THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Doc Contents      

   Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to address the ongoing dispute between advocates of low power FM radio and full power FM radio broadcasters. I am pleased to be joined in this bipartisan effort by Senators BAUCUS, INHOFE, GREGG, and HUTCHISON. Our legislation, the ``Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000,'' was overwhelmingly passed by the House of Representatives on April 13th by a vote of 274-110.

   On January 20th, the Federal Communications Commission narrowly adopted a proposal that would establish a new radio service known as low power FM radio (LPFM). Under this program, the Commission would license hundreds of new low power FM

[Page: S8210]  GPO's PDF

   Over the last several months, I have carefully listened to Minnesotans who care deeply about the issues involved in the debate over LPFM. In the absence of third-adjacent channel protection, incumbent FM broadcasters believe that low power FM radio stations would cause interference to existing radio services. LPFM advocates argue that the Federal Communications Commission has conducted adequate testing for interference and that requiring third adjacent channel protections would unnecessarily limit the number of licensed low power FM radio stations. Further, they suggest that the 1996 Telecommunications Act has resulted in unprecedented concentration within the telecommunications industry.

   Although I have many concerns about the impact of LPFM service upon current FM radio broadcasting, I share the commission's stated goal of increasing diversity in radio and television broadcasting. Earlier this Congress, I supported the enactment of the Community Broadcasters Act, which preserves the unique community television broadcasting provided by low power television stations that are operated by diverse groups such as high schools, churches, local government and individual citizens. I also look forward to reviewing the findings and recommendations from the ongoing survey of minority broadcast owners being conducted by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration that will be used to analyze the impact of the 1996 Telecommunications Act upon minority broadcast ownership in the United States.

   Mr. President, I am also very mindful of the concerns about LPFM raised by radio reading service programs. In my home state, the State Services for the Blind sponsors the ``Radio

   Talking Book'' program. Radio Talking Book is a closed-circuit broadcast system which uses FM subcarrier frequencies from radio stations in Minnesota and South Dakota to deliver readings from newspapers, magazines and books on a daily basis to more than 10,000 blind and visually impaired persons. Sub-carrier signals are the most vulnerable to low power FM radio interference because they are located at the outer edge of the frequency space.

   I am troubled by the Federal Communications Commission's decision to adopt LPFM without conducting field testing of subcarrier receivers. Nearly eight months after the Commission approved LPFM, engineering studies and field testing of these receivers have not yet been completed by the Commission, and it remains unclear as to how the FCC intends to address interference that may be caused to radio reading services. The agency's inaction underscores the haste in which the LPFM plan was developed and gives credence to the view that the adoption of the FCC rules was a rush to judgment. I ask unanimous consent that letters from Minnesota Public Radio , the Minnesota State Services for the Blind and the International Association of Audio Information Services be inserted into the RECORD at this time.

   For these reasons, I am pleased to introduce the ``Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000.'' I believe this legislation represents the interests of LPFM advocates, full power FM broadcasters, and most importantly--radio listeners. This compromise bill will allow the Federal Communications Commission to license lower power FM radio stations while requiring additional third adjacent channel protections for full power FM broadcasters.

   Among its other provisions, the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000 would require that an independent party conduct testing in nine FM radio markets to determine whether LPFM without third adjacent channel protections would cause harmful interference to existing FM radio services. The legislation would require the FCC to submit a report to Congress which analyzes the experimental test program results; and evaluates the impact of LPFM on listening audiences, incumbent FM radio broadcasters, minority and small market broadcasters, and radio stations that provide radio reading services to the blind.

   Mr. President, some advocates of the low power FM plan adopted by the Commission argue that the Congress should simply allow the agency to move forward on LPFM without any input or modifications from Congress. Those individuals apparently favor granting legislative authority to federal regulatory agencies. Since the establishment of the Federal Communications Commission through an Act of Congress in 1934, members of the House and Senate have consistently exercised appropriate oversight of FCC rules and proposals.

   As a member of the Senate, I have carefully monitored the Commission's activities to ensure responsible public policy and the wisest use of taxpayer dollars. Over the last few years, I have expressed my concern over a number of issues considered by the Commission, including satellite television, rights-of-way management, universal service, the impact of digital television rules upon low power television and translator stations, and most recently low power FM radio . Congress should not abdicate its oversight responsibilities when considering the LPFM issue.

   Mr. President, I firmly believe that the ``Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000'' will strengthen community broadcasting without sacrificing existing radio services. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill and additional material be printed in the RECORD and I yield the floor.

