Prometheus Radio, along with a multitude of other independent media organizations, sent this motion to the FCC on August 24, 2005.  It covered the issues of permitting the utilization of contour overlap interference methodology, protecting LPFM stations from encroachment by full power stations, ensuring the localism goals by limiting LPFM ownership to local entities, by restricting multiple ownership of LPFM licences, and by limiting transferability of LPFM licences, as well as having an application window open at regular intervals, and the length of the construction permits.
Read the entire motion at FCC filing regarding LPFM encroachment and ownership - 8/24/2005

    SUMMARY

These comments are filed on behalf of a coalition of low power
applicants, permittees and licensees, full power non-commercial broadcasters,
and national and local citizens groups representing low power advocates,
users and listeners.

The Commission has a duty, not only to protect the LPFM service, but
to create new opportunities for the LPFM service. The best method the
Commission has for protecting and creating opportunities for the LPFM
service is to adopt a more sophisticated methodology for interference
avoidance. Thus, the coalition maintains that LPFM applicants should be
permitted to utilize the contour overlap interference methodology in the
public interest of dispersing the limited LPFM spectrum available. In
particular, they argue that the Commission has full discretion to employ a
contour method for LPFM, and that Section 632 of the Act is wholly
consistent with this view.

Perhaps the greatest threat to the future of LPFM is the Commission’s
all-too casual approach to the so-called “encroachment issue. Full power
licensees are free to attack nearby LPFM stations through an amendment
process which is at this time unavailable to LPFM stations, leaving them
helpless to deal with a process that is fatal to them. The Commission should
implement policies that generally discourage full power stations from moving
out of their original community of license or expanding into an LPFM
community of license. Allowing a full power station to change its community
of license so easily encourages station owners to move away from the
communities that were intended to benefit from the full power service and
shuts off a valuable source of programming in the encroached upon LPFM
station. If the Commission is unwilling to give LPFMs the primary status
they deserve, it should, at the least, administer encroachment cases at the
full Commission level and adopt a processing guideline which allows
consideration of the public interest effect of encroachment. Stations facing
encroachment should also be allowed to make major engineering changes to
address the circumstances causing their potential disempowerment.

The key policy concept that should guide the Commission through this
rulemaking is strengthening the Commission’s definition, analysis, and
utilization of local origination pledges in making decisions regarding the
allocation of scarce spectrum available for Low Power FM stations.
Additionally, the Commission must ensure the LPFM goal of localism by
providing strong local eligibility requirements. To achieve these goals, the
Commission should better define local origination, strictly enforce local
eligibility requirements and extend applicants’ 10 mile distance limitation to
20 miles.

The Commission should retain its restriction on multiple ownership of
LPFM licenses. If it is disposed to change this highly valuable restriction, it
should, at the least, make plain that multiple owners are not entitled to a
renewal expectancy.

The Commission will cripple LPFM if it eases limits on transferability
of construction permits. Consideration for LPFM transfers should not be
allowed. There should in any event be a three year holding period on all
license transfers to deter abuses.

The problem of determining how to deal with changes in the governing
board of a non-commercial licensee is not unique to LPFM. The Commission
must address this question and, in particular, develop mechanisms to
address emergencies which lead to sudden changes in board composition.
The LPFM service will be at once facilitated and stabilized if the
Commission were to begin to open LPFM windows at regular two year
intervals. The commenters strongly urge this be done. Another important
simplification would be to afford 18 months for construction of LPFM, and to
allow one additional 18 month period upon good cause shown.
..... 

Read the entire motion at FCC filing regarding LPFM encroachment and ownership - 8/24/2005