search'' function.
The Commission therefore seeks comment on whether notification to the
Commission should suffice to provide notice to other interested
parties, including adjacent channel stations. To the extent that
commenters believe that more or different notice should be required, it
asks that they specify the type of notice and the reasons why form
availability in LMS is not sufficient. It further tentatively concluded
that Schedule 335-FM notification should be required for any digital FM
station that permanently reverts to symmetric sideband operation from
asymmetric sideband operation, and further tentatively conclude that
any such notification of return to symmetric sideband operation be
accompanied by a short statement of the reason(s) for this action. The
Commission seeks comment on this tentative conclusion.
29. Likewise, the Commission believed that the interference
mitigation and remediation procedures established in 2010 should be
sufficient to remedy any reports of inter-station interference as a
result of asymmetric sideband operation. It observed that asymmetric
sideband operation per se should not cause an increase in interference
or complaints thereof, as stations employing such operation are already
protecting the closer of the adjacent stations to their sideband
frequencies, and the only power increases should be toward adjacent
channel stations that are more distant, either physically or by
frequency. To the extent that commenters believe that more stringent
interference mitigation and remediation procedures are required, the
Commission asks that such commenters detail the measures they deem
necessary as well as the precise reasons why the current procedures are
inadequate.
30. Other Issues: Digital Equity and Inclusion. Finally, the
Commission, as part of its continuing effort to advance digital equity
for all, including people of color, persons with disabilities, persons
who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who are or have been
historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by
persistent poverty or inequality, invites comment on any equity-related
considerations and benefits (if any) that may be associated with the
proposals and issues discussed herein. The term ``equity'' is used here
consistent with Executive Order 13985 as the consistent and systematic
fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including
individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied
such treatment. Such individuals include Black, Latino, and Indigenous
and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and
other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with
disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise
adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality. Section 1 of
the Communications Act of 1934 as amended provides that the FCC
``regulat[es] interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire
and radio so as to make [such service] available, so far as possible,
to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.''.
Specifically, the FCC seeks comment on how its proposals may promote or
inhibit advances in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as
well the scope of the Commission's relevant legal authority.
Procedural Matters
Ex Parte Rules
31. The proceeding this NPRM initiates shall be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
ex parte rules, 47 CFR 1.1200 et seq. Persons making ex parte
presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a
memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days
after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the
Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations
are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list
all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at
which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data
presented and arguments made during the presentation. Memoranda must
contain a summary of the substance of the ex parte presentation and not
merely a listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one or two
sentence description of the views and arguments presented is generally
required. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's
written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the
presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her
prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant
page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be
found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown
or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be
written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with 47 CFR
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 47 CFR 1.49(f) or for which the
Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and
must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt,
searchable.pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
32. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),
requires that a regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared for notice
and comment rule making proceedings, unless the agency certifies that
``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) is independently
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
33. As required by the RFA, the Commission has prepared this
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
by the policies proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be
identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines
for comments on the NPRM provided on the first page of the NPRM. The
Commission will send a copy of this entire NPRM, including this IRFA,
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration
(SBA). In addition, the NPRM and the IRFA (or summaries thereof) will
be published in the Federal Register.
