4 FCC 90375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Iro. 25
Anrennas I IO &fore the lnierference criteria I Federal Communications Commission I6 TV channel rix interference Washington. D.C. 20554 132 Other matters Grandfathering criteria h1.U Docket NO.88-140 for existing translators I38 Rebised rule section i 45 In the Matter of Administratire matters 11R Amendment of Part 14 of the FM RM-5416 Commission's Rules Concerning RN-5472 Appendix A: Commenterr Translator Stations Appendix B Rule Section
REPORTASDORDER Proceeding Terminated ISTRODLCTIOS I B) this Report md Order. the Cornmiwon I\ Adopted: Sorembcr 8. 1990 Released: December 4. 1990 amendine the rules gokerning the FM iran4ator ur\ice The Commi\wn I\ re\iructuring the f \l tranrlaior ruler By the Cornmiwon Commissioners \lar\hail and ~onrtrtent with the intended purpo\c of thi\ *nice. Duggan issuing xparate staiements uhich I\ io prtnide \upplementar> \enice io area, in uhirh LIIreLI re'epiion of radio hn>adca\r rlation'i I\ unwi\facior! due io dirtance nr inirr\cnine .terrain har- TABLE OF COSTESTS riers In particular. ue re\i\e and cldrif! the F5l fran4ator rules. including new rules for ounership and Paragraph financial wpport of translators. methods for \electing among fran4ator application\. the definition of "major INTRODUCTION 1 change" in tran4ator cowrage area,. ux of commercial and auriliar) hand frequencies. interference criteria' and iechnical rcquircmeni\ for tran\latar\ BACKGROUSD -7
DLSCCSSIOK 5 BACKGROUSD 2 tV tranrlatnrs are \tation\ that receiw the signals of 'Sjivice issues FU radio hroadcast stations and *imultaneousl) retratismit tho*e ,ignal, on another frequenc) ' In general. the signal Coverage area 9 of the FU radio hroadcast station heing rehroadcau' must' Ouncrship resfrictions I5 he rccci\cd directl) nrer-the-air at the iranrlator Me as a means Financial support 2.r Fbl trardainr\ ueie first authorized in 1970' of prmiding t\l $errice io area, and populations that Fundraising hy translator 33 sere unahle IO receive safisfactor? F\I signals clue to Local program originailon di\tance or tnterwning terrain oh\iructions ' While the authorit) 44 Cornmiwon recognized the henefits of authorizing FM Local service obligations 53 tranrlator w\ice. it also exprerud cnncern regarding the pnwhle umpetifi\e impact wch tran4ators could hare Signal delivery 56 on F\I radio hroadcast stations and the effect their p. Use of auxiliary frequencies 63 thoriration could haw on the kenring of tho* stations? Conditional relaying 67 Thu,. the Commission elecfed to authorize FM translators Need requirements for on a .econdar) hasis only and imposed rules that restricl translators -11 iheir ur\tc!. ounership. financial support and program origination The translator rules currently in effect Method for selecting FM are essentially the same as those adopted in I970 among applicants 76 3 The Commission commenced this proceeding with a Definition of major .Voticc of Inquiry (.VO/J ' IO sfudy the role of FM change 79 translators in the radio hroadcast service. Thfs SO/ re- Multiple ownership limits 84 $ponded to even parties who pettnoned the Commission Cross-service translating 87 for rule making seeking various. sometimes conflicting changes to our FM translator rules Rule making pelitionr were filed by fhe National Association of Broadarten Technical Issuer - (%AB). AGK Communications. Inc (ACK). John David- Frquencies available to wn Craver (Craver). John S. La Tour (La Tour). Commu- FM translators 90 nications General Corp. Bruce Ouinn IOuinn). and Maximum power output 9s Robert Jacoby (Jacoby)? In its petition. the NAB re-
7212 I 5 FCC Red 25 No. Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 quesed the Commission to impose financial support and danger remain permissible with no local Xr\Ice profit-maktq restricttons on F.U translators to prerent obligations Commercial translators provildilng fill-in ,er. their use by primary stattons to expand thetr senice areas. \ice ma!. use any terrestrial means to obtain the primary The NAB also =ked the Commission IO tighten the tech- station .. mals. wtth a favorable disposition toward wai\er nical rules to prevent interference from translators to FM request% for similar permission entertained for "wh,te radio broadcast stations The other petitioner5 generail) area" translafors. Commerctal fill-in translators nil1 alx, sought expansion of the current translator servlce. includ- be authorized to UK intercity relay ffequencies on a xc- ing program ortgmation authority. ondary basts. We will retatn the extstrng rule which pro- 4. The Commission nen adopted a So'ourc of Proposed htbits use of a translator solely to relay stgnals of a Rule .Uakmg (SoIlCci Io tn this proceeding. proposing to prlmary station 10 more distant translator factltttes. al- amend the rules governing the FM translator urstce though midental relay will be permitted We clarify that based on the comments submitted in response io the A'OI licensees may operate mulltple FM translators upon show- and our own analyss of the translator servtce We stated. ing "need" ?