FCC Web Documents citing 74.1204

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-729A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-729A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-729A1.txt
  • prepare supplements to claim points. Mutual exclusivity for radio groups may have changed as a result of the Commission's decision in Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, MM Docket No. 98-93 (November 1, 2000), and Appendix D does not reflect these changes. More specifically, in that proceeding the Commission adopted less preclusive second adjacent interference protection standards in Section 73.509 and 74.1204 to conform NCE FM and FM translator proposals to commercial standards. Under the new rules, a station's 100 dBu contour generally defines its second adjacent channel interfering contour. Radio applicants with second adjacent channel conflicts should determine whether these rule changes eliminate technical conflicts with any other applications. Applicants seeking to modify closed groups based on the new second adjacent
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2022A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2022A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2022A1.txt
  • its application for a construction permit for a new FM translator station on Channel 266 to serve Corrigan, Texas, which the staff dismissed by letter dated September 4, 2003 (``Staff Decision''). For the reasons set forth below, we deny the 2004 Petition. Background The staff dismissed Proctor's construction permit application because an engineering analysis revealed that the application violated Section 74.1204(a) of the Commission's rules. Specifically, the proposed 100 dBu interference contour of the new FM translator would have overlapped the 60 dBu protected contour of KOBT(FM), Winnie, Texas - overlap that is prohibited under Section 74.1204(a). When Proctor submitted its 2003 Petition within 30 days of the Staff Decision, it included an amendment to the application that Proctor characterized as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2106A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2106A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2106A1.txt
  • for waivers of Section 73.807 and Section 73.825 ARE HEREBY GRANTED and its application, File No. BMPL-20060809ALB IS HEREBY GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS. The authorization is enclosed. These actions are taken pursuant to Section 0.283 of the Commissions Rules. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle, Chief Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. 47 C.F.R. � 73.807. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(d). See also Living Way Ministries, 17 FCC Rcd 17054 (2002) (petition for reconsideration pending). Id. � 73.825. Id. � 73.525. 114 Stat. 2762 at A-11. Formerly H. R. 5548 (106th Cong.). E.g., WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1968) (``WAIT Radio''). Columbia Communications Corp. v. FCC, 832 F.2d 189, 192 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (quoting Rio Grand Family
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1006A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1006A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1006A1.txt
  • defective. Background. This case involves a staff grant of an application (the ``Application'') filed by Educational Media Foundation (``EMF'') for a new FM translator station in New Albany, Indiana, notwithstanding the fact that the 100 dB( interfering contour of the proposed FM translator station lies entirely within the 60 dB( protected contour of second-adjacent channel Station WFPL(FM), Louisville, Kentucky. Section 74.1204(a) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') provides, in pertinent part, that a translator application will not be accepted for filing if the proposed operation would involve overlap of its predicted interfering contour and the protected contour of an existing full-service FM station. However, subsection (d) of the rule provides that: [A]n application otherwise precluded by this section will be accepted
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1718A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1718A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1718A1.txt
  • application to, among other things, move the new Cimarron transmission facilities to a site 24 kilometers closer to Dodge City. The staff granted the modification application ten days later. In anticipation of the imminent commencement of program tests by KMML(FM), Kanza ceased Station operations on March 5, 2008 on the theory that continued operations would constitute a violation of Section 74.1204 of the Rules. At this time, Kanza failed to notify or request approval from the Commission regarding the cessation of Station operations, in violation of Section 74.1263(c) of the Rules. Kanza indicates that it has continued to investigate options to continue service to Dodge City either through further modification of its existing construction permit or by other arrangements, although its
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1688A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1688A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1688A1.txt
  • explanation for the untimely filing of the First Application. Capstar filed a Petition to Deny the First Application on April 15, 2002, claiming that the Station has no current authority to operate because its license has expired. Thus, it maintains that the First Application should be treated as an application for a new translator station and dismissed for violating Section 74.1204(a) of the Rules. It further argues that Licensee does not meet the criteria for a request for a waiver of Section 73.3539 of the Rules. On December 1, 2004, Licensee timely filed the Second Application. DISCUSSION Petition to Deny. First, Capstar alleges that the Commission should deny the First Application because it violates Section 74.1204(a) of the Rules. This Rule
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1727A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1727A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1727A1.txt
  • added). See, e.g., Digital Broadcasting Systems and Their Impact on the Terrestrial Broadcast Service, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 15 FCC Rcd 1722, 1734 (1999) (seeking comment on DAB design attributes to ``meet the current and future needs of all stakeholders in our free over-the-air broadcasting system.'') (emphasis in original). 47 C.F.R. � 74.1203(b). Id. (emphasis added) 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(b). (footnote continued) Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 October 18, 2011 T�RΞ&��PNG �` �` b``D� 4 �&)�@�-�@�@�7 H >��O��� p j�� �2�=��k��� �"_� - J��, �Nt�Rb �7�P���U�ZS '��wp��ˈ jP�T{.|�87w]�g��yA�Ҩ-��=T#�O> �#W p����U�^S� �t�''�TxNt�l ۦ��X6`T{������:�r�� �A�R\ )]h]e�M8�I̟`�?K^��� ?C��A�UU �3ꡟ=��A � \�+�_ �e�P�g� �ك�� �_ą {�.� �"��{Z��HV9�iъ���� s+ �~ �p��,�� �tm�y� ݤ*>0�F��lŢ.|�� /�b���=^''"TxM[�D\Њl��-I�@� � �-'��I�<~@� �p^v�}��+d�� '� �@����7�l:] �WN 9�� _#p�� �h -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-688A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-688A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-688A1.txt