[[Page 57039]]
A. Need For, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
34. In the NPRM, the Commission proposes to revise its methodology
for determining whether a digital FM station may increase the effective
radiated power (ERP) on its digital sidebands; to allow a digital FM
station to implement or increase digital ERP from 14 dB below the
analog carrier ERP (expressed as -14 dBc) to -10 dBc, without the need
to do more than notify the Commission of such operation by FCC form;
and to allow a digital FM station to operate with different power
levels on its upper and lower digital sidebands, without first having
to seek experimental authorization for such operation. The Commission
initiated the NPRM in response to two Petitions for Rulemaking that
were consolidated by the Media Bureau (Bureau) because the proposed
rule changes both relate to improving digital FM signal quality and
minimizing the effect of the digital FM station signal on adjacent
channel FM transmissions. In the earlier of the two petitions, filed
December 9, 2019, petitioners National Association of Broadcasters
(NAB), Xperi Corporation (Xperi), and National Public Radio (NPR)
request blanket authorization to set digital power at different levels
on each digital sideband, thus allowing a digital FM station to
protect, for example, an analog FM station on a lower first adjacent
channel, while enabling an increase in digital power on the upper
sideband where there is no adjacent analog FM station or a more distant
adjacent station. In the second petition, filed October 26, 2022, NAB
and Xperi request that the FCC adopt an updated methodology to
determine digital FM power levels for stations seeking to exceed the
currently authorized FM digital effective radiated power (ERP) of -14
dBc. The Commission seeks comment on whether the rule changes proposed,
based on the Asymmetric Sideband Petition and Power Increase Petition,
would serve the public interest by providing digital FM stations with
the ability to increase power and, concomitantly, increase coverage
area, building penetration, and provide a more robust digital signal.
Petitioners, and most commenters on the petitions, maintain that the
current method for determining digital FM power overprotects analog FM
stations on adjacent frequencies from digital interference, and that
higher digital FM power levels would enable digital FM stations to more
closely replicate their analog FM coverage with digital coverage. With
regard to the Asymmetric Sideband Petition, petitioners contend that
allowing calculation of the maximum allowable digital FM power on a
per-sideband basis allows such stations to optimize their digital
signal coverage while still protecting analog FM stations on adjacent
channels. For example, a digital FM station with an analog station only
on the first adjacent channel above its frequency could selectively
reduce power on the upper sideband to avoid causing interference, while
maintaining or even increasing digital power on the lower sideband to
enhance signal coverage without interfering with a nearby station.
Alternatively, a digital FM station in the same situation could
maintain its digital power on the upper sideband while increasing power
on the lower sideband.
35. The Commission seeks comment on the following issues relating
to digital FM station operations: (1) to change the methodology used by
digital FM stations to determine whether they are eligible to increase
digital FM ERP up to -10 dBc, or 10% of analog power, upon basic
notification to the Commission and without the need for additional
individual special authorization; (2) to allow a power increase up to -
10 dBc by notifying the Commission in the Bureau's Licensing and
Management System (LMS), utilizing the same notification procedures as
currently used; (3) whether changing the method for calculating whether
a digital FM station can increase its digital power will create an
unacceptable risk of interference to adjacent-channel stations; (4)
whether to continue to limit the power level for previously authorized
superpowered FM stations to their class maximum; (5) the type of
notification, if any, we should require of a digital FM station
increasing digital power, and whom should be notified; (6) whether the
interference mitigation and remediation procedures currently used for
inter-station digital FM interference should be sufficient to remedy
any reports of interference to FM broadcast stations or other spectrum
users as a result of a station's increase in its digital power; (7)
whether to grant blanket authorization to digital FM stations to
originate digital transmissions at different power levels on the upper
and lower digital sidebands without having to request experimental
authorization; and (8) whether the interference mitigation and
remediation procedures currently used for inter-station digital FM
interference should be sufficient to remedy any reports of inter-
station interference as a result of asymmetric sideband operation.
B. Legal Basis
36. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 4(i),
4(j), 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, and 324 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),
301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, and 324.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
37. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3). The RFA
generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning
as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small
governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business''
has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the
Small Business Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) is
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the
SBA.
38. Radio Stations. This industry is comprised of ``establishments
primarily engaged in broadcasting aural programs by radio to the
public.'' Programming may originate in their own studio, from an
affiliated network, or from external sources. The SBA small business
size standard for this industry classifies firms having $41.5 million
or less in annual receipts as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017
show that 2,963 firms operated in this industry during that year. Of
this number, 1,879 firms operated with revenue of less than $25 million
per year. Based on this data and the SBA's small business size
standard, we estimate a majority of such entities are small entities.
