Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/11/20/2018-25101/revitalization-of-the-am-radio-service
Timestamp: 2018-12-09 23:39:56
Document Index: 205179533

Matched Legal Cases: ['§\u20091', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973', '§\u200973']

A Proposed Rule by the Federal Communications Commission on 11/20/2018
This document has a comment period that ends in 44 days. (01/22/2019) Submit a formal comment
Comments may be filed on or before January 22, 2019 and reply comments may be filed on or before February 19, 2019.
58513-58522 (10 pages)
FCC 18-139
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-25101 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-25101
This is a summary of the Commission's Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Second FNPRM), MB Docket No. 13-249; FCC 18-139, adopted and released on October 5, 2018. The full text of this document will be available for public inspection and copying via ECFS, and during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The full text of this document can also be downloaded in Word or Portable Document Format (PDF) at http://www.fcc.gov/​ndbedp.
1. The 73 Class A AM stations in the United States are authorized to broadcast at up to 50 kW both day and night and, by current rule, are designed to render primary and secondary service over extended areas and are afforded extensive daytime and nighttime protection from interference by co- and adjacent-channel AM stations. Currently, Class A AM stations in the continental United States are protected during the day to their 0.1 mV/m groundwave contour from co-channel stations, and to their 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour from adjacent-channel stations. At night, such Class A stations are protected to their 0.5 mV/m-50 percent skywave contour from co-channel stations and to their 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour from adjacent-channel stations.
2. In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (AMR FNPRM), FCC 15-142, 30 FCC Rcd 12145, 81 FR 2818, Jan. 19, 2016, in this AM Revitalization proceeding, the Commission recognized that many of the areas previously receiving only Class A secondary service are now served by FM stations and smaller, more local AM stations. 30 FCC Rcd at 12168, 12170, paras. 51, 55. In the latter case, local AM service is often curtailed by the need for a local AM station to protect a (sometimes distant) Class A station's service. The Commission therefore tentatively concluded in the AMR FNPRM (1) that all Class A stations should be protected, both day and night, to their 0.1 mV/m groundwave contour, from co-channel stations, thus maintaining daytime protection but reducing protection to secondary coverage service areas at night; (2) that all Class A stations should continue to be protected to the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour, both day and night, from first adjacent channel stations; and (3) that the critical hours protection of Class A stations should be eliminated completely. The Commission sought comment on these proposals.
3. The AMR FNPRM proposals attracted voluminous and diverse comments. The licensees of Class A stations, represented primarily by the AM Radio Preservation Alliance (AMRPA), argue against the proposals and in favor of retaining the current protection rules. AMRPA argues that the Commission's proposal would do “significant harm” to the AM band by creating new interference, and point out the vital role that Class A stations have played in prior emergencies, such as Hurricane Katrina, noting further that 25 such stations are Primary Entry Points (PEPs) for the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS), 22 of which have been outfitted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to improve operating capability in national emergencies. A number of other commenters joining AMRPA in opposing the AMR FNPRM proposal agree that the proposal would reduce those stations' utility during national emergencies. Others contend that the proposal will increase nighttime interference in exchange for little in the way of increased nighttime coverage for less-powerful stations, while still others object to losing the ability to listen to distant signals for extended time periods.
4. On the other hand, a number of commenters supported the Start Printed Page 58514Commission's proposal. Many believe that Class A AM stations' current protected status may be an anachronism with little relevance to a world with more FM stations, the internet, and other forms of communications. Some licensees of AM stations that must reduce nighttime power to protect Class A stations wish to improve their local nighttime service. Some point out that the extended skywave service that Class A licensees seek to protect has become increasingly unreliable and prone to interference, particularly given high environmental noise floors caused by various sources of radiofrequency noise. Many also criticize some of the opponents' calculations of potential signal losses due to the proposed rule changes, questioning opponents' technical showings. As for emergency communications, some commenters note that Class A stations seldom broadcast weather or other alerts for distant areas beyond their immediate communities of license, and thus contend that it is more valuable for local stations to have the ability to broadcast emergency alerts and other locally relevant emergency information at night.
