FCC Web Documents citing 74.13

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

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1285A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1285A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1285A1.txt
  • 17.91% 2047 366.72 Lexington (Village) OH0789 17.12% 1626 278.33 Limaville OH2271 17.91% 71 12.72 Lisbon OH0070 36.88% 1133 417.83 Lodi OH0071 15.67% 1274 199.69 Louisville OH0063 19.81% 3444 682.15 Lowellville OH1498 28.01% 520 145.64 Lucas OH0605 50.33% 246 123.81 Malvern OH0326, 23.28% 530 123.40 OH0348 OH0326 Marlboro OH1622 18.57% 1452 269.69 Midvale OH0299 23.63% 213 50.33 Mifflin OH2187 17.28% 429 74.13 Mifflin OH2101 32.39% 64 20.73 Milan OH0191 15.15% 1321 200.14 Milan OH0872 24.14% 540 130.37 Millersburg OH0079 29.41% 1213 356.74 Milton OH1492 26.34% 1606 423.07 Mineral City OH0349 44.55% 306 136.32 Minerva OH0168 45.64% 1603 731.62 Mogadore OH0773 21.38% 1485 317.46 Monroe OH2188 34.91% 1776 620.05 Monroeville OH0036 39.74% 523 207.85 Nashville OH2194 50.24% 68 34.16 New Franklin OH2599 19.16%
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-121A2_Rcd.pdf
  • 280 161 48 12 44,451 10,080 2.18 480.64 13,688.74 1,584.32 0.90 13.01 1.87 1,466.57 1.99 MN 4,839 155 89 34 11 17,903 8,341 0.00 242.38 5,231.48 551.42 0.00 13.29 0.00 496.81 55.74 MO 9,415 360 192 87 24 50,096 5,394 0.15 659.06 8,734.16 227.17 0.97 0.88 0.54 874.87 63.35 MS 2,904 155 99 52 12 25,156 2,747 1.14 367.79 3,696.64 74.13 0.97 0.32 0.00 343.70 114.59 MT 24,626 204 125 56 12 27,086 53,161 38.64 1,501.54 37,618.87 15,227.06 7.16 7,238.97 7.82 2,960.28 57.89 NC 7,717 420 251 74 23 73,948 3,801 0.68 521.92 6,327.38 338.30 1.61 43.78 0.00 527.54 54.55 ND 2,547 64 47 39 6 2,235 2,467 0.00 156.54 3,607.40 538.52 0.00 0.00 0.05 285.12 0.00 NE 6,104 112 74
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.txt
  • Florida FL 114,828 37,624 77,204 67.23 Windstream Georgia Communications GA 43,880 32,041 11,825 26.95 AT&T - BellSouth - Georgia GA 216,512 129,462 87,091 40.22 Verizon - Northwest - Idaho ID 10,409 927 8,912 85.62 Qwest - Idaho South ID 50,317 23,522 26,797 53.26 Qwest - Idaho North ID 3,635 1,814 1,821 50.10 Verizon North - Contel/Illinois IL 9,126 2,357 6,765 74.13 Verizon South - Illinois IL (187) (417) 229 (122.46) Verizon North - Illinois IL 31,242 5,200 26,027 83.31 AT&T - Ameritech - Illinois Bell IL 373,060 213,609 157,712 42.28 Verizon North - Contel/Indiana IN 19,613 8,695 10,911 55.63 Verizon North - Indiana IN 48,351 4,920 43,411 89.78 AT&T - Ameritech - Indiana Bell IN 127,300 69,620 57,157 44.90 Embarq -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A13.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A13.txt
  • Florida FL 114,828 37,624 77,204 67.23 Windstream Georgia Communications GA 43,880 32,041 11,825 26.95 AT&T - BellSouth - Georgia GA 216,512 129,462 87,091 40.22 Verizon - Northwest - Idaho ID 10,409 927 8,912 85.62 Qwest - Idaho South ID 50,317 23,522 26,797 53.26 Qwest - Idaho North ID 3,635 1,814 1,821 50.10 Verizon North - Contel/Illinois IL 9,126 2,357 6,765 74.13 Verizon South - Illinois IL (187) (417) 229 (122.46) Verizon North - Illinois IL 31,242 5,200 26,027 83.31 AT&T - Ameritech - Illinois Bell IL 373,060 213,609 157,712 42.28 Verizon North - Contel/Indiana IN 19,613 8,695 10,911 55.63 Verizon North - Indiana IN 48,351 4,920 43,411 89.78 AT&T - Ameritech - Indiana Bell IN 127,300 69,620 57,157 44.90 Embarq -
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/da92-1547.pdf
  • FCCRcdNo.25 4,Atnotimepriortothegrantoftheconstruction permitapplicationdidWKFMinterposeanobjection,Consequently, WKFM'spetitionseeksreconsiderationofaction takeninaproceedingtowhichitwasnotaparty,Inorder todemonstratestandingtofileitspetition.WKFMstates thatitsinterestswouldbeadverselyaffectedbythegrant "becauseoftheinterferencethatwouldhecausedtothe receptionofitsfacilitiesbyForus'boosterstation.More- over.WKFMsubmitsthatithadnotparticipatedearlier becausetheSeptember20,1989PublicNoticeannouncing theapplicationastenderedforfiling(ReportNo,14559), listedonlytheproposedtransmitteroutputpowerof2.5 kW,asopposedtotheproposedeffectiveradiatedpower ("ERP")of8kW,WKFMmaintainsthatifithadbeen informedthattheproposedboosterstationwouldoperate withfacilitiesgreaterthanaClassAFMstation,itwould havetimelyfiledapetitiontodenytheapplication, 5,WefindthatWKFMhasfailedtoestablishgoodcause fornotparticipatingearlierintheproceeding,Hence,it lackstherequisitestandingtofileapetitionforreconsideration ofthegrantoftheForusapplication.AllCommis- sionpublicnoticesannouncingthetenderofFMbooster stationsspecifytheproposedtransmitteroutputpowerand nottheERP.Fromthisnotice.interestedpartiesare chargedwithconstructivenoticeofthesubjectapplication. This,coupledwiththefactthatthepublicnoticespecified Syracuseastheproposedcommunityoflicenseforthe boosterstation,meantthatWKFM,by theexerciseof reasonablediligence.couldhavedeterminedthefactsrelating totheproposedstation'spowerandtheeffectitwould haveontheoperationofWKFM.SeeHighCountryCommunications, 4FCCRcd6237,n,2.