39. The Commission estimates that as of March 31, 2023, there were
4,472 licensed commercial AM radio stations and 6,681 licensed
commercial FM radio stations, for a combined total of 11,153 commercial
radio stations. Of this total, 11,151 stations (or 99.98%) had revenues
of $41.5 million or less in 2022, according to Commission staff review
of the BIA Kelsey Inc. Media Access Pro Database (BIA) on April 7,
2023, and therefore these licensees qualify as small entities under the
SBA definition. In addition, the Commission estimates that as of March
31, 2023, there were 4,219 licensed noncommercial (NCE) FM radio
stations, 1,999 low power FM (LPFM) stations, and 8,939 FM translators
and
[[Page 57040]]
boosters. The Commission however does not compile, and otherwise does
not have access to financial information for these radio stations that
would permit it to determine how many of these stations qualify as
small entities under the SBA small business size standard.
Nevertheless, given the SBA's large annual receipts threshold for this
industry and the nature of radio station licensees, we presume that all
of these entities qualify as small entities under the above SBA small
business size standard.
40. We note, however, that in assessing whether a business concern
qualifies as ``small'' under the above definition, business (control)
affiliations must be included. Our estimate, therefore, likely
overstates the number of small entities that might be affected by our
action, because the revenue figure on which it is based does not
include or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies. In addition,
another element of the definition of ``small business'' requires that
an entity not be dominant in its field of operation. We are unable at
this time to define or quantify the criteria that would establish
whether a specific radio or television broadcast station is dominant in
its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses
to which the rules may apply does not exclude any radio or television
station from the definition of a small business on this basis and is
therefore possibly over-inclusive. An additional element of the
definition of ``small business'' is that the entity must be
independently owned and operated. Because it is difficult to assess
these criteria in the context of media entities, the estimate of small
businesses to which the rules may apply does not exclude any radio or
television station from the definition of a small business on this
basis and similarly may be over-inclusive.
41. Low Power FM Stations. The SBA small business size standard for
Radio Stations applies to low power FM stations. The Radio Stations
industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in broadcasting
aural programs by radio to the public. Programming may originate in
their own studio, from an affiliated network, or from external sources.
The SBA small business size standard for this industry classifies firms
having $41.5 million or less in annual receipts as small. U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that 2,963 firms in this industry operated
during that year. Of this number, 1,879 firms operated with revenue of
less than $25 million per year. Therefore, based on the SBA's size
standard we conclude that the majority of low power FM stations are
small.
42. Additionally, according to Commission data as of March 31,
2023, there were 1,999 Low Power FM licensed broadcast stations and
8,939 FM Translator Stations. The Commission does not compile and
otherwise does not have access to financial information for these
stations that would permit it to determine how many of the stations
would qualify as small entities under the SBA size standard. However,
given that low power FM stations and FM translators and boosters are
very small and limited in their operations and unlikely to have annual
receipts anywhere near the SBA small size standard, we will presume
that these licensees qualify as small entities under the SBA size
standard.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements
43. In this section, we identify the reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements proposed in the NPRM and consider whether
small entities are affected disproportionately by any such
requirements. As discussed above, the NPRM seeks comment on changes to
the Commission's rules governing digital FM broadcast stations.
Allowing some broadcasters that are small entities to increase digital
FM power, or to operate with asymmetric sideband power, as proposed in
the NPRM would be a voluntary process. Each FM station that meets the
proposed requirements can make an individual decision about whether
operating with higher digital power and/or asymmetric sideband power is
a feasible technical and economic upgrade option. The Commission does
not propose to compel, but rather merely to authorize, the proposed
digital power increases and operations. The NPRM proposes new mandatory
reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance requirements for small
entities that are FM licensees and choose to increase their power and/
or adopt asymmetric sideband operation. We note that the adoption of
the proposed rules may require modification of current requirements and
processes for small entities that choose to implement these operational
changes, and may require modification of FCC forms, including but not
limited to, FCC Form 2100, Schedule 335-FM, which is the form currently
used to notify the Commission of the initiation of digital operations.