5. A third category of commenters believe that changes to Class A protections are necessary, but do not believe the Commission's proposals to be the correct approach. Most share certain premises: That a 0.1 mV/m signal is not listenable under most circumstances; that nighttime skywave service is sporadic and unreliable; and that the wide-area coverage of Class A stations written into the rules should be preserved to at least some extent. At the same time, these commenters propose solutions that they believe will offer some relief to AM broadcasters currently protecting Class A stations that are sometimes many hundreds of miles away.
6. The majority of these commenters propose instead that Class A stations be protected to their 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour, both day and night, from co-channel stations and, in some cases, first-adjacent channel stations as well. They differ in how they believe Class A stations should be protected from nighttime skywave interference from other stations. Some propose nighttime protection of a Class A station's 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour based on the RSS values calculated for Class A stations in the continental United States, and further propose that the interfering contour should be the 0.025 mV/m-10 percent skywave contour based on single signal calculations. Others propose that Class A stations be protected to their nighttime 0.5 mV/m groundwave contours in a similar fashion to the way that Class B stations are currently protected to their 2.0 mV/m nighttime groundwave contours; they state that other stations making facility changes would have to show that they do not increase interference above the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour, or the 50 percent exclusion RSS nighttime interference-free (NIF) level, if higher, of any Class A station; believing that this more fairly protects the actual interference-free service enjoyed by Class A AM stations, rather than the theoretical service being protected by the current rules or the Commission's proposed rules. These commenters, however, do not all agree with the Commission's proposal to eliminate critical hours protection to Class A AM stations, favoring instead protection to the Class A stations' 0.5 mV/m groundwave contours during those hours.
7. In the Second FNPRM, the Commission now seeks further comment on revised proposals for amending protections to Class A AM stations. Some commenters purport to demonstrate that protection of the 0.1 mV/m contour as proposed in the AMR FNPRM would be excessive because a 0.1 mV/m signal cannot be heard under current noise conditions and suggest that it is only necessary to protect Class A stations to their 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour. However, other commenters disagree. The Commission seeks further comment on this determination.
8. Moreover, commenters argue that some skywave protection of Class A stations is desirable. The Commission therefore seeks comment on revised proposals for amending protections to Class A AM stations, which include alternative protection standards for critical hours and nighttime hours. These alternative protection standards are proposed as revisions to the proposed rules set forth at 81 FR 2818, Jan. 19, 2016. The following proposals all provide Class A stations with less protection than they currently enjoy; in the case of the critical hours proposals, Alternative 1 provides Class A stations with less protection than does Alternative 2, and in the case of the nighttime protection proposals, Alternative 2 in some cases provides Class A stations with less protection than does Alternative 1:
9. The Commission seeks comment on these alternative proposals and asks once again for the comments to address those issues set forth in the AMR FNPRM concerning the effects on licensees and listeners of each type of station that could result from the combination of reduced protection to Class A stations and power increases by co- and adjacent-channel stations that this proposal would allow. The Commission also asks that commenters be mindful of the engineering comments already submitted concerning the calculation of listener interference, and, with this in mind, requests realistic estimates of the numbers of listeners that may lose primary service, as opposed to secondary or sporadic service, under each of the alternatives. Is there common agreement that protection of the 0.1 mV/m contour is excessive because a 0.1 mV/m signal cannot be heard under current noise conditions or are there studies to the contrary? Is the appropriate level of protection to the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour? Likewise, the Commission seeks realistic estimates of the populations that could receive new primary local service, especially nighttime service, under each of these alternatives. It also seeks comment on whether its statutory authority imposes any limitations on implementation of these proposals, and whether such implementation is consistent with the Start Printed Page 58515public interest. Finally, the Commission asks for comment on the effect of these proposals on AM broadcasters that are small entities and seek comment as to alternatives that would minimize burdens on such small entities.
10. The Commission also asked for specific comments addressing the effect of these proposals, if any, on the functioning of the Emergency Alert System (EAS) and IPAWS. FEMA's IPAWS Office noted in comments that twenty-five Class A stations are Primary Entry Point (PEP) stations, and stated that under certain circumstances, the Commission's original proposal would diminish the reach of EAS alerts from these stations. The Commission sought comment as to the effect of its alternative proposals on emergency communications. In particular, it requested that any such evaluation include specifics as to what effect, if any, our proposals would have on the ability of other radio stations to receive EAS alerts from Class A stations that function as PEPs. It asked commenters to identify the affected stations and the populations covered by such stations to the extent possible. Such comments should also include an evaluation of the current reliability of Class A nighttime skywave service in providing emergency communications to distant listeners and to other radio stations that are not PEPs, compared to the expected reliability and reach of such communications if any of the alternative proposals are adopted. Commenters were also asked to address the potential benefits during emergencies of having more local service on the AM band available to listeners.