& determined on technical ground, h) the in the .Vouce. that the proper role for FM translators quality of signal recened from the mended primar) Ita- should be as a secondary serbice Intended to supplement lion or an) operating translator. We adopt procedures to the ervtce of FM radio broadcast stations The rule resolve mutually exclusive appltcawns "fill-in" changes propoud in the Soucc wught to ensure that translators of the commonly owned primar! .tatlon ut11 transkwr enice does not adversely affect the qxration haw highest priority. alternative frequencies uill he a,. of FM radio broadcast \tations Sixty-nine parties filed higned u hen possible. when alternatl%e frequencies are initial comments in response to the .\once and went) unavailable. priortt! classifications for FM allotments uill parties replied." he used. and. where the mutual excluwity remalns. ne ut11 \elect applications using a first-come-firsi-ser\ed method A "major change" for FM translators ulll be DISCC'SSION defined as any change in output frequenc) (output chan- nel). or an) change or increu (hut decreau) in 5 We continue to helie\e that the proper role for FY not geographic area that increaus the I mV m coverage area translators is that of a secondary service intended to sup- pkmenr the service of EM radio hroadcast sta(ionL" Fur- h) more than 10 percent of the pre\tourly authorized ther. the rule changer we now make reflect our cowage contour FM translators will remain exempt from multiple ownerqhip rules and no AM-FM cross- .conclusion that the ale purpoe of FM trmslators is to provide service in areas where direct reception of radw ser\ice translating will he permttted. service IS unsatisfactory due to dtstance or ioierkening 7 Regarding techn~cal issues. we udl allow all FM terrain obstructions. After revieu of the comments suh. translators tu operate on an! of the RO non-resened com- mitted in responx to the .Voricr add our oun analpis of mercial channels -8th the 20 rcserwd noncommercial these issues. we conclude that our existing regulator) educational ISCE) channels remaining a\ailable for XCE- structure does not adequately ensure that the FM FM trandator UY The propoxd maximum ERP standard translator service achieves its intended purpo\e We are has been reduced to 250 watts at Ion antenna hgights aoare of the need to clarify and amend several rules in (HMT). uith the pro\'tston that additional antenna order to ensure that FM radio hroadcast stations are not height must he traded for reduced power ?ielding new adwvcly affected b) translator operations. We also haw criteria for permtssible coverage distance We will he fa- determined that several rules should he modified to assure rorahl! dispoud touard uaiving this rule to permit high- that translators better serre the public. er pouer up to 250 uatts ERP at any HAAT if the applicant demonstrates that the %nice IO a greater dis- 6 This Report and Order takes the following actionr id tance reaches only a "uhite area 'I For purposes of apply. revise the FM translator rules. First. the coverage contoui ing the waiwr standard to NCE-FM translators. the of a translator providing fill-in service nil1 he defined Commission w11l construe any area that 15 not served by a congruent with the coverage contour of the primary \ta- full-rer$ice public radio station as a "uhite area." We tion for respective station classes. An FM translator', pro- haw clarified the standards for antennas and adopted our, tected contour uill hc defined at I mV.m. With respect 10 propod prohibited o\erlap criteria for Interference to service issues. an FM translator may not be'ltcenwd to a FM and TV Channel 6 stations. Exisling stations must commercial FM broadcast station if the translator s COI- compl) uith the ne= service rules withtn three years of erage contour beyond the primary stat.ion's cowrage goes the effective date of these new rules. and we will entertain contour. However. in "white area" situations heyond the naiver requests where service to the public would be lost protected contour of any full-time aural service. we will as a result Since most iranslarors already comply with the be favorably disposed toward requests for waivers of our neu technical rules. we will "grandfather" existing rules to permit commercial primary -station ounership translators until interference problems occur. at which Commercul primary stations may financially support fill- time compliance will be required Prospective licensees in translators both before and after the translator appljing for translators under the new rules should commences operation. HoGever. commercial primary sia- be aware that the Commrssion intends to enforce the scan- lions may provide no financial support beyond technical dards. and lhow found in violation of the rule Wql assislance IO translators serving other areas. although be FM subject to the appropriate sanctions we will favorably view waiver requests to allow financial support for translators in "white areas." Noncommercial 8. In an effort to simplify the treatment Of numkrous FM stations are no1 subject to any ownership or financial issues in this proceeding, this Report and Order examines support restriciions. For a!l translators. one or more ap- each of the existing FM translator rules and policies sep nouncements not to exceed a total of 31-rconds per hour rately Below we describe the current rule or policy, are permitted in order to acknouledge and wli& fupds for operating expenses Emergency warnings of immment