The NPRM thus may impose additional obligations or expenditure of
resources on small businesses that elect to modify their digital
service, and may require small entities to hire professionals to comply
with the proposed rules.
44. The NPRM seeks comment on the notification and interference
mitigation and remediation obligations of digital FM stations,
including small entities. For example, the proposal to amend the
Commission's rules to modify the methodology a digital FM station must
use to determine whether it is eligible to increase its power above -14
dBc, if adopted, would reduce compliance obligations for small entities
by allowing them to increase power up to -10 dBc without submitting a
contour analysis. Small entity stations that seek to increase digital
sideband power by the addition of 4 dB would need to notify the
Commission by filing Schedule 335-FM. At this time the Commission
cannot quantify the cost of compliance for small entities that choose
to modify their operations pursuant to the NPRM proposals. However, the
Commission expects the information it receives in comments to help it
identify and evaluate relevant compliance matters for small entities,
including compliance costs and other burdens that may result from
potential changes discussed in the NPRM.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
45. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant,
specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four
alternatives (among others): ``(1) the establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the
use of performance, rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small
entities.''
46. The NPRM considers a voluntary process by which some FM
stations may operate at increased digital power and/or with differing
power levels on each digital sideband. According to commenters, the
proposal would benefit digital FM broadcasters and listeners alike by
promoting greater adoption of FM digital transmission systems.
Commenters also assert that adoption of the NPRM proposals would
increase the robustness of the digital FM broadcast service by
improving stations' signal quality, including building penetration and
allowing a digital FM licensee to
[[Page 57041]]
expand its digital service area to approximate more closely its analog
service area. Other commenters caution that the proposed change may
harm small entities by causing surrounding interference for smaller
stations such as Class A FM stations, LPFM stations, and stations
broadcasting over FM translators.
47. In the NPRM, the Commission considers specific steps it could
take and alternatives to the proposed rules that could minimize
potential economic impact on small entities that might be affected by
the proposed rule change, as well as any other rule changes that may be
required. For example, to avoid increasing burdens on digital FM
broadcasters, the Commission proposes that any notification of
increases in digital FM ERP and/or initiation of asymmetric sideband
operation be made by filing FCC Form 2100, Schedule 335-FM, in the
searchable LMS database. This is the same form currently used to notify
the Commission of the initiation of digital operations. Under the
proposed rule changes fewer stations would be required to submit a
contour study with Schedule 335-FM, as is currently the case for
digital FM stations proposing digital power levels above -14 dBc.
Therefore, the administrative impact of the proposed rule changes will
be similar to that of existing digital FM service, will be less
burdensome for most digital FM broadcasters, and thus is not likely to
have an additional adverse economic impact on small entities.
48. The Commission also considers alternatives to its current
interference remediation procedures, including whether station
complaints should be assessed based on listener complaints or based on
studies and/or measurements demonstrating that a digital FM signal
within the complaining station's protected contour exceeds allowable
limits. Another alternative considered in relation to interference that
may impact small entities is whether protection of incumbent analog FM
stations on adjacent channels should be increased beyond the 60
dB[micro] contour. The Commission tentatively concluded that this
protection is not necessary, however, it also considered whether this
protection should be increased and, if so, to what contour. The
Commission expects to more fully consider the economic impact and
alternatives for small entities following the review of comments filed
in response to the NPRM.
F. Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With, the
Commission's Proposals
49. None.
50. To request materials in accessible formats for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d3b5b0b0e6e3e793b5b0b0fdb4bca5">[email protected]</a> or call the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).
Ordering Clauses
51. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to Sec. 1.407 of the
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.407, that the Petition for Rulemaking of
the National Association of Broadcasters, Xperi Corporation, and
National Public Radio filed on Dec. 9, 2019 and the Petition for
Rulemaking of the National Association of Broadcasters and Xperi
Corporation filed on Oct. 26, 2022 are granted.