  • proposed translator would interfere with the reception of its second-adjacent channel (Channel 256, 99.1 MHz) Class B Station WPLR(FM), New Haven, Connecticut. Citadel claims that the proposed translator would interfere with the regularly received off-air reception of its first-adjacent-channel (Channel 257, 99.3 MHz) Class A Station WSKO-FM, Wakefield-Peacedale, Rhode Island. Each of the Objectors claims that the Application violates Section 74.1204(f) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') and should be dismissed. In its various Oppositions, Red Wolf offers detailed rebuttals to the Objector's arguments. It denies that the Application would cause any interference, maintains that there will be no prohibited overlap with any of the Objectors' stations and that the Application complies with all Commission rules.. Finally, it contends that the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253002A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253002A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253002A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Report No. 2676 October 08, 2004 CONSUMER & GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS BUREAU REFERENCE INFORMATION CENTER ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------- RM NO. RULES SEC. PETITIONER DATE RECEIVED NATURE OF PETITION ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------- 11099 73.807 & New Jersey Broad- 05/27/2004 In the Matter of the Commission's Rules with 74.1204(a) casters Association regards to the prevention of further deterioration to the New Jersey FM band broadcast environment, (Filed By: John F. Garziglia, the petition proposes 1) amend the rules to require Womble Carlyle Sandridge & FM translator and LPFM stations requesting to Rice, PLLC operate in New Jersey to provide protection to the 1401 Eye Street, N.W. 44 dBu (50,50)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-349A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-349A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-349A1.txt
  • stations. The interference protections that were added to the translator and LPFM service rules place LPFM stations and FM translators on essentially equal footing in providing reciprocal interference protection. LPFM stations must meet FM translator distance separation minimums and FM translators must protect the 60 dBu contour of LP100 stations. We wish to clarify the application of 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(a)(4), the rule section requiring FM translators to protect the 60 dBu contour of co- and 1st adjacent channel LP100 stations. In issuing LPFM construction permits we will specify an acceptable range of ERP based on the proposed antenna HAAT. Any subsequently filed license authorization will include a specific operating ERP. An FM translator application must protect the maximum facility authorized
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-368A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-368A1.pdf
  • our rules to expand one-step-licensing procedures to allow FM translator and booster stations to decrease power only by filing a license application. Relaxed NCE FM and FM Translator Technical Requirements Second-Adjacent Channel Interference Ratios for Predicting Prohibited Overlap in the Reserved Band We proposed in the Notice to conform commercial and NCE FM interference standards by modifying Sections 73.509 and 74.1204(a) of the Commission's rules to specify a 100 dBu interfering contour for second-adjacent channel NCE FM and FM translator stations. Commercial and NCE FM interference standards are derived from a common methodology. Despite this, second-adjacent channel protection requirements use a 100 dBu interfering contour in the non-reserved band and an 80 dBu interfering contour in the reserved band. We stated
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-46A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-46A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-46A1.txt
  • State of Oregon, Acting By and Through the State Board of Higher Education for the Benefit of Southern Oregon State College (``Oregon''), seeks reconsideration of our denial of its Application for Review (``Reconsideration Petition''). For the reasons set forth below, we deny the Reconsideration Petition. 2. Background: This case involves the request of Oregon for a waiver of 47 C.F.R. �74.1204(a), which prohibits the operation of an FM translator station that causes actual interference to, inter alia, the transmission of any authorized broadcast station. In the Oregon Decision, we found that Oregon's translator station K202AP (``Station K202AP'') interfered with KNYR(FM), Yreka, California, also owned by Oregon, and thus denied the requested waiver. 3. Oregon provides no new facts in its Reconsideration
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-227A1.txt
  • (``[An] authorized FM translator or booster station will not be permitted to continue to operate if it causes any actual interference to the transmission of any authorized broadcast station''). Additionally, the Staff Decision correctly noted that the rules specify that booster stations provide protection to first-adjacent channel stations, not to second-adjacent channel stations, such as KXPT(FM). See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(i). 47 C.F.R. � 74.1232(f). See General Instructions to FCC Form 323, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations, Section I, item 5. See, e.g., Greater Muskegeon Broadcasters, Inc., 11 FCC Rcd 15464, 15472-73 (1996) (existence of an inaccuracy in an application, without any indication that the applicant meant to deceive the Commission, does not elevate such a mistake to the level
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-244A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-244A1.txt
  • a new interference standard adopted while its petition for reconsideration was pending.4 San Bernardino Community College ("SBCC"), the licensee of NCE FM station KVCR, San Bernardino, California opposes LWM's requests. For the reasons discussed below, we find that the staff correctly rejected the applicant's primary argument concerning the use of census data, in considering the "no population" exception in Section 74.1204(d) of our rules. However, we apply the new interference standard and find that the application may be granted under this exception. Accordingly, we grant review, reinstate the application, and direct the staff to grant LWM's application for a construction permit for a new FM translator station in Sun Valley, California. We also take this opportunity to clarify the use of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-202A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-202A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-202A1.txt
  • kHz/East Greenbush proposal. The Commission granted WPOW's request and treated the modification application as one for a new station. In contrast, the subject major modification application was to enhance W234AB's then-existing facilities, relocating the transmitter site, but not changing the community of license or the frequency. As a result of the protection afforded to a licensee's existing facilities under Section 74.1204(a) of the Commission rules, competing proposals were required to protect W234AB's then-licensed facilities. Thus, the rights of interested parties to file competing applications would have been prejudiced by subsequent amendment and conversion of WYCQ's application into one for a new FM translator. Accordingly, we uphold the staff action separately on this basis. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED; that the Application for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-66A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-66A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-66A1.txt
  • translator station at Penryn, California (the ``Penryn Translator Station''). For the reasons set forth below, we deny CSU's application for review. and submitted letters from KXPR(FM) and KZSA(FM) accepting this overlap. 3. On December 23, 1999, the staff dismissed the Application, holding that the consents of KZSA(FM) and KXPR(FM) to receive the prohibited overlap did not warrant waiver of Section 74.1204. The staff followed long-standing precedent rejecting attempts of applicants and licensees to determine acceptable levels of interference among broadcast stations. The staff also concluded that a waiver was unwarranted. 4. CSU timely sought reconsideration of the dismissal of the Application. CSU argued that it is arbitrary and capricious to permit the filing of applications for low power FM (``LPFM'') stations