(1989):SeealsoRivoli RealityCo.,27FCC2d1004(1971). 6,Accordingly.theWKFMpetitionwillbedismissed, However,becauseoftheeventsfollowinggrantofthe booster,wewillconsideronourownmotionthepolicy questionspresentedandtheappropriateactiontotakein suchasituation. BACKGROUND 7,Whilethepetitionforreconsiderationwaspending. Foruscommencedequipmenttestoperationofthebooster stationonMarch15.1990,3OnMarch16.1990,WKFM requestedthattheboosterbeorderedtoceaseoperation, pursuantto§74,1203.becauseitsoperationwascausing "destructive"interferencetothereceptionofWKFM'ssignal withinits1mV/'mservicearea,Consequently.Forus wasdirectedtoterminateoperations,Believingthatthe interferencewasaonetimeoccurrence.Forusresumed operationsonMarch23,1990,WKFM,by letterofthat samedate,againcomplainedthatthebooster'soperation wascausing"destructive"interferencetothereceptionof tinentpart,thatanauthorizedFMboosterstation"willnotbe permittedtocontinuetooperateifitcausesanyactualinterference to:...thetransmissionofanyauthorizedbroadcaststation; or...thedirectreceptionbythepublicoftheoff-the-airsignals ofanyauthorizedbroadcaststation...."47C.F.R.§74,1203(a) 1991), 3Equipmenttestsareauthorizedby47C.F.R.§74.13,and maybecontinuedaslongastheconstructionpermitshall 7FCCRcdNo.25 WKFM.°TheChiefoftheAuxiliaryServicesBranchdirected Forustodiscontinueoperationoftheboosterstation pendingresolutionofthismatter. 8.Thepartiessubsequentlyagreedtoconductjointlistening teststodeterminetheeffectoftheboosterstation's operationonWKFM'sreceptioninSyracuse.Thelistening tests.whichwereconductedonApril10,1990.covered eightmutuallyagreeduponpointsintheSyracusearea.At theconclusionofthetesting.theamountandthetypeof interferenceremainedindispute.However.bothparties agreedthatinterferencehadresultedfromoperationofthe boosterstation.Forusconcludedthatbasedonthelocation oftheinterference(thetwotestpointsclosesttothetransmitting site).itshouldhaveanopportunitytorectifyany complaintsanditexpressedawillingnesstoresolvecomplaints byprovidingnewreceiversorbyrepositioning and/orreorientingtheantennasofaffectedreceivers. WKFMcontendedthatitssignalwouldreceiveactualoff-the-airinterferenceasaresultofthebooster'soperationat sixoftheeighttestsitesandthatitdetectedintermediate frequency("IF")interferenceattwoofthesites. 9.Tofurtherfacilitateresolutionofthiscase.theparties andtheirrepresentativesmetwithCommissionstaffon December13.1990.Asaresultofthismeeting,itwas agreedthatForuswouldbepermittedtocommenceopera- tionpursuanttospecialtemporaryauthority("STA")in ordertodetermineiflistenercomplaintswouldresultfrom thebooster'soperationand.ifso,todetermineForus' abilitytoresolvesuchcomplaints.TheSTAwasissuedon February20.1991.andranthroughApril25.1991.Thereafter .bothpartiesweretosubmitreportsandreplycomments ontheresultsoftheSTAoperation.OnApril22. 1991.ForusrequestedanindefiniteextensionoftheSTA. WKFMobjectedtotheextensionnotingthatthetemporary operationresultedinunresolvedlistenercomplaints.More specifically,WKFMarguedthatinterferencehadbeenreceived bymobilereceiversandthat.sincesuchlisteners constitutedasignificantportionofitsradiostation'slisteningaudience.thisinterferencecouldnotbeignored.Forus reiterateditsintenttoresolvealloutstandingcomplaints. WedeniedForus'requestforanextensionofitsoperating authorityonApril25.1991.sothatwecouldhavean opportunitytoanalyzetheSTAresultswithoutthepotential forfurthercomplaints. CONTENTIONSOFTHEPARTIES 10.BothForusandWKFMfiledreportsandreplycomments ontheresultsoftheSTAoperation.WKFM reportedthatithadforwarded48listenercomplaintsinvolving 51radioreceiverstoForusforresolution.Ofthe 48complaintsreceived.19requiredresolutionand29required nofurtheractionbecausethecomplaintswereei- thernotboosterrelatedorassistancewasdeclined.Sixof the19complaintsrequiringresolutionremainunresolved. These sixcomplaintsallinvolvemobilereceivers. 11.Forusattributestheremainingunresolvedcomplaints ofinterferencetoFrontEndReceiverOverload("FERO"). Itsuggeststhattheobligationstosatisfyallinterference complaintsimposeduponpermitteesforFMboostersta- remainvalid.