7213 a FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Yo. 15
summarize the comments received in response to the all Class D secondary NCE-FM %tations1 We helle\e thai .l'oticc and set forth our decision 10 retain. to modit). or to it would be inappropriate to single out particular cia,\es eliminate that rule I' Of primary Stations and provide them with greater prorec- lion from predicted interference than they otheruise re- ceive under the applicable rules In their senice Thus. for SERVICE ISSUES example. NCE-FM radio stations will continue to he pro- Coverage area tected to their predicted 1 mV.m contours rather than to 9. The present rules do not contain a definition of an their predicted 0.5 mv:m contours. Furthermore. it does F.U translator station's "coverage area." The rules. how- not appear necessary to adopt much more conservatiw protected contour values since there are rules to resolve ever. refer to the l mV!m field strength contour of the FM ~..~ radio broadcast station being rebroadcast regardless of 11s the few interference situations gn\ol\ing translators that class as an area within uhich a translator ma! pro\ide may arise. See paras. 128-131. 137 mnfrd senice '* 13. While ue proposed. in the .\oncr. to define the 10 We propovd in the .brrce. that. for purposes of the coverage contour for an FM translator as itc predlcted I F U translator rules. a primary statton's protected contour mV m contour. ue are persuaded that 11 IS more appro- *ill be defined as the predicted 05 mV.m contour for priate to define the coverage contour for an FM tranhlator Lorn-mercial Class B FM uations. the predicted 0 7 mV m proriding fill-in service to be congruent with its pitmar? contour for commercial Class BI FM station,. and the station. Thus. the cowage contour for an FM translator predicted I mV m contour for all other claues of com- probiding fill-in sersice for a commercial Class B FM mercial as uell as all NCE-FM stations. In this ua!. the station uill he defined as the f0rmer.s predlcted 0 S mV m FM translator rules will be consistent uith the Commis- contour. the co%eragecontour for an F.M trandator pro- 11on's other rules with respect to the proteciion of all \#ding fill-in +%\ice for a commercial Class El FM \la. slasres of FM rtations We also proposed to define the lion uill he defined as the former', predicted 0 7 mV m cwerage contour for an F.M translator station as its pre- wntour. and the cmerage contour for all other FM dicted I mV m contour tran4ator\. tncluding thme pro\iding fill-in xrktce for all clabvs of stations except and BI. will be defined as 1 I Conimrrrrs While \everal cornmenref, support the B their predicted I mV m contour For a fill-in FM Commisuon's propod the \tale, that trandator KAB trandaior. this contour must be contained uithin the . coverage contour definitions should be congruent uith primar) %tation'scoverage contour the protected contour of the primary station fur the re- I4 Although ue are making a translator r coverage \pectire alation classes Thus. the fill-tn FU iran4ator contours should he established as the predicted 0 S mV m. contour congruent uith the coverage contour of the prt- 0 7 mV m. and I mV'm for commercial Class 8. 81 and mar? \lation a, dircuued in the preceding paragraph. we other FM stations. respectively. and should fall entirel) decline tu take similar action with respect 10 FU iranrlator protected contour5 rules concern- utthin the primary station's protected contour in order to Our existing prevent a primary station's reception area from extending ing the protected rer*ice pro\ided b) FM translators and heyond its protected contour. National Public Radio our propod to uu a uniform 1 mVm contour for the (VPRI. as uell as several other public broadcamng en- FM tran,lator unice. provide a consistent standard for determining predicted interference We intend to use this tities. argue that wider co\erage areas (0 S mV'm. SJ ~Bu) are'necessary for both NCE-FM translators and YCE-FM \slue to define both protection for authorized FM primary stations because the proposed I mV!m protected iranrlator \rations and thuu applicattons that are consld- ered mutuall? exclusise. coverage area for NCE-FM primary station, and SCE-F>I iranslators u~lldegrade actual coverage areas of man! noncommercial FM stations. threatentng the economic Ownership restrictions tiability of these stations through lost listenership Tucwn IS The Commission adopted ruler restricting the own- Broadcasters AsU)ciation ITBh) recommends that the pro- er5hip of FXl translators by the commercial FM primary tected contour for all FU stattons be defined as the pre- radio ,tation in response 10 its concern about the poten- dicted 05 mV.m contour du Treil. Lundin 6 Rackle). tiall! adrerv effect if primary \tations ex and their ser- Inc (du Treil) suggests that the FM translator urvice \ice area, into other stations' service areas.' A ltcenxc of should parallel the TV