11. The AMR FNPRM also included a tentative conclusion to roll back 1991 rule changes pertaining to calculation of nighttime RSS values of interfering field strengths and nighttime interference-free service. 30 FCC Rcd at 12170-73. It also proposed a return to predicting the nighttime interference-free coverage area using only the interference contributions from co-channel stations and the 50 percent exclusion method. Id. at 12172. The AMR FNPRM also included a proposed revision to daytime protection to Class B, C, and D AM stations, to return to the pre-1991 0 dB daytime 1:1 protection ratio for first adjacent channels; change second adjacent channel groundwave protection to match the current levels for third adjacent channel protection; and eliminate third adjacent channel groundwave protection. Additionally, the AMR FNPRM included a proposal to change the daytime protected contour for Class B, C, and D stations to the 2.0 mV/m contour. These proposals were intended to allow AM broadcasters greater flexibility to make station modifications designed to increase signal strength to their primary service areas.
12. While not revising these proposals at this time, the Commission requested that in light of the alternative Class A protection proposals set forth above, commenters state whether they would revise their previously submitted comments regarding calculation of RSS values and changes to Class B, C, and D daytime protection and, if so, in what way and for what reasons. Commenters should consider the proposed revisions to AM station protection in terms of a new system designed to maximize local radio service without unduly jeopardizing wide-area service.
13. The Commission thus sought comment on the rule changes proposed above, including the costs and benefits associated with the various proposals. It also sought comment on the costs and benefits of any other alternative approaches to addressing the issues raised in the record. To the extent possible, commenters should quantify the claimed costs and benefits and provide supporting information.
14. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
15. This proceeding 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. 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.
16. 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 Start Printed Page 58516business 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).
17. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),[1] 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 Second FNPRM. 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 Second FNPRM provided in paragraph 18. The Commission will send a copy of this entire Second FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). 5 U.S.C. 603(a). In addition, the Second FNPRM and the IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register. Id.
18. This rulemaking proceeding is initiated to obtain further comments concerning certain proposals designed to revitalize the AM broadcast radio service. It is based in substantial part on proposals raised by commenters in this rulemaking proceeding, in response to the Commission's call in the original NPRM in this proceeding for further ideas and proposals.
19. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on the following: (1) Whether to change the nighttime and critical hours signal protection to Class A AM stations, based on new alternative proposals; (2) whether to change the methodology for calculating nighttime root sum square (RSS) values, based on the new alternative proposals for protection to Class A AM stations; and (3) whether to change daytime signal protection to Class B, C, and D stations, based on the new alternative proposals for protection to Class A AM stations.
20. The authority for this proposed rulemaking is contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 301, 303(r), 307, 316, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 301, 303(r), 307, 316, and 403.
21. The RFA directs the Commission to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that will be affected by the proposed rules. 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3). The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as encompassing the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental entity.” Id. section 601(6). In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. Id. section 601(3). 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). 15 U.S.C. 632.
22. The proposed rules and policies could apply to AM radio broadcast licensees, and potential licensees of the AM radio service. A radio broadcasting station is an establishment primarily engaged in broadcasting aural programs by radio to the public. Id. Included in this industry are commercial, religious, educational, and other radio stations. Id. Radio broadcasting stations which primarily are engaged in radio broadcasting and which produce radio program materials are similarly included. Id. However, radio stations that are separate establishments and are primarily engaged in producing radio program material are classified under another NAICS number. Id. The SBA has established a small business size standard for this category, which is: Firms having $38.5 million or less in annual receipts. 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 515112 (updated for inflation in 2008). According to the BIA/Kelsey, MEDIA Access Pro Database on May 14, 2018, 4,630 (99.94%) of 4,633 AM radio stations have revenues of $38.5 million or less. Therefore, the majority of such entities are small entities. 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.