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-155A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-155A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-155A1.txt
  • 10, 1996, the Association tendered its original application for a new NCE FM translator on Channel 211 at Santa Ana, California. SMCCD petitioned to deny that application, arguing that the proposed translator would cause interference to a substantial number of listeners of its first-adjacent-channel station, KCRW(FM), Santa Monica, California. SMCCD argued that the application should be dismissed pursuant to Section 74.1204(f) of the rules because, if implemented, the Association's translator station would cause interference to reception of KCRW(FM). The Association subsequently filed a ``major amendment'' to its application, and the amended application was then assigned a new file number under Section 74.1233(a)(1) of the rules. The Association further amended the proposal in accordance with a staff request, and on August 26,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-68A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-68A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-68A1.txt
  • Louisville Free Public Library (``LFPL'') and granting the captioned application of Educational Media Foundation (``EMF'') for a new FM translator station at New Albany, Indiana. Also before the Commission is KPR's June 16, 2000, Motion for Stay. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss as moot the Motion for Stay and deny the Application for Review. 2. Background. Section 74.1204(a) of the Commission's rules provides, in pertinent part, that a translator application will not be accepted for filing if the proposed operation would involve overlap of its predicted interference contour and the protected contour of an existing full-service FM station. However, subsection (d) of the rule provides that: [A]n application otherwise precluded by this section will be accepted if it
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-75A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-75A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-75A1.txt
  • requests for waiver of our strict tolling provisions.'' Id. at 17541. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598. UCC 2001 Petition at 7. Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 2233; Reconsideration Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 19223. Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 2233-34. Id. at 2233. Id.; Reconsideration Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 19223; see also 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204. Reconsideration Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 19223. Id. Id. at 19224. See Testimony of Marianne Knorzer, KRBS-LP, LPFM Forum (Feb. 8, 2005). See also 12/8/04 MAP Ex Parte; 9/30/04 MAP Ex Parte; 8/17/04 MAP Ex Parte; Prometheus Mitre Study Comments at 18-20. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1231(b). 8/17/04 MAP Ex Parte; Prometheus Mitre Study Comments at 18. See also Testimony
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-204A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-204A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-204A1.txt
  • in their local communities. Prometheus and other LPFM advocates argue that the Commission should adopt a more flexible ``contour'' methodology for the licensing of LPFM stations. Although full-service NCE FM stations are licensed pursuant to a contour methodology, it appears that these parties are urging the Commission to permit LPFM station licensing pursuant to the FM translator protection rule, Section 74.1204 of the Rules. As demonstrated by the filing of over 13,000 applications in the 2003 window for new non-reserved band FM translator construction permits, adoption of this standard would vastly expand LPFM licensing opportunities throughout the nation and create the possibility of locating new LPFM stations in a number of major and spectrum-congested markets. The flexibility of FM translator licensing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-142A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-142A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-142A1.txt
  • would result in unreasonable delay to the applicants and unnecessary administrative burden upon the limited technological resources available to the Commission for evaluating alternative prediction studies. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 73.313(e). See also note 9, supra. Application for Review at 4-5. Opposition to Application for Review at 7. Reply to Opposition at 4-5. Lunderville also refers to 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(h), which states that an FM translator application must be in compliance with Section 74.1235(d) to be acceptable for filing. Id. U.S.-Canada FM Agreement Modified to Permit Added Flexibility for FM Translators, Public Notice, Ref. No. IN97-22 (rel. Jul. 28, 1997). 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, Final Rule, 63 FR 33875, 33879 (Jun. 22, 1998). We
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-242A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-242A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-242A1.txt
  • and find nothing that persuades us to reconsider either the Reinstatement Order or Educational Media Foundation. We therefore deny the Petitioners' reconsideration petitions. background The Living Way Application The Application specified a new translator station operating on a second adjacent channel to, and within the protected 1 mV/m (60 dBu) contour of, Station KUSC-FM, Los Angeles, California. Pursuant to Section 74.1204(d) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), Living Way asserted that its application was grantable because the area of predicted interference to KUSC-FM was unpopulated. The staff initially dismissed Living Way's application because its ``lack of population'' exhibit relied on United States Census Block data which do not accurately reflect the actual location of residences and other structures in an area.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-105A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-105A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-105A1.txt
  • seek comment on these issues. Finally, it appears that it will be significantly easier to ensure that licenses will be available for future translator stations than for LPFM stations. As previously noted, licensing asymmetries between the translator and LPFM services make it unlikely that LPFM licensing will preclude translator licensing opportunities, even in spectrum-limited markets. The translator protection rule, Section 74.1204, which is substantially more flexible than the minimum spacing requirements governing the LPFM service, facilitates the filing of technically acceptable applications in a window. It also facilitates the resolution of technical conflicts among competing applications, thereby permitting numerous grants from individual mutually exclusive groups under the translator auction settlement procedures. We tentatively conclude that these considerations establish that the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-72A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-72A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-72A1.txt
