Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Red :-10
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Red :-10. 25 Antennas l10 Before the Interference criteria 1L6 Federal Communications Commission TV channel six interference 132 Washington, D.C. 20554 Other matters Grandfathering criteria MM Docket No. 88-140 for existing translators 138 Revised rule section 145 In the Matter of Administrative matters 148 Amendment of Part 74 of the FM RM-5416 Commission's Rules Concerning RM-5472 Appendix A: Commenters T rans!ator Stations Appendix B: Rule Section REPORT AND ORDER Proceeding Terminated INTRODUCTION 1. By this Report and Order, the Commission is Adopted: November 8, 1990; Released: December 4, 1990 amending the rules governing the FM translator service. The Commission is restructuring the FM translator rules By the Commission: Commissioners Marshall and consistent with the intended purpose of this service, Duggan issuing separate statements. which is to provide supplementary service to areas in which direct reception of radio broadcast stations is unsatisfactory due to distance or intervening terrain bar TABLE OF CONTENTS riers. In particular, \\'e revise and clarify the FM translator rules, inclUding new rules for: ownership and Paragraph financial support of translators: methods for selecting among translator applications; the definition of "major change" in translator coverage areas: use of commercial INTRODUCTION I and auxiliary band frequencies: interference criteria: and technical requirements for translators. BACKGROUND 2 DISCUSSION 5 BACKGROUND 2. FM translators are stations that receive the signals of Service issues FM radio broadcast stations and simultaneously retransmit those signals on another frequency. I In generaL the signal 2 Coverage area 9 of the FM radio broadcast station being rebroadcast must 15 be received directly over-the-air at the translator site. 3 Ownership restrictions wer~ 24 FM translators first authorized in 1970.1. as a means Financial support of providing FM service to areas and populations that Fundraising by translator 33 were unable to receive satisfactory FM signals due to Local program origination distance or intervening terrain obstructions.s While the authority 44 Commission recognized the benefits of authorizing F~ Local service obligations 53 translator service, it also expressed concern regarding the possible competitive impact such translators could have 56 Signal delivery on FM radio broadcast stations and the effect their au use of auxiliary frequencies 63 thorization could have on the licensing of those stations. 6 Conditional relaying 67 Thus, the Commission elected to authorize FM translators Need requirements for On a secondary basis onty and imposed rules that restrict translators 70 their service, ownership, financial support and program origination. -; The FM translator rules currently in effect Method for selecting are essentially the same as those adopted in 1970. 76 among applicants 3. The Commission commenced this proceeding with a Definition of major Notice of InqUiry (NOl) 8 to study the role of FM change 79 translators in the radio broadcast service. This NOI re Multiple ownership limits 84 sponded to seven parties who petitioned the Commission Cross-service translating 87 for rule making seeking various, sometimes conflicting changes to our FM translator rules. Ru Ie making petitions were filed by the National Association of Broadcasters Technical issues (NAB), AGK Communications, Inc. (AGK), John David Frequencies available to son Craver (Craver), JohnS. La Tour (La Tour), Commu FM translators 90 nications General Corp., Bruce Quinn (Quinn), and Maximum power output 95 Robert Jacoby (Jacoby).9 In its petition, the NAB re- 7212 5 FCC Red No. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 quested the Commission to impose financial support and danger remain permissible with no local service profit-making restrlctions on FM translators to prevent o?ligations. Commercial translators providing fill-in ser their use by primary stations to expand their service areas V1C~ ma~ use an~ terrestrial means to Obtain the primary The NAB also asked the Commission to tighten the tech station "i'~nals, wlth a favorable disposition toward waiver nical rules to prevent interference from translators to FM requests for similar permission entertained for """hite radio broadcast stations. The other petitioners generally area" translators. Commercial fill-in translators will also sought expansion of the Current translator service, includ be authorized to use intercity relay frequencies on a sec ing program origination authority. o?