23. In addition, an element of the definition of “small business” is that the 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 station is dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses to which rules may apply do not exclude any radio station from the definition of a small business on this basis and therefore may be over-inclusive to that extent. Also as noted, an additional element of the definition of “small business” is that the entity must be independently owned and operated. We note that it is difficult at times to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and our estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive to this extent.
24. The proposed rule and procedural changes may, in some cases, impose different reporting, recordkeeping, or other requirements on existing and potential AM radio licensees and permittees. In the case of proposed changes to the technical rules regarding calculation of daytime and nighttime interfering contours, and changes to daytime, nighttime, and critical hours protection to some stations, there would be changes in the calculation of inter-station interference and reporting of same. However, the information to be filed is already familiar to broadcasters, and the nature of the interference calculations would not change, only the values that are acceptable, so any additional burdens would be minimal.
25. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 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 or reporting requirements under the rule for 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 small entities.[2] In the Second FNPRM, the Commission seeks to assist AM broadcasters by changing certain daytime, nighttime, and critical hours interference protection standards as they apply to certain classes of AM Start Printed Page 58517stations. The Commission seeks comment as to whether its goal of revitalizing the AM service could be effectively accomplished through these means. The Commission is open to consideration of alternatives to the proposals under consideration, as set forth herein, including but not limited to alternatives that will minimize the burden on AM broadcasters, most of which are small businesses. There may be unique circumstances these entities may face, and we will consider appropriate action for small broadcasters when preparing a Fourth Report and Order in this matter.
27. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).
28. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 301, 303(r), 307, 316, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 301, 303(r), 307, 316, and 403, this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making is adopted.
2. Amend § 73.21 by revising the last two sentences of paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
(1) Class A Station. A Class A station is an unlimited time station that operates on a clear channel and is designed to render primary service over an extended area at relatively long distances from its transmitter. Its primary service area is protected from objectionable interference from other stations on the same and adjacent channels. (See § 73.182). The operating power shall not be less than 10 kW nor more than 50 kW. (Also see § 73.25(a)).
3. Amend § 73.24 as follows:
Option 1: Amend § 73.24 by removing paragraph (h) and redesignating paragraphs (i) and (j) as paragraphs (h) and (i).
Option 2: Amend § 73.24 by revising paragraph (h) to read as follows:
(h) That, in the case of an application for a Class B or Class D station on a clear channel, the proposed station would radiate, during two hours following local sunrise and two hours preceding local sunset, in any direction toward the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour of a co-channel United States Class A station, no more than the maximum value permitted under the provisions of § 73.187.
4. Amend § 73.37 by revising the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
0 0.025 0.500 (Class A).
10 0.500 0.500 (Class A).
20 25.0 25.0 (All classes).
5. Amend § 73.99 by revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (3), (c)(1)(ii) and (iii), (d)(2) and (3), (f)(1) and (3) to read as follows:
§ 73.99
(ii) Protection is to be provided to the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contours of co-channel U.S. Class A stations or the NIF groundwave contour based on the 50 Start Printed Page 58518percent RSS exclusion method, whichever is greater.
6. Amend § 73.182 as follows:
Option 1: Amend § 73.182 by:
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) through (3), (c) and (d);
b. Removing paragraphs (g) and (h);
c. Redesignating paragraphs (i) through (t) as paragraphs (g) though (r); and
d. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (i) and (j), (m)(1), and the tables in paragraphs (o) and (p).
(i) Class A stations in the conterminous United States operate on the channels assigned by § 73.25 with minimum power of 10 kW, maximum power of 50 kW, and minimum antenna efficiency of 275 mV/m/kW at 1 kilometer. The Class A stations in this group are afforded protection as follows:
(ii) Class A stations in Alaska operate on the channels assigned by § 73.25 with minimum power of 10 kW, maximum power of 50 kW, and minimum antenna efficiency of 215 mV/m/kW at 1 kilometer. The Class A stations in this group are afforded protection, both daytime and nighttime, to the 0.1 mV/m groundwave contour from other co-channel stations and to the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour from other stations on first adjacent channels.