  • 1.201, 1.283. See, e.g., Pamplin Broadcasting, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 649, 651-52 n.15 (2008) (staff routinely waives 100 percent coverage of principal community requirement of Section 73.24(j) of the Rules for applicants showing at least 80 per cent coverage); State of Oregon, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 4344, 4345 (2001) (staff routinely waives Section 74.1204(a) for applicants who show that an overlap area is unpopulated). See, e.g., The Last Bastion Station Trust, LLC, as Trustee, c/o Media Venture Partners, LLC, Georgia Eagle Broadcasting, Inc., Letter, 23 FCC Rcd 4941, 4944 (MB 2008) (waiver of ``same day filing'' requirement facilitated efficient processing of applications in a manner which did not prejudice filing rights of any other
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-28A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-28A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-28A1.txt
  • leaves no room for balancing of the potential for interference with the potential for loss of service. We seek comment on our tentative conclusion and our reasoning. We also seek comment on whether we should permit LPFM applicants to make the sort of showings we routinely accept from FM translator applicants to establish that ``no actual interference will occur.'' Section 74.1204(d) of the rules permits a translator applicant to demonstrate that ``no actual interference will occur'' due to ``lack of population'' and we have permitted translator applicants to use an undesired/desired signal strength ratio methodology to narrowly define areas of potential interference when proposing to operate near another station operating on a second- or third-adjacent channel. Are such showings consistent with
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.wp
  • in FM translator coverage areas greater than 10 percent be classified as minor changes based on concern over enabling translators to increase coverage significantly without being subject to competing applications). 86 See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.37(a) (AM daytime contour protection requirements); 73.182(q) (AM nighttime contour protection requirements); 73.509 (NCE FM stations must protect 1 mV/m contour of NCE FM stations); 74.1204 (FM translators must protect primary service contours of existing FM and FM translator stations); see also Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4738 (employing similar reasoning in adopting cut-off protection for minor change applications against rulemaking petitions) 23 predicted 1 mV/m (60 dBu) coverage area;80 and (3) for FM translators, any proposed change or increase of over 10 percent
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00349.pdf
  • stations. The interference protections that were added to the translator and LPFM service rules place LPFM stations and FM translators on essentially equal footing in providing reciprocal interference protection. LPFM stations must meet FM translator distance separation minimums and FM translators must protect the 60 dBu contour of LP100 stations. We wish to clarify the application of 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(a)(4), the rule section requiring FM translators to protect the 60 dBu contour of co- and 1st adjacent channel LP100 stations. In issuing LPFM construction permits we will specify an acceptable range of ERP based on the proposed antenna HAAT. Any subsequently filed license authorization will include a specific operating ERP. An FM translator application must protect the maximum facility authorized
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.pdf
  • facilities. 81 47 U.S.C. � 319(f). 82 See Comments of AFCCE, Graham Brock, Hardy & Carey, NPR, Sound of Life and V-Soft. Federal Communications Commission FCC 00-368 21 1. Second-Adjacent Channel Interference Ratios for Predicting Prohibited Overlap in the Reserved Band 39. We proposed in the Notice to conform commercial and NCE FM interference standards by modifying Sections 73.509 and 74.1204(a) of the Commission's rules to specify a 100 dBu interfering contour for second-adjacent channel NCE FM and FM translator stations.83 Commercial and NCE FM interference standards are derived from a common methodology.84 Despite this, second-adjacent channel protection requirements use a 100 dBu interfering contour in the non-reserved band and an 80 dBu interfering contour in the reserved band. We stated
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da010729.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da010729.html http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da010729.txt
  • prepare supplements to claim points. Mutual exclusivity for radio groups may have changed as a result of the Commission's decision in Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, MM Docket No. 98-93 (November 1, 2000), and Appendix D does not reflect these changes. More specifically, in that proceeding the Commission adopted less preclusive second adjacent interference protection standards in Section 73.509 and 74.1204 to conform NCE FM and FM translator proposals to commercial standards. Under the new rules, a station's 100 dBu contour generally defines its second adjacent channel interfering contour. Radio applicants with second adjacent channel conflicts should determine whether these rule changes eliminate technical conflicts with any other applications. Applicants seeking to modify closed groups based on the new second adjacent
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-11-105A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-11-105A1.pdf
  • seek comment on these issues. Finally, it appears that it will be significantly easier to ensure that licenses will be available for future translator stations than for LPFM stations. As previously noted, licensing asymmetries between the translator and LPFM services make it unlikely that LPFM licensing will preclude translator licensing opportunities, even in spectrum-limited markets. The translator protection rule, Section 74.1204, which is substantially more flexible than the minimum spacing requirements governing the LPFM service, facilitates the filing of technically acceptable applications in a window. It also facilitates the resolution of technical conflicts among competing applications, thereby permitting numerous grants from individual mutually exclusive groups under the translator auction settlement procedures. We tentatively conclude that these considerations establish that the Commission's
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-12-28A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-12-28A1.pdf
  • leaves no room for balancing of the potential for interference with the potential for loss of service. We seek comment on our tentative conclusion and our reasoning. We also seek comment on whether we should permit LPFM applicants to make the sort of showings we routinely accept from FM translator applicants to establish that ``no actual interference will occur.'' Section 74.1204(d) of the rules permits a translator applicant to demonstrate that ``no actual interference will occur'' due to ``lack of population'' and we have permitted translator applicants to use an undesired/desired signal strength ratio methodology to narrowly define areas of potential interference when proposing to operate near another station operating on a second- or third-adjacent channel. Are such showings consistent with
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-99-55A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-99-55A1.pdf
  • Commission's Rules, First Report and Order in MM Docket No. 83-1377, 56 Rad. Reg. 2d 941, 943-44 (1984) (employing similar analysis in classifying commercial FM station facilities increases as minor changes). See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.37(a) (AM daytime contour protection requirements); 73.182(q) (AM nighttime contour protection requirements); 73.509 (NCE FM stations must protect 1 mV/m contour of NCE FM stations); 74.1204 (FM translators must protect primary service contours of existing FM and FM translator stations). Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14872; see supra, n. 29. With regard to NPR's and V-Soft Communications' suggestions regarding strict application of construction permit extension rules to address warehousing concerns, we note that the Commission recently adopted modified construction permit extension procedures lengthening the time period