52. it is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained
in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, and
324 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 301, 302a, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, and 324 this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
53. it is further ordered that the Commission's Office of the
Secretary, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in this preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 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, 155, 301, 303, 307, 309, 310, 334,
336, 339.
0
2. Amend Sec. 73.310 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.310 FM technical definitions.
(a) Frequency modulation. The following definitions pertain to
frequency modulation, as defined in Sec. 73.310(a)(17).
(1) Antenna height above average terrain (HAAT). HAAT is calculated
by: determining the average of the antenna heights above the terrain
from 3 to 16 kilometers (2 to 10 miles) from the antenna for the eight
directions evenly spaced for each 45[deg] of azimuth starting with True
North (a different antenna height will be determined in each direction
from the antenna): and computing the average of these separate heights.
In some cases less than eight directions may be used. (See Sec.
73.313(d).) Where circular or elliptical polarization is used, the
antenna height above average terrain must be based upon the height of
the radiation of the antenna that transmits the horizontal component of
radiation.
(2) Antenna power gain. The square of the ratio of the root-mean-
square (RMS) free space field strength produced at 1 kilometer in the
horizontal plane in millivolts per meter for 1 kW antenna input power
to 221.4 mV/m. This ratio is expressed in decibels (dB). If specified
for a particular direction, antenna power gain is based on that field
strength in the direction only.
(3) Auxiliary facility. An auxiliary facility is an antenna
separate from the main facility's antenna, permanently installed on the
same tower or at a different location, from which a station may
broadcast for short periods without prior Commission authorization or
notice to the Commission while the main facility is not in operation
(e.g., where tower work necessitates turning off the main antenna or
where lightning has caused damage to the main antenna or transmission
system) (See Sec. 73.1675).
(4) Center frequency. The term ``center frequency'' means:
(i) The average frequency of the emitted wave when modulated by a
sinusoidal signal.
(ii) The frequency of the emitted wave without modulation.
(5) Composite antenna pattern. The composite antenna pattern is a
relative field horizontal plane pattern for 360 degrees of azimuth, for
which the value at a particular azimuth is the greater of the
horizontally polarized or vertically polarized component relative field
values. The composite antenna pattern is normalized to a maximum of
unity (1.000) relative field.
(6) Composite baseband signal. A signal which is composed of all
program and other communications signals that frequency modulates the
FM carrier.
(7) Effective radiated power. The term ``effective radiated power''
means the product of the antenna power
[[Page 57042]]
(transmitter output power less transmission line loss) times:
(i) The antenna power gain, or
(ii) the antenna field gain squared. Where circular or elliptical
polarization is employed, the term effective radiated power is applied
separately to the horizontal and vertical components of radiation. For
allocation purposes, the effective radiated power authorized is the
horizontally polarized component of radiation only.
(8) Equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP). The term
``equivalent isotropically radiated power (also known as ``effective
radiated power above isotropic) means the product of the antenna input
power and the antenna gain in a given direction relative to an
isotropic antenna.
(9) FM Blanketing. Blanketing is that form of interference to the
reception of other broadcast stations which is caused by the presence
of an FM broadcast signal of 115 dB[micro] (562 mV/m) or greater signal
strength in the area adjacent to the antenna of the transmitting
station. The 115 dB[micro] contour is referred to as the blanketing
contour and the area within this contour is referred to as the
blanketing area.
(10) FM broadcast band. The band of frequencies extending from 88
to 108 MHz, which includes those assigned to noncommercial educational
broadcasting.
(11) FM broadcast channel. A band of frequencies 200 kHz wide and
designated by its center frequency. Channels for FM broadcast stations
begin at 88.1 MHz and continue in successive steps of 200 kHz to and
including 107.9 MHz.
