programming from a satellite feed, fill similar un-
used gaps in the spectrum as LPFM stations. 
(14) The commission received over 13,000 ap-
plications in the March 2003 Window, almost four 
times the number of translators in existence prior to 
the March 2003 Window. As a result of this unan-
ticipated surge of applications, the grant of all appli-
cations would virtually eliminate any opportunity to 
grant LPFM licenses in the future, even if Congress 
repealed the current legislative prohibitions on 
LPFM spacing. 
(15) Detailed analysis of the 13,000 applica-
tions also raises grave concerns that the grant of all 
pending applications in the March 2003 Window 
would compromise the goal of promoting localism 
central to Federal regulation of broadcasting: only 
15 organizations account for more than 50 percent 
of the applications. Two corporations (with identical 
corporate officers) account for more than 4,220 ap-
plications. 
(16) The sheer number and geographic scope of 
these applications suggests that it would disserve the 
Federal interest in promoting local content by allow-
ing these applications to take precedence over 
LPFM licensees.
(17) Furthermore, the Commission has received 
complaints that parties receiving construction per-
mits as a result of the March 2003 Window have 
marketed and sold these permits without making 
any effort to construct facilities and provide service. 
This suggests that the Commission failed to create 
adequate safeguards to prevent trafficking in the 
March 2003 Window, as required by section 
309(j)(4)(E) of the Communications Act of 1934, 
rendering the March 2003 Window suspect and re-
quiring Congressional action. 
(18) LPFM stations have what is known as 
‘‘secondary status’’. They can be displaced at any 
time by any full power station, because full power 
stations have ‘‘primary status’’. Because full power 
stations are primary to LPFM, and because of the 
mandatory spacing rules, the newly expanded full 
power signal ‘‘encroaches’’ on the pre-existing 
LPFM signal and requires the pre-existing LPFM 
to reduce its coverage area or shut down altogether. 
(19) New digital broadcast technologies in radio 
enable the delivery of more content using the same 
amount of channel space. This technology holds 
great promise for incumbent full power radio licens-
ees, who will have the capacity to provide greater
public service to their communities. At the same 
time, the efficiencies from these new technologies 
can create opportunities for new entrants to broad-
casting increasing the diversity of media voices avail-
able and creating new opportunities for local pro-
gramming. 
(20) In implementing these new technologies, 
the Commission is charged with examining how best 
to balance the interests of enhancing the existing 
full-power radio broadcasting service, providing op-
portunities for new entrants, and Congress’ long-
standing policy of promoting localism, diversity, and 
competition. In particular, the Commission should 
consider the success of the LPFM service in pro-
viding quality local content and enhancing the diver-
sity of local voices available to their communities. 
(21) The conversion to digital broadcasting may 
also create new opportunities and challenges for in-
cumbent analog LPFM stations. The current Fed-
eral Communications Commission rules for digital 
radio transition make no provision for opportunities 
for new entrants in radio. Certain configurations of 
the technology can create additional channels. Cur-
rently incumbent licensees can use these newly pos-
sible second channels, while new entrants have no
opportunity to take advantage of these new digital 
opportunities. 
SEC. 3. REPEAL OF PRIOR LAW. 
Section 632 of the Departments of Commerce, Jus-
tice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Ap-
propriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106–553; 114 Stat. 
2762A–111), is repealed. 
SEC. 4. SPECIAL REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE CRE-
ATION OF LOW POWER FM STATIONS. 
Section 309 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 309) is amended by adding at the end the following 
new subsection: 
‘‘(l) SPECIAL REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE 
CREATION OF LOW POWER FM STATIONS.— 
‘‘(1) MINIMUM
DISTANCE
SEPARATION
RE-
QUIREMENTS.—The Commission shall modify its 
rules to eliminate third-adjacent minimum distance 
separation requirements between— 
‘‘(A) LPFM stations; and 
‘‘(B) full-service FM stations, FM trans-
lator stations, and FM booster stations. 
‘‘(2) PROTECTION
OF
RADIO
READING
SERV-
ICES.—The Commission shall retain its rules that 
provide third-adjacent channel protection for full- 
power FM stations that broadcast radio reading