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/engrser.html
  • not justify waiver; translators are not comparable to LPFM stations. Application for review denied. September 9, 2002 Living Way Ministries ... New Noncommercial Educational FM Translator on Channel 220, Sun Valley, CA MO&O, FCC 02-244, released September 9, 2002 [ [966]PDF | [967]Word | [968]Text ]. NOTE: 100 dBu interfering contour for second adjacent channel translator stations under [969]47 CFR 74.1204(a). Guidance is provided for applicants applying the "lack of population" provision of [970]47 CFR 74.1204(d), discussion of Census internal points and USGS topographic maps. February 6, 2002 Peninsula Communications, Inc., Former Licensee of FM Translator Stations K285EF, Kenai; K283AB, Kenai/Soldotna; K274AB and K285AA, Kodiak; K272DG and K285EG, Seward, AK Forfeiture Order, FCC 02-31, 17 FCC Rcd 2832, released February 6,
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/part74rule.html
  • pages on the FCC Internet site may be listed to the right of the rule title, enclosed in brackets [ ]. [45]Subpart L -- FM Broadcast Translator Stations and FM Broadcast Booster Stations Subpart L -- FM Broadcast Translator Stations and FM Broadcast Booster Stations [46]TEXT [47]PDF 74.1201 Definitions [48]TEXT [49]PDF 74.1202 Frequency Assignment [50]TEXT [51]PDF 74.1203 Interference [52]TEXT [53]PDF 74.1204 Protection of FM broadcast, FM Translator and LP100 stations [54]TEXT [55]PDF 74.1205 Protection of TV Channel 6 broadcast applications [56]TEXT [57]PDF 74.1231 Purpose and permissible service [58]TEXT [59]PDF 74.1232 Eligibility and licensing requirements [60]TEXT [61]PDF 74.1233 Processing FM translator and booster station applications [62]TEXT [63]PDF 74.1234 Unattended operation [64]TEXT [65]PDF 74.1235 Power limitations and antenna systems [66]TEXT [67]PDF 74.1236 Emission
• http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/part74rule.html
  • pages on the FCC Internet site may be listed to the right of the rule title, enclosed in brackets [ ]. [45]Subpart L -- FM Broadcast Translator Stations and FM Broadcast Booster Stations Subpart L -- FM Broadcast Translator Stations and FM Broadcast Booster Stations [46]TEXT [47]PDF 74.1201 Definitions [48]TEXT [49]PDF 74.1202 Frequency Assignment [50]TEXT [51]PDF 74.1203 Interference [52]TEXT [53]PDF 74.1204 Protection of FM broadcast, FM Translator and LP100 stations [54]TEXT [55]PDF 74.1205 Protection of TV Channel 6 broadcast applications [56]TEXT [57]PDF 74.1231 Purpose and permissible service [58]TEXT [59]PDF 74.1232 Eligibility and licensing requirements [60]TEXT [61]PDF 74.1233 Processing FM translator and booster station applications [62]TEXT [63]PDF 74.1234 Unattended operation [64]TEXT [65]PDF 74.1235 Power limitations and antenna systems [66]TEXT [67]PDF 74.1236 Emission
• http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/audio/decdoc/engrser.html
  • not justify waiver; translators are not comparable to LPFM stations. Application for review denied. September 9, 2002 Living Way Ministries ... New Noncommercial Educational FM Translator on Channel 220, Sun Valley, CA MO&O, FCC 02-244, released September 9, 2002 [ [966]PDF | [967]Word | [968]Text ]. NOTE: 100 dBu interfering contour for second adjacent channel translator stations under [969]47 CFR 74.1204(a). Guidance is provided for applicants applying the "lack of population" provision of [970]47 CFR 74.1204(d), discussion of Census internal points and USGS topographic maps. February 6, 2002 Peninsula Communications, Inc., Former Licensee of FM Translator Stations K285EF, Kenai; K283AB, Kenai/Soldotna; K274AB and K285AA, Kodiak; K272DG and K285EG, Seward, AK Forfeiture Order, FCC 02-31, 17 FCC Rcd 2832, released February 6,
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/25/releases/fc980194.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/25/releases/fc980194.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/25/releases/fc980194.wp
  • requested comment on a petition for 102 rulemaking proposing a new "Class A" television service for which certain LPTV stations could qualify. See Public Notice, Petition for Rulemaking for "Class A" TV Service (rel. April 21, 1998). FM translator stations will also continue to be subject to other existing rules concerning their secondary status. See, e.g., 103 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(f) (allowing FM broadcasters right to object to proposed translators that would be likely to interfere with reception of a regularly received existing service, even if there is no prohibited contour overlap); 47 C.F.R. � 74.1232(h) (FM translator authorization subject to termination if the circumstances in the community or area served are so altered as to have prohibited grant of the
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/25/releases/fc990074.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/25/releases/fc990074.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/25/releases/fc990074.wp
  • due to terrain shielding. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.703(a). These applicants are also permitted to avoid mutual exclusivity by agreeing to accept interference, or by filing minor amendments to their applications. See 47 C.F.R. �� 74.703(a). FM translator applicants may also avoid mutual exclusivity by demonstrating that no actual interference will occur due to intervening terrain. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(d). See 47 U.S.C. � 309(j)(3)(A) (in designing systems of competitive bidding, Commission shall promote development 87 and deployment of products and services for public, including those residing in rural areas, without administrative or judicial delays). 30 legislative history of the Budget Act specifically admonished the Commission about its obligations under Section 309(j)(6)(E) by emphasizing that notwithstanding its expanded auction authority,
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/28/releases/fc980194.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/28/releases/fc980194.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/28/releases/fc980194.wp
  • requested comment on a petition for 102 rulemaking proposing a new "Class A" television service for which certain LPTV stations could qualify. See Public Notice, Petition for Rulemaking for "Class A" TV Service (rel. April 21, 1998). FM translator stations will also continue to be subject to other existing rules concerning their secondary status. See, e.g., 103 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(f) (allowing FM broadcasters right to object to proposed translators that would be likely to interfere with reception of a regularly received existing service, even if there is no prohibited contour overlap); 47 C.F.R. � 74.1232(h) (FM translator authorization subject to termination if the circumstances in the community or area served are so altered as to have prohibited grant of the
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/28/releases/fc990074.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/28/releases/fc990074.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/28/releases/fc990074.wp