~ary basis. We will retain the existing rule which pro 4. The Commission next adopted a J/\'/otice of Proposed htbtts use of a translator solely to relay signals of a RuLe i'Yfaking (J.Volice) 10 in this proceeding, proposing to primary station to more distant translator facilities, al amend the rules governing the FM translator service t~ough incidental relays will be permitted. We clarify that based on the comments submitted in response to the iVOI hcensees may operate multiple FM translators upon show and our own analysis of the translator service. We stated, ing "need" as determined on technical grounds by the in the Notice, that the proper role for FM translators quality of signal received from the intended primary sta should be as a secondary service intended to supplement tiOn or any operating translator. We adopt procedures to the service of FM radio broadcast stations The rule resolve mutually eXClusive applicatit!ns: !Ifill-in" changes proposed in the NOlice sought to ensure that translators of the commonly owned primary station will translator service does not adversely affect the operation have highest priority; alternative frequencies will be as of FM radio broadcast stations. Sixty-nine parties filed signed when possible: when alternative frequencies are initial comments in response to the ,Voliee and twenty unavailable, priority classifications for FM allotments will parties repEed. lL be used: and, where the mutual exclusivity remains, we will select applications using a first-come-first-served method. A "major change" for FM translators will be DISCUSSION defined as any change in output frequency (output chan 5. We continue to believe that the proper role for FM nel). or any change or increase (but not decrease) in translators is that of a secondary service intended to sup geographic area that increases the 1 mV/m coveracre area plement the service of FM radio broadcast stations. 12 Fur by more than 10 percent of the previously authorized ther, the rule changes we now make reflect our coverage contour. FM translators will remain exempt conclusion that the sole purpose of FM translators is to from multiple ownership rules and no AM-FM cross provide service in areas where direct reception of radio service translating will be permitted. service is .unsatisfactory due to distance or intervening 7. Regarding technical issues, we will allow all FM terrain obstructions. After review of the comments sub~ translators to operate on any of the 80 non-reserved com mitted in response to the I'v'olice and our own analysis of mercial channels with the 20 reserved noncommercial these issues. we conclude that our existing regulatory educational (NeE) channels remaining available for NCE structure does not adequately ensure that the F\1 FM translator use. The proposed maximum ERP standard translator service achieves its intended purpose. We are has been reduced to 250 watts at low antenna heights aware of the need to clarify and amend several rules in (HAA.T), with the provision that additional antenna order to ensure that FM radio broadcast stations are not height must be traded for reduced power yielding new adversely affected by translator operations. We also have criteria for permissible coverage dista~ce. We will be fa determined that several rules should be modified to assure vorably disposed toward waiving this rule to permit high that translators better serve the pUblic. er power up to 250 watts ERP at any HAAT if the 6. This Report and Order takes the following actions to ,applicant demonstrates that the service to a greater dis- 11 revise the FM translator rules. First, the coverage contour tance reaches only a "white area. For purposes of apply of a translator providing fill-in service will be defined ing the waiver standard to NCE-FM translators. the congruent with the coverage contour of the primary sta Commission will construe any area that is not served by a tion for respective station classes. An FM translator's pro full-service public radio station as a "white area." We tect.ed contour will be defined at 1 mV/m. With respect to have clarified the standards for antennas and adopted our service issues, an FM translator may not be hcensed to a proposed prohibited overlap criteria for interference to commercial FM broadcast station if the translator's cov FM and TV Channel 6 stations. Ex'isting stations must erage contour goes beyond the primary station's coverage comply with the new service rules within three years of contour. However, in "white area" situations beyond the the effective date of these new rules. and we will entertain protected contour of any full-time aural service, we will waiver requests where service to the public would be lost be favorably disposed toward requests for waivers .of our as a result. Since most translators already comply with the rules to permit commercial primary station ownership. nnv technical rules, we \\'ill "grandfather" existing Commercial primary stations may financially support fill translators until interference problems occur, at which in translators both before and after the translator time compliance will be required. Prospective licensees commences operation. However. commercial primary sta applying for translators under the new rules should be tions may provide no financial support beyond technical aware that the Commission intends to enforce the stan assistance to FM translators serving other areas, although dards, 'and those found in violation 'of the rules will be we witl favorably view waiver requests to allow financial subject to the appropriate sanctions.