(12) FM broadcast station. A station employing frequency modulation
in the FM broadcast band and licensed primarily for the transmission of
radiotelephone emissions intended to be received by the general public.
(13) Field strength. The electric field strength in the horizontal
plane.
(14) Free space field strength. The field strength that would exist
at a point in the absence of waves reflected from the earth or other
reflecting objects.
(15) Frequency departure. The amount of variation of a carrier
frequency or center frequency from its assigned value.
(16) Frequency deviation. The peak difference between modulated
wave and the carrier frequency.
(17) Frequency modulation. A system of modulation where the
instantaneous radio frequency varies in proportion to the instantaneous
amplitude of the modulating signal (amplitude of modulating signal to
be measured after pre-emphasis, if used) and the instantaneous radio
frequency is independent of the frequency of the modulating signal.
(18) Frequency swing. The peak difference between the maximum and
the minimum values of the instantaneous frequency of the carrier wave
during modulation.
(19) Multiplex transmission. The term ``multiplex transmission''
means the simultaneous transmission of two or more signals within a
single channel. Multiplex transmission as applied to FM broadcast
stations means the transmission of facsimile or other signals in
addition to the regular broadcast signals.
(20) Percentage modulation. The ratio of the actual frequency
deviation to the frequency deviation defined as 100% modulation,
expressed in percentage. For FM broadcast stations, a frequency
deviation of <plus-minus>75kHz is defined as 100% modulation.
(21) Previously authorized superpowered FM station. An FM station
authorized to operate with facilities that exceed the Effective
Radiated Power/Height Above Average Terrain limitations of Sec. Sec.
73.211 or 73.511 for their specific class.
(b) Stereophonic sound broadcasting. The following definitions
pertain to stereophonic sound broadcasting, as defined in Sec.
73.310(b)(8).
(1) Cross-talk. An undesired signal occurring in one channel caused
by an electrical signal in another channel.
(2) FM stereophonic broadcast. The transmission of a stereophonic
program by a single FM broadcast station utilizing the main channel and
a stereophonic subchannel.
(3) Left (or right) signal. The electrical output of a microphone
or combination of microphones placed so as to convey the intensity,
time, and location of sounds originating predominately to the
listener's left (or right) of the center of the performing area.
(4) Left (or right) stereophonic channel. The left (or right)
signal as electrically reproduced in reception of FM stereophonic
broadcasts.
(5) Main channel. The band of frequencies from 50 to 15,000 Hz
which frequency-modulate the main carrier.
(6) Pilot subcarrier. A subcarrier that serves as a control signal
for use in the reception of FM stereophonic sound broadcasts.
(7) Stereophonic separation. The ratio of the electrical signal
caused in sound channel A to the signal caused in sound channel B by
the transmission of only a channel B signal. Channels A and B may be
any two channels of a stereophonic sound broadcast transmission system.
(8) Stereophonic sound. The audio information carried by plurality
of channels arranged to afford the listener a sense of the spatial
distribution of sound sources. Stereophonic sound broadcasting
includes, but is not limited to, biphonic (two channel), triphonic
(three channel) and quadrophonic (four channel) program services.
(9) Stereophonic sound subcarrier. A subcarrier within the FM
broadcast baseband used for transmitting signals for stereophonic sound
reception of the main broadcast program service.
(10) Stereophonic sound subchannel. The band of frequencies from 23
kHz to 99 kHz containing sound subcarriers and their associated
sidebands.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 73.402 by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.402 Definitions.
* * * * *
(i) Asymmetric sideband operation. For digital FM stations, the use
of different power levels on the upper and lower digital sidebands in a
hybrid or extended hybrid DAB system.
0
4. Amend Sec. 73.404 by adding paragraphs (e) through (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.404 IBOC DAB operation.