  • due to terrain shielding. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.703(a). These applicants are also permitted to avoid mutual exclusivity by agreeing to accept interference, or by filing minor amendments to their applications. See 47 C.F.R. �� 74.703(a). FM translator applicants may also avoid mutual exclusivity by demonstrating that no actual interference will occur due to intervening terrain. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(d). See 47 U.S.C. � 309(j)(3)(A) (in designing systems of competitive bidding, Commission shall promote development 87 and deployment of products and services for public, including those residing in rural areas, without administrative or judicial delays). 30 legislative history of the Budget Act specifically admonished the Commission about its obligations under Section 309(j)(6)(E) by emphasizing that notwithstanding its expanded auction authority,
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/32/releases/fc990074.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/32/releases/fc990074.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/32/releases/fc990074.wp
  • due to terrain shielding. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.703(a). These applicants are also permitted to avoid mutual exclusivity by agreeing to accept interference, or by filing minor amendments to their applications. See 47 C.F.R. �� 74.703(a). FM translator applicants may also avoid mutual exclusivity by demonstrating that no actual interference will occur due to intervening terrain. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(d). See 47 U.S.C. � 309(j)(3)(A) (in designing systems of competitive bidding, Commission shall promote development 87 and deployment of products and services for public, including those residing in rural areas, without administrative or judicial delays). 30 legislative history of the Budget Act specifically admonished the Commission about its obligations under Section 309(j)(6)(E) by emphasizing that notwithstanding its expanded auction authority,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.wp
  • in FM translator coverage areas greater than 10 percent be classified as minor changes based on concern over enabling translators to increase coverage significantly without being subject to competing applications). 86 See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.37(a) (AM daytime contour protection requirements); 73.182(q) (AM nighttime contour protection requirements); 73.509 (NCE FM stations must protect 1 mV/m contour of NCE FM stations); 74.1204 (FM translators must protect primary service contours of existing FM and FM translator stations); see also Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4738 (employing similar reasoning in adopting cut-off protection for minor change applications against rulemaking petitions) 23 predicted 1 mV/m (60 dBu) coverage area;80 and (3) for FM translators, any proposed change or increase of over 10 percent
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1999/fcc99055.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1999/fcc99055.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1999/fcc99055.wp
  • Rules, First Report and Order in MM Docket No. 83-1377, 56 Rad. Reg. 2d 941, 943-44 (1984) (employing similar analysis in classifying commercial FM station facilities increases as minor changes). 29 See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.37(a) (AM daytime contour protection requirements); 73.182(q) (AM nighttime contour protection requirements); 73.509 (NCE FM stations must protect 1 mV/m contour of NCE FM stations); 74.1204 (FM translators must protect primary service contours of existing FM and FM translator stations). 30 Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14872; see supra, n. 29. 31 With regard to NPR's and V-Soft Communications' suggestions regarding strict application of construction permit extension rules to address warehousing concerns, we note that the Commission recently adopted modified construction permit extension procedures lengthening the
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fc00019a.doc
  • auxiliary stations licensed to low power FM stations will be assigned on a secondary basis; i.e., subject to the condition that no harmful interference is caused to other aural auxiliary stations assigned to radio broadcast stations. Auxiliary stations licensed to low power FM stations must accept any interference caused by stations having primary use of aural auxiliary frequencies. 4. Section 74.1204 Subpart L in Part 74, is renamed and amended as follows: �74.1204 Protection of FM broadcast, FM Translator and LP100 stations. (a) An application for an FM translator station will not be accepted for filing if the proposed operation would involve overlap of predicted field contours with any other authorized commercial or noncommercial educational FM broadcast stations, FM translators, and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00215.doc
  • McCloud, California. The STA expired on October 13, 1995. Oregon's June 6, 1996 request for reinstatement of the STA is still pending. 4. The staff denied the Major Change Application by letter dated May 7, 1996, finding that the 40 dB� interfering contour of Station K202AP's proposed facility overlapped with KNYR's 60 dB� protected service contour, in violation 47 C.F.R. �74.1204(a). The staff also found that Station K202AP's power exceeded the MERP limits allowed in 47 C.F.R. �74.1235(b). Since McCloud received other noncommercial educational (``NCE'') radio service, the staff held that a waiver of that section was not warranted. Oregon filed its Petition on June 6, 1996. The staff denied reconsideration on April 3, 1997, finding that Oregon had failed to
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00349.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00349.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00349.txt
  • stations. The interference protections that were added to the translator and LPFM service rules place LPFM stations and FM translators on essentially equal footing in providing reciprocal interference protection. LPFM stations must meet FM translator distance separation minimums and FM translators must protect the 60 dBu contour of LP100 stations. We wish to clarify the application of 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(a)(4), the rule section requiring FM translators to protect the 60 dBu contour of co- and 1st adjacent channel LP100 stations. In issuing LPFM construction permits we will specify an acceptable range of ERP based on the proposed antenna HAAT. Any subsequently filed license authorization will include a specific operating ERP. An FM translator application must protect the maximum facility authorized
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.txt
  • our rules to expand one-step-licensing procedures to allow FM translator and booster stations to decrease power only by filing a license application. Relaxed NCE FM and FM Translator Technical Requirements Second-Adjacent Channel Interference Ratios for Predicting Prohibited Overlap in the Reserved Band We proposed in the Notice to conform commercial and NCE FM interference standards by modifying Sections 73.509 and 74.1204(a) of the Commission's rules to specify a 100 dBu interfering contour for second-adjacent channel NCE FM and FM translator stations. Commercial and NCE FM interference standards are derived from a common methodology. Despite this, second-adjacent channel protection requirements use a 100 dBu interfering contour in the non-reserved band and an 80 dBu interfering contour in the reserved band. We stated
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da010729.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da010729.html http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da010729.txt