   There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

   SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000''.

   SEC. 2. MODIFICATIONS TO LOW -POWER FM REGULATIONS REQUIRED.

    (a) THIRD-ADJACENT CHANNEL PROTECTIONS REQUIRED.--

    (1) MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED.--The Federal Communications Commission shall modify the rules authorizing the operation of low -power FM radio stations, as proposed in MM Docket No. 99-25, to--

    (A) prescribe minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels (as well as for co-channels and first- and second-adjacent channels); and

    (B) prohibit any applicant from obtaining a low -power FM license if the applicant has engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation of any station in violation of section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301).

    (2) CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY REQUIRED FOR FURTHER CHANGES.--The Federal Communications Commission may not--

    (A) eliminate or reduce the minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels required by paragraph (1)(A); or

    (B) extend the eligibility for application for low -power FM stations beyond the organizations and entities as proposed in MM Docket No. 99-25 (47 CFR 73.853),

   except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act.

    (3) VALIDITY OF PRIOR ACTIONS.--Any license that was issued by the Commission to a low -power FM station prior to the date on which the Commission modify its rules as required by paragraph (1) and that does not comply with such modifications shall be invalid.

    (b) FURTHER EVALUATION OF NEED FOR THIRD-ADJACENT CHANNEL PROTECTIONS.--

    (1) PILOT PROGRAM REQUIRED.--The Federal Communications Commission shall conduct an experimental program to test whether low -power FM radio stations will result in harmful interference to existing FM radio stations if such stations are not subject to the minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels required by subsection (a). The Commission shall conduct such test in no more than nine FM radio markets, including urban, suburban, and rural markets, by waiving the minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels for the stations that are the subject of the experimental program. At least one of the stations shall be selected for the purpose of evaluating whether minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels are needed for FM translator stations. The Commission may, consistent with the public interest, continue after the conclusion of the experimental program to waive the minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels for the stations that are the subject of the experimental program.

    (2) CONDUCT OF TESTING.--The Commission shall select an independent testing entity to

[Page: S8211]  GPO's PDF

    (A) an opportunity for the public to comment on interference; and

    (B) independent audience listening tests to determine what is objectionable and harmful interference to the average radio listener.

    (3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.--The Commission shall publish the results of the experimental program and field tests and afford an opportunity for the public to comment on such results. The Federal Communications Commission shall submit a report on the experimental program and field tests to the Committee on Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate not later than February 1, 2001. Such report shall include--

    (A) an analysis of the experimental program and field tests and of the public comment received by the Commission;

    (B) an evaluation of the impact of the modification or elimination of minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels on--

    (i) listening audiences;

    (ii) incumbent FM radio broadcasters in general, and on minority and small market broadcasters in particular, including an analysis of the economic impact on such broadcasters;

    (iii) the transition to digital radio for terrestrial radio broadcasters;

    (iv) stations that provide a reading service for the blind to the public; and

    (v) FM radio translator stations;

    (C) the Commission's recommendations to the Congress to reduce or eliminate the minimum distance separations for third-adjacent channels required by subsection (a); and

    (D) such other information and recommendations as the Commission considers appropriate.

--

   COMMUNICATION CENTER,

   STATE SERVICES FOR THE BLIND,

   St. Paul, MN, February 11, 2000.

   TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Communication Center of Minnesota State Services for the Blind, SSB, has provided blind and visually impaired persons with access to the printed word since 1953. The most popular and well-known way we provide our customers with this access is via the Radio Talking Book, RTB. The RTB is a closed-circuit broadcast system which uses FM sub-carriers, or SCA's, to bring people readings from newspapers, magazines and books, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. We loan our customers special SCA receivers, which only pick up the RTB signal.

   The RTB, this nation's oldest and largest radio reading service for the blind, was founded in 1969 and has over 10,000 users in Minnesota alone. It is also picked up by other radio reading services around the country, for rebroadcast, via satellite.

   We rely on the SCA frequencies of approximately 40 radio stations in Minnesota and South Dakota, to distribute our programming to local listeners. Approximately 20 stations used by us are operated by Minnesota Public Radio , MPR. Further, the MPR stations we use are our main outlets. The other stations we use are smaller and/or cover sparsely populated areas. Consequently, the Radio Talking Book lives and dies via the technical integrity and success of MPR.