* * * * *
(e) All FM stations transmitting hybrid IBOC signals may operate
with total effective radiated power of up to -14 dBc. No station may
operate its digital carriers with a total effective radiated power in
excess of -10 dBc. A station using symmetric sidebands planning to
operate with a total radiated power in excess of -14 dBc must confirm
compliance with Table 1 below by calculating the signal strength of its
analog signal at the first adjacent station's 60 dB[mu] contour. All
calculations must be made using the standard FCC contour prediction
methodology.
Table 1 to Paragraph (e)--Maximum Permissible FM Digital ERP for
Symmetric Sideband Operation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
Proponent analog F(50,10) field strength at first permissible FM
adjacent station's analog 60 dB[mu] F(50,50) contour digital ERP
(symmetric sideband operation) (dBc)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
57.9 dB[mu] and above................................... -14
56.5 dB[mu] to 57.8 dB[mu].............................. -13
55.6 dB[mu] to 56.4 dB[mu].............................. -12
54.1 dB[mu] to 55.5 dB[mu].............................. -11
54.0 dB[mu] or less..................................... -10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(f) FM stations may transmit hybrid IBOC signals with asymmetric
power on
[[Page 57043]]
the digital sidebands, as defined in Sec. 73.402(i). Where asymmetric
operation is used, the Effective Radiated Power at each sideband must
be adjusted so that the total sideband powers do not exceed the total
power that would be authorized for the station operating in symmetric
sideband mode. A station using asymmetric sidebands planning to operate
with a radiated power in excess of -17 dBc on either sideband (upper or
lower) must confirm compliance with Table 1 below by calculating the
signal strength of its analog signal at the respective (upper or lower)
first adjacent station's 60 dB[mu] contour. All calculations must be
made using the standard FCC contour prediction methodology.
Table 1 to Paragraph (f)--Maximum Permissible FM Digital ERP for
Asymmetric Sideband Operation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
permissible FM
digital ERP
Proponent analog F(50,10) field strength at the upper or for the
lower first adjacent station's analog 60 dB[mu] respective
F(50,50) contour (asymmetric sideband operation) (upper or
lower)
sideband (dBc)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
54.9 dB[mu] and above................................... -17
53.5 dB[mu] to 54.8 dB[mu].............................. -16
52.6 dB[mu] to 53.4 dB[mu].............................. -15
51.1 dB[mu] to 52.5 dB[mu].............................. -14
51.0 dB[mu] or less..................................... -13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(g) The digital effective radiated power of a previously authorized
superpowered FM station, as defined in Sec. 73.310(a)(7) and (a)(21),
must be limited to the class maximum set forth in Sec. Sec. 73.211 and
73.511.
0
5. Amend Sec. 73.406 by adding paragraphs (d)(5) through (8) to read
as follows:
Sec. 73.406 Notification.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(5) If applicable, for FM stations planning to operate with
symmetric sidebands in excess of -14 dBc, a certification that the
proposed FM digital Effective Radiated Power is permitted, using the
table set forth in Table 1 to Sec. 73.404(e). Certifications must be
based on the most restrictive analog field strength of the proponent at
any nearby first-adjacent channel station's 60 dB[mu] contour.
(6) If applicable, for FM stations employing asymmetric sideband
operation as defined in Sec. 73.402(i), a certification that the
proposed digital sideband power on each sideband conforms to the
Maximum Permissible FM Digital ERP set forth in Table 1 to Sec.
73.404(f), and that the total digital sideband power will not exceed
the total power if the digital sideband operation were symmetric.
(7) Any digital FM station permanently reducing digital power must
notify the Commission of such digital power reduction on Form 2100,
Schedule 335-FM. Any such notification of digital FM power reduction
must include a short statement of the reason(s) for the power
reduction.
(8) Any digital FM station permanently discontinuing asymmetric
sideband operation and returning to symmetric sideband operation must
notify the Commission of such return to symmetric sideband operation on
Form 2100, Schedule 335-FM. Any such notification of discontinuing
asymmetric sideband operation must include a short statement of the
reason(s) for such action.
[FR Doc. 2023-17423 Filed 8-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on August 22, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.