  • prepare supplements to claim points. Mutual exclusivity for radio groups may have changed as a result of the Commission's decision in Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, MM Docket No. 98-93 (November 1, 2000), and Appendix D does not reflect these changes. More specifically, in that proceeding the Commission adopted less preclusive second adjacent interference protection standards in Section 73.509 and 74.1204 to conform NCE FM and FM translator proposals to commercial standards. Under the new rules, a station's 100 dBu contour generally defines its second adjacent channel interfering contour. Radio applicants with second adjacent channel conflicts should determine whether these rule changes eliminate technical conflicts with any other applications. Applicants seeking to modify closed groups based on the new second adjacent
• http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form349/349.pdf
  • The applicant must certify that the proposal complies with the Commission's contour overlap and interference protection provisions. In order to answer "Yes" to this question, the applicant must submit exhibits with sufficient information to demonstrate that the proposed facility complies with the applicable rule sections. All proposed translator and booster facilities must provide exhibits demonstrating compliance with 47 C.F.R. Section 74.1204. Failure to provide exhibits demonstrating lack of prohibited overlap may result in dismissal of the application. Any proposed translator on the reserved band (channels 201-220) must provide exhibits demonstrating compliance with 47 C.F.R. Section 74.1205. If compliance with Section 74.1205 is by an agreement, the application must include a copy of that agreement. See 47 C.F.R. Section 74.1205(a). Proposed translators
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-2106A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-2106A1.pdf
  • for waivers of Section 73.807 and Section 73.825 ARE HEREBY GRANTED and its application, File No. BMPL-20060809ALB IS HEREBY GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS. The authorization is enclosed. These actions are taken pursuant to Section 0.283 of the Commissions Rules. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle, Chief Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. 47 C.F.R. � 73.807. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(d). See also Living Way Ministries, 17 FCC Rcd 17054 (2002) (petition for reconsideration pending). Id. � 73.825. Id. � 73.525. 114 Stat. 2762 at A-11. Formerly H. R. 5548 (106th Cong.). E.g., WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1968) (``WAIT Radio''). Columbia Communications Corp. v. FCC, 832 F.2d 189, 192 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (quoting Rio Grand Family
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1006A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1006A1.pdf
  • defective. Background. This case involves a staff grant of an application (the ``Application'') filed by Educational Media Foundation (``EMF'') for a new FM translator station in New Albany, Indiana, notwithstanding the fact that the 100 dB( interfering contour of the proposed FM translator station lies entirely within the 60 dB( protected contour of second-adjacent channel Station WFPL(FM), Louisville, Kentucky. Section 74.1204(a) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') provides, in pertinent part, that a translator application will not be accepted for filing if the proposed operation would involve overlap of its predicted interfering contour and the protected contour of an existing full-service FM station. However, subsection (d) of the rule provides that: [A]n application otherwise precluded by this section will be accepted
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1718A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1718A1.pdf
  • application to, among other things, move the new Cimarron transmission facilities to a site 24 kilometers closer to Dodge City. The staff granted the modification application ten days later. In anticipation of the imminent commencement of program tests by KMML(FM), Kanza ceased Station operations on March 5, 2008 on the theory that continued operations would constitute a violation of Section 74.1204 of the Rules. At this time, Kanza failed to notify or request approval from the Commission regarding the cessation of Station operations, in violation of Section 74.1263(c) of the Rules. Kanza indicates that it has continued to investigate options to continue service to Dodge City either through further modification of its existing construction permit or by other arrangements, although its
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1688A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1688A1.pdf
  • explanation for the untimely filing of the First Application. Capstar filed a Petition to Deny the First Application on April 15, 2002, claiming that the Station has no current authority to operate because its license has expired. Thus, it maintains that the First Application should be treated as an application for a new translator station and dismissed for violating Section 74.1204(a) of the Rules. It further argues that Licensee does not meet the criteria for a request for a waiver of Section 73.3539 of the Rules. On December 1, 2004, Licensee timely filed the Second Application. DISCUSSION Petition to Deny. First, Capstar alleges that the Commission should deny the First Application because it violates Section 74.1204(a) of the Rules. This Rule
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1727A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1727A1.pdf
  • added). See, e.g., Digital Broadcasting Systems and Their Impact on the Terrestrial Broadcast Service, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 15 FCC Rcd 1722, 1734 (1999) (seeking comment on DAB design attributes to ``meet the current and future needs of all stakeholders in our free over-the-air broadcasting system.'') (emphasis in original). 47 C.F.R. � 74.1203(b). Id. (emphasis added) 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(b). (footnote continued) Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 October 18, 2011 T�RΞ&��PNG �` �` b``D� 4 �&)�@�-�@�@�7 H >��O��� p j�� �2�=��k��� �"_� - J��, �Nt�Rb �7�P���U�ZS '��wp��ˈ jP�T{.|�87w]�g��yA�Ҩ-��=T#�O> �#W p����U�^S� �t�''�TxNt�l ۦ��X6`T{������:�r�� �A�R\ )]h]e�M8�I̟`�?K^��� ?C��A�UU �3ꡟ=��A � \�+�_ �e�P�g� �ك�� �_ą {�.� �"��{Z��HV9�iъ���� s+ �~ �p��,�� �tm�y� ݤ*>0�F��lŢ.|�� /�b���=^''"TxM[�D\Њl��-I�@� � �-'��I�<~@� �p^v�}��+d�� '� �@����7�l:] �WN 9�� _#p�� �h -
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-688A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-688A1.pdf
  • proposed translator would interfere with the reception of its second-adjacent channel (Channel 256, 99.1 MHz) Class B Station WPLR(FM), New Haven, Connecticut. Citadel claims that the proposed translator would interfere with the regularly received off-air reception of its first-adjacent-channel (Channel 257, 99.3 MHz) Class A Station WSKO-FM, Wakefield-Peacedale, Rhode Island. Each of the Objectors claims that the Application violates Section 74.1204(f) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') and should be dismissed. In its various Oppositions, Red Wolf offers detailed rebuttals to the Objector's arguments. It denies that the Application would cause any interference, maintains that there will be no prohibited overlap with any of the Objectors' stations and that the Application complies with all Commission rules.. Finally, it contends that the
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-03-66A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-03-66A1.pdf
  • translator station at Penryn, California (the ``Penryn Translator Station''). For the reasons set forth below, we deny CSU's application for review. and submitted letters from KXPR(FM) and KZSA(FM) accepting this overlap. 3. On December 23, 1999, the staff dismissed the Application, holding that the consents of KZSA(FM) and KXPR(FM) to receive the prohibited overlap did not warrant waiver of Section 74.1204. The staff followed long-standing precedent rejecting attempts of applicants and licensees to determine acceptable levels of interference among broadcast stations. The staff also concluded that a waiver was unwarranted. 4. CSU timely sought reconsideration of the dismissal of the Application. CSU argued that it is arbitrary and capricious to permit the filing of applications for low power FM (``LPFM'') stations