   While we support the principles of diversity and community access for all, we cannot support these goals at the expense of existing services. As you know, the Federal Communications Commission, FCC, intends to create at least 1000 low -power FM stations across the country. However, it is my understanding that they have not tested the effects and implications of these new services on existing FM SCA signals. This does not seem right to us. Prior to authorizing a new set of services, it seems to us, that you should know all the implications to existing services.

   Since the sub-carrier signal of an FM station is located on the outside edge of its frequency space, it seems logical to us that these are the signals which will receive the first, and most harmful interference from new, untested signals. We strongly urge the FCC to do more testing prior to proceeding with the creation of new low -power FM services. Further, it seems even more advisable to use to not create such a new service at all prior to making long-term decisions about digital broadcasting. The FCC may be creating a new service that will be obsolete in a few years.

   While we understand that the FCC must respond to a variety of constituencies, their decision which doesn't adequately consider the needs of SCA users, the majority of whom are users of radio reading services, seems to be highly disrespectful to blind and visually impaired persons. We urge the FCC to reconsider its low -power FM policy. Thank you very much for your consideration of our concerns.

   Respectfully yours,

   David Andrews,
Director, Communication Center.

--

   MINNESOTA PUBLIC RADIO ,

   St. Paul, MN, September 6, 2000.
Senator ROD GRAMS,
Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.

   DEAR SENATOR GRAMS: Minnesota Public Radio supports your efforts to protect high quality signal integrity for America's radio listening public. Recent action by the Federal Communications Commission will cause harm to the broadcast signal of existing stations and interfere with their ability to serve their listeners. Your legislation, a bipartisan compromise, will protect the rights of the listening public to receive the highest quality signal available.

   In addition to protecting the general listening public, your legislation will protect a particularly vulnerable segment of the radio listening public, the blind and visually impaired.

   More than 1 million blind and visually impaired people in the United States are served by the joint efforts of radio reading services and public radio stations. This service is now threatened by a well meaning but highly politicized action of the FCC.

   Started in Minnesota in 1969 as Radio Talking Book (RTB) by the joint effort of Minnesota Public Radio and the Minnesota Services for the Blind, radio reading services have grown to more than 100 locally controlled and operated reading services around the country. They bring newspapers, magazines and books into the lives of those who can't see by the use of an FM radio subcarrier, or SCA. The SCA uses a sliver of the FM signal, and basically ``piggybacks'' onto the regular FM frequency. Reading service customers receive a special radio receiver, which picks up only the SCA broadcast.

   The FCC in January approved rules to add more local public service broadcasting to America's airwaves. Unfortunately, it rescinded decades-old protections given existing broadcasters and the listening public. The removal of those protections will, most certainly, cause interference to the broadcast signal that are currently being delivered by the nation's radio reading services.

   Many in this country, including Minnesota Public Radio , support the goal of licensing more locally owned low -power FM stations. They would be a welcome addition to the voices and opinions heard on the air. However, when government deals with trying to solve problems, it should learn from the medical profession's Hippocratic Oath: First do no harm. Your legislation helps solve the problem of additional voices and does no harm to America's general listening public and specifically the services of Radio Reading Services.

   Attached is an Opinion piece from the Fergus Falls Daily Journal as well as a letter in opposition to the FCC decision by the Minnesota Services for the Blind.

   Congratulations to taking on this important issue for the benefit of the people of Minnesota.

   Sincerely yours,

   Will Haddeland,
Senior Vice President.

--

   INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

   AUDIO INFORMATION SERVICES,

   Pittsburgh, PA, May 20, 2000.
Senator ROD GRAMS,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

   DEAR SENATOR GRAMS: We are writing to ask for your help in the urgent matter of Low Power FM service that is being rushed into place by the FCC. There are millions of Americans that may be dramatically and negatively impacted by these new stations. They are blind, visually impaired, or have a disability that prevents them from reading. Our association members serve them with reading services on the radio , and other print-to-audio services.

   A reading service on the radio is the daily newspaper for these men and women. It's where they learn what is on sale at the local grocery store, what bus stops have changed in their town, and who passed away. Without this valuable link to their community, they are at grave risk of being isolated and become very dependent.

   Our association of these reading services, IAAIS, has asked the FCC to ensure that reading services for the blind not suffer interference from the coming new Low Power FM stations. IAAIS is very concerned that the fragile sub-carrier services will not be heard clearly when a low power FM station is allowed in the 2nd adjacent space on the FM dial. The radios we have to use to give blind listeners access to the signals have very fragile reception characteristics. The FCC's plan for low power stations brings a potential of interference that never existed before.

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Doc Contents