Your browser is out-of-date!

Update your browser to view this website correctly. Update my browser now


Support for C4: Do It — But Make a Few Changes, Too

One in a series of articles exploring comments about the proposed C4 Class

We reported last week that an FCC Notice of Inquiry about the Class 4 station proposal triggered a commentary period, and supporters have been quick to share their thoughts about Docket 18-184.

To date, the majority of the comments have been positive. Read on for a sampling of why some advocates say the commission should move forward with this idea. Submit your own comment before Aug. 13.

[Read: Support for C4: The Engineering Logic Is “Quite Sound”]

Some commenters expressed support for the idea, but offered a tweaks to the proposed plan.

Betty Shapiro, owner and general manager of KGID(FM) in Giddings, Texas, commented, “I also feel that for this to be implemented fairly and quickly, that stations eligible for this sorely needed relief should be able to do so without a fully spaced allotment site, as long as they are not causing interference to other licensed facilities. Please implement the MB 18-184 proposal fully without delay and consider the proposal without the need for allotment sites. Many small broadcasters need this relief.”

RF Services Inc. Treasurer Greg Shapiro seconded the idea: “We also feel the ‘fully spaced allotment site’ rules need changes as well.”

New Life Broadcasting Pres. and WNVM(FM) owner Juan Carlos Matos wrote, “I support this petition and request the FCC to create an equivalent class for Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands.”

Robert F. “Doc” Fuller, co-owner of Atlantic Coast Radio LLC in Portland, Maine, expressed support for the proposal — and added his own thoughts to go one step farther. He commented, “In addition to the current proposal it is by far the most efficient use of the spectrum that all zones must have the ability for Class A FMs to increase their power to 12,000 W if the spacing mileage requirements are within the technical rules. Therefore, in the non-Class C zones I would propose it be called a ‘B 2.’”

Fuller explained, “There are many ‘rural’ areas in the zones that currently only allow Class B and B1 facilities. Populations have expanded out of the principal communities of many of the rural areas and a current Class A of 3 kW or 6 kW are not powerful enough to provide local public service to these areas.”

Fuller continued, “If a C4 or B2 (12 kW @ 100 m) technically meets the separation requirements, it is my belief that it is strongly in the public interest that the commission approve this proposal for all areas of the United States.”

[Want more information like this? Subscribe to our newsletter and get it delivered right to your inbox.]