(3) Class C stations operate on local channels, normally rendering primary service to a community and the suburban or rural areas immediately contiguous thereto, with powers not less than 0.25 kW or greater than 1 kW, except as provided in § 73.21(c)(1). Such stations are normally protected to the daytime 2.0 mV/m contour. On local channels the separation required for the daytime protection shall also determine the nighttime separation. Where directional antennas are employed daytime by Class C stations operating with power equal to or greater than 0.25 kW, the separations required shall in no case be less than those necessary to afford protection assuming nondirectional operation with power of 0.25 kW. In no case will nighttime power of 0.25 kW or greater be authorized to a station unable to operate nondirectionally with power of 0.25 kW during daytime hours. The actual nighttime limitation will be calculated. For nighttime protection purposes, Class C stations in the 48 conterminous United States may assume that stations in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands operating on 1230, 1240, 1340, 1400, 1450, and 1490 kHz are Class C stations.
(c) All classes of AM broadcast stations have in general three types of service areas, i.e., primary, secondary and intermittent. (See § 73.14 for the definitions of primary, secondary and intermittent service areas.) All classes of AM stations render service to a primary area but the secondary and intermittent service areas may be materially limited or destroyed due to interference from other stations, depending on the station assignments involved.
(d) The groundwave signal strength required to render primary service is 2 mV/m for communities with populations of 2,500 or more and 0.5 mV/m for communities with populations of less than 2,500. Because only Class A stations have protected primary service extending beyond the 2 mV/m contour, the groundwave signal strength constituting primary service for Class A stations is that set forth in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. See § 73.184 for curves showing distance to various groundwave field strength contours for different frequencies and ground conductivities, and also see § 73.183, “Groundwave signals.”
(1) With respect to the root-sum-square (RSS) values of interfering field strengths referred to in this section, calculation of nighttime interference-free service is accomplished by considering co-channel signals in order of decreasing magnitude, adding the squares of the values and extracting the square root of the sum, excluding those signals which are less than 50% of the RSS values of the higher signals already included. This is known as the “50% Exclusion Method.”
(m) Computation of skywave field strength values:—(1) Fifty percent skywave field strength values. To compute fifty percent skywave field strength values, Formula 1 of § 73.190, entitled “Skywave field strength, 50% of the time (at SS+6)” shall be used.
Signal strength contour of area protected from objectionable interference (µV/m)
Night 1
A Clear SC 500 SC 500 SC 25 SC 25
AC 500 AC 500 AC 500 AC 500
B Regional SC 2000 SC 2000 SC 100 Not presc.
AC 2000 AC 2000 AC 2000 Not presc.
C Local 2000 Not presc 3 SC 100 Not presc.
D Regional 2000 Not presc SC 100 Not presc.
AC 2000 Not presc.
Option 2: Amend § 73.182 by:
(ii) Class A stations in Alaska operate on the channels assigned by § 73.25 with minimum power of 10 kW, maximum power of 50 kW, and minimum antenna efficiency of 215 mV/m/kW at 1 kilometer. The Class A stations in this group are afforded protection, both daytime and nighttime, to the 0.1 mV/m groundwave contour from other stations on the same channel and to the 0.5 mV/m groundwave contour from other stations on first adjacent channels.
(2) The RSS value will not be considered to be increased when a new interfering signal is added which is less than the appropriate exclusion percentage as applied to the RSS value of the interference from existing stations, and which at the same time is Start Printed Page 58521not greater than the smallest signal included in the RSS value of interference from existing stations.
A Clear SC 500 SC 5003 SC 25 SC 25
3 Class A AMs are protected such that interference may not be increased above the greater of the 0.5 mV/m nighttime ground wave contour or the 50% exclusion RSS NIF level.
4 During nighttime hours, Class C stations in the contiguous 48 States may treat all Class B stations assigned to 1230, 1240, 1340, 1400, 1450, and 1490 kHz in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands as if they were Class C stations.
(p) * * *Start Printed Page 58522
§ 73.187
7. In paragraphs (a)(1), (2)(ii), and (3) remove all references to “0.1 mV/m” and add in their place “0.5 mV/m”.
§ 73.190
8. In paragraph (e), on right-hand side of Figures 9, 10, and 11, remove the axis label “Distance from 0.1 mV/m Contour in Miles” and add in its place “Distance from 0.5 mV/m Contour in Miles.”
2. 5 U.S.C. 603(b).
[FR Doc. 2018-25101 Filed 11-19-18; 8:45 am]