The Battle Over TV Channel 6 and LPTVs Used for FM Radio Broadcasts
A controversy has bubbled up in connection with the FCC proceeding to set the date by which Low Power Television stations will be required to convert to digital operations. While the analog operations of full-power TV stations were mandatorily terminated in 2009, Low Power television stations and TV translators have not yet faced any end date for their analog operations - though the FCC recently suggested that the final date for analog broadcasting by these stations be set - perhaps as soon as next year. In comments filed in the proceeding to set the end date, the question of when to terminate analog broadcasting became tangled in another issue - whether Channel 6 LPTV stations should be allowed to continue to be used to broadcast FM programming. NPR suggested that the practice be terminated now, while Channel 6 licensees argued that this use was perfectly permissible under FCC rules, and that it provides a public interest benefit that should be preserved.
Channel 6 is immediately adjacent to the FM band. Analog television stations used an audio transmission standard that was very similar to that used by FM stations, and the audio from analog Channel 6 stations could be picked up by FM radio receivers. In many major television markets across the country, LPTV operators have taken their stations, optimized the audio for FM reception, and started broadcasts intended to be treated like radio stations - programming music or talk like a radio station, with the video programming being secondary to the audio output. Some have called these "Franken FMs", and many listeners don't even realize that they are listening to a station licensed for video operation - just assuming that radio on 87.7 or 87.9 is a normal extension of the FM band. But this proceeding to end analog television broadcasting has brought the issue to the forefront.
Why would anyone care about these stations? Several reasons present themselves. First, NPR has suggested that some of these stations may be creating interference to noncommercial FM stations low on the FM dial, and adjacent to these channel 6 stations. In addition, the existence of these stations have posed issues about increasing the facilities of noncommercial stations low on the FM band. And, finally, there have even been proposals, about which we have written before, to take television channels 5 and 6 and use them for radio. Some of these proposals include suggestions about reserving some of the spectrum for noncommercial stations. Obviously, the more "television" stations operating on these channels. the less likely that the channels will be reallocated to radio.
The question of whether using LPTV stations to provide an audio service is permissible centers around the interpretation of Section 73.653 of the FCC rules, which permit television stations to operate separate audio and video transmitters "used with different and unrelated program material." While objections were raised as to whether this rule was meant to allow audio-only programming during all hours of station operations, proponents of these radio-type uses of LPTV stations claim that the rule, by its terms, does not prohibit these operations, so the FCC should not interfere.
Where will this go? While, when we've written about this issue in the past, we have had readers tell us that that they believe that the FCC will find a way to grandfather these radio-like broadcasts even when LPTV stations go fully digital. Given the FCC's interest in clearing the TV band and repurposing part of it for broadband, this should be an interesting argument to watch develop.
There were other interesting proposals made in the LPTV digital conversion proceeding, and debate about whether that transition should be mandated quickly or whether it should take place on a more gradual basis. And there are even suggestions that LPTV itself could be used to provide a broadband service. We hope that we have a chance to write about those issues in the coming days.
I guess I am the 87.75 MHz pioneer, not that I got much out of it. Reason I did it? An 11 kW FM parked nearby at 88.5 MHz. I knew the LPTV was secondary, knew protection to the video of the LPTV required the FM to power down to about 5 W. ERP, I knew the picture was going to be mostly wiped out. See §73.525 and scale to a video peak ERP of 1 kW. So, the question was, should the spectrum go fallow, or find a use? At the moment it is a nice Jazz and Blues station. Closing down that unique program mix will be a significant cultural loss.
I operate the 87.75 here in Denver, CO, programming "Denver Sports for Denver Sports Fans". We have a great station, with 'Broncos legend John Elway on Friday mornings. We are planning a video sports portion, trying to figure out how to implement it but know that it would be well received. The station employs 43 people so there is an economic argument as well as the fact that it is an extremely popular station serving a segment of the population that appreciates the content. We have received complaints from the local noncomm but when pressed for details related to interference they have been less than forthcoming. It is my opinion that we could all get along but the biggest impediment I have seen is honesty as to 'real' interference and a willingness to coexist.
A couple of facts come to mind. First, when LPTV goes digital, Channel 6 and lower are not a great option due to the impulse noise found in that spectrum. So, if possible, LPTV needs to find a home on a higher channel. The current digital TV in the U.S. allows adjacent stations, and in fact there are cities where that is already happening.Thus, the UHF spectrum may be more open than in the analog TV days.
Second, commercial radio, especially NPR, hates LPFM. Moving LPFM into the spectrum of channel 5-6 may be a good idea. Equipment manufacturers will have to provide updated equipment, but I don't see that as a problem because they have done that before. It will take a few years to be sure, but it will happen.
Third, in-band digital radio is not all it is said to be and doesn't seem to be catching on (I have no plans to buy one). So here is a wild idea -- use the channel 5-6 spectrum for a true digital radio band. One that starts with a clean slate. One free of outrageous license fees. If this catches on, then eventually it can expand into the current FM band as stations convert to True Digital (my words).
However, True Digital needs to come with some strings. First, we must go back to the days of fewer stations owned by one company. From a listener's perspective, the current rules have not worked out very well. It hasn't worked out for the owners that well either -- Clear Channel still needs to unload stations, Citadel is bankrupt and being rescued by Cumulus (and we'll see how that works out). Talk radio on FM and music being pushed on AM?? Yes, it is time for a change to radio -- and not just a new band.
Dave,
I feel that if the Commission wants to use it for radio, first, they should make it a non-commercial station like the rest of the FM’s in the lower band, and second they should find somewhere else to put the stations that are there right now, under a TV license, and then auction off the frequency to the highest bidder. Many people wanted Channel 6, but could not move because there were under 50 channels so they could not relocate.
Another reason is the people that are operating these stations now, are operating as a profit station, and are putting a burden on stations that are trying to operate non-commercial as mandated by FCC Rules. This way it would be the same for everyone, and would let anyone be able to own an FM station especially in one of the top 50 Radio Market.