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-04-155A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-04-155A1.pdf
  • 10, 1996, the Association tendered its original application for a new NCE FM translator on Channel 211 at Santa Ana, California. SMCCD petitioned to deny that application, arguing that the proposed translator would cause interference to a substantial number of listeners of its first-adjacent-channel station, KCRW(FM), Santa Monica, California. SMCCD argued that the application should be dismissed pursuant to Section 74.1204(f) of the rules because, if implemented, the Association's translator station would cause interference to reception of KCRW(FM). The Association subsequently filed a ``major amendment'' to its application, and the amended application was then assigned a new file number under Section 74.1233(a)(1) of the rules. The Association further amended the proposal in accordance with a staff request, and on August 26,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-04-68A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-04-68A1.pdf
  • Louisville Free Public Library (``LFPL'') and granting the captioned application of Educational Media Foundation (``EMF'') for a new FM translator station at New Albany, Indiana. Also before the Commission is KPR's June 16, 2000, Motion for Stay. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss as moot the Motion for Stay and deny the Application for Review. 2. Background. Section 74.1204(a) of the Commission's rules provides, in pertinent part, that a translator application will not be accepted for filing if the proposed operation would involve overlap of its predicted interference contour and the protected contour of an existing full-service FM station. However, subsection (d) of the rule provides that: [A]n application otherwise precluded by this section will be accepted if it
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-07-204A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-07-204A1.pdf
  • in their local communities. Prometheus and other LPFM advocates argue that the Commission should adopt a more flexible ``contour'' methodology for the licensing of LPFM stations. Although full-service NCE FM stations are licensed pursuant to a contour methodology, it appears that these parties are urging the Commission to permit LPFM station licensing pursuant to the FM translator protection rule, Section 74.1204 of the Rules. As demonstrated by the filing of over 13,000 applications in the 2003 window for new non-reserved band FM translator construction permits, adoption of this standard would vastly expand LPFM licensing opportunities throughout the nation and create the possibility of locating new LPFM stations in a number of major and spectrum-congested markets. The flexibility of FM translator licensing
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-142A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-142A1.pdf
  • would result in unreasonable delay to the applicants and unnecessary administrative burden upon the limited technological resources available to the Commission for evaluating alternative prediction studies. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 73.313(e). See also note 9, supra. Application for Review at 4-5. Opposition to Application for Review at 7. Reply to Opposition at 4-5. Lunderville also refers to 47 C.F.R. � 74.1204(h), which states that an FM translator application must be in compliance with Section 74.1235(d) to be acceptable for filing. Id. U.S.-Canada FM Agreement Modified to Permit Added Flexibility for FM Translators, Public Notice, Ref. No. IN97-22 (rel. Jul. 28, 1997). 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, Final Rule, 63 FR 33875, 33879 (Jun. 22, 1998). We
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-242A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-242A1.pdf
  • and find nothing that persuades us to reconsider either the Reinstatement Order or Educational Media Foundation. We therefore deny the Petitioners' reconsideration petitions. background The Living Way Application The Application specified a new translator station operating on a second adjacent channel to, and within the protected 1 mV/m (60 dBu) contour of, Station KUSC-FM, Los Angeles, California. Pursuant to Section 74.1204(d) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), Living Way asserted that its application was grantable because the area of predicted interference to KUSC-FM was unpopulated. The staff initially dismissed Living Way's application because its ``lack of population'' exhibit relied on United States Census Block data which do not accurately reflect the actual location of residences and other structures in an area.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-11-72A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-11-72A1.pdf
  • 1.201, 1.283. See, e.g., Pamplin Broadcasting, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 649, 651-52 n.15 (2008) (staff routinely waives 100 percent coverage of principal community requirement of Section 73.24(j) of the Rules for applicants showing at least 80 per cent coverage); State of Oregon, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 4344, 4345 (2001) (staff routinely waives Section 74.1204(a) for applicants who show that an overlap area is unpopulated). See, e.g., The Last Bastion Station Trust, LLC, as Trustee, c/o Media Venture Partners, LLC, Georgia Eagle Broadcasting, Inc., Letter, 23 FCC Rcd 4941, 4944 (MB 2008) (waiver of ``same day filing'' requirement facilitated efficient processing of applications in a manner which did not prejudice filing rights of any other
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/decdoc/engrser.html
  • not justify waiver; translators are not comparable to LPFM stations. Application for review denied. September 9, 2002 Living Way Ministries ... New Noncommercial Educational FM Translator on Channel 220, Sun Valley, CA MO&O, FCC 02-244, released September 9, 2002 [ [966]PDF | [967]Word | [968]Text ]. NOTE: 100 dBu interfering contour for second adjacent channel translator stations under [969]47 CFR 74.1204(a). Guidance is provided for applicants applying the "lack of population" provision of [970]47 CFR 74.1204(d), discussion of Census internal points and USGS topographic maps. February 6, 2002 Peninsula Communications, Inc., Former Licensee of FM Translator Stations K285EF, Kenai; K283AB, Kenai/Soldotna; K274AB and K285AA, Kodiak; K272DG and K285EG, Seward, AK Forfeiture Order, FCC 02-31, 17 FCC Rcd 2832, released February 6,
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/includes/30-engrser.htm
  • not justify waiver; translators are not comparable to LPFM stations. Application for review denied. September 9, 2002 Living Way Ministries ... New Noncommercial Educational FM Translator on Channel 220, Sun Valley, CA MO&O, FCC 02-244, released September 9, 2002 [ [920]PDF | [921]Word | [922]Text ]. NOTE: 100 dBu interfering contour for second adjacent channel translator stations under [923]47 CFR 74.1204(a). Guidance is provided for applicants applying the "lack of population" provision of [924]47 CFR 74.1204(d), discussion of Census internal points and USGS topographic maps. February 6, 2002 Peninsula Communications, Inc., Former Licensee of FM Translator Stations K285EF, Kenai; K283AB, Kenai/Soldotna; K274AB and K285AA, Kodiak; K272DG and K285EG, Seward, AK Forfeiture Order, FCC 02-31, 17 FCC Rcd 2832, released February 6,