service. where TV translator and a commercial FM radio broadcast station is. therefore. IOU power TV stations are required 10 protect the Grade prohihiied from owning and operating FM translators B coverage contour even though full service station, are intended to provide service beyond the primary station's not protected from Interference from each other to the predicted I mV!m contour. if such service is, within the Grade E. du Treil proposer that FM translators he re- predicted I mV/m contour of another commerciil F.U quired 10 protect the 34 dBu contour of all FM statlons station licensed to a different communtty." This means KSOR-FM suggests protecting the .OS mV/m 134 dBuI that a commercial FM station licensee may own and contour for existing IO-watt TPO NCE-FM translaton as a opcrate FM translators serving areas wtthin its own pre- result of their specialtzed circumsunces. dicted I mV'm contour for the purpose of filling in signal E. Rules. For purposes of the FM translator rules. a reception where its signal is impeded by geographic ob- primary station's coverage contour will be the same as its struction. In addition. commercial FM radio broadcast protected contour and will be defined to be consistent stations may become licensees of translators to serve areas uith the Commission's other FM station protection rules. beyond their I mV/m contour where there is no other Thus. the coverage contours will be the predicted 05 predicted FM service.'* mV!m contour for commercial Class B F.U stations. the 16. The licensee of an NCE-FM radio broadcasf miion predicted 0.7 mV'm contour for commercial Class BI FU IS not subject to any ratrictions regarding the service area uations. and the predicted 1 mVm contour for all other of any translators it owns and operates. if the signal is classes of commercial and all NCE-FM stations fincluding transmitted over-the-air from the primary Station to iU
L J FCC Red Na. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90.375
translators. A recent Commission action amended the sig- cause sudden disappearance of \atued urvwes when the nal delivery rules for NCE-FM translators ovned and translator facility transfen to another primary \tation ~a operated by their primary stations that are assigned to the Tour disagrees with this concept. htattng that an reserved frequency band (channels 200.220) to permit the unregulated market and the pressure for translator oper- use of alternative signal distribution technologies In such ators to raise financial support will he most Iikel) to cases. an applicant for a translator proposing to serw a create community responsive programming. thus estah- particular area is required to meet certain conditions lishing a "real connectton" for a broad variety of locally before its application can be accepted." appealing FM radio services KPBX Spokane Public Radio 17. Independent parties are also eliyble to become FM IKPBX) states that XCE-FM translator stations should be translator licensees for stations that are intended to re- Permitted to operate only within the primary station's broadcast either commercial or NCE-FM stations.'" Under protected contour or in areas uhere there IS no other exsting rules. there are no restrictions on the ownership SCE-FM radio service of FM translators by independent parties since therr inter- 21 Alpine. licensee of WAW-F.M. Marco. Florida. and est in establishing wch translators IS indicative of a need Knetler. licensee of WKII-AM. Pori Charlotte. Florida. for supplemental 1 H service." Thus. independent parties pro\ide an example of an alleged ahure of the FM may be licensed to operate FM translators probiding xr- translator rules They state that FM tran4atorr of a Class vice to areas withln or outside the 1 mV.m contour of the A FU siation from North haples. Florida. hroadcasts hig FM primary station hand programmmg into the Punta Gorda and Port Char- lgl In the Aoim. we proposed to divide FM translators lotte communttie, All four of this stauof licensed 10 the >tation ouner's father-In-lau. who resider translaiors providing "fill-in" service - IC.. the FM in the miduest. Alpine complains that Punta Gorda is translator's predicted I mVm contour IS within the EO+ already well-urd as it recei+es radw servlce from Ft erage contour of the primar) station. The second categor) Mps. bpleb. Sarawta. and Tampa-Si Peiershurg with includes FM translators providing service to "other areas" ltkal ur%icefrom twAM and tu0 FW \tation> Kneller - ic.. the FIM translator's predicted I mV m coterage >hou\ ihal of the four iranslator locauunb. three are contour extends be)ond the coverage contour of the pri- -er\ed h! -IX. three. and tvo local full service FM facili- mary station We proposed to modify the existin, ovner- tie\. respectirelv Furthermore. the Punta Corda ship rule so that the licensee of a commercial FM radio translator Juplicate, the local format of UKII-A.W of Port broadcast station cannot own an FM translator if the Charlotte iouned h? Kneller) and has nearly driren Al- coverage contour of the FM translator goes he)ond the pine', WAVV-FM 111f the air Kneller rtaies that the Xorth coverage contour of the prlmary station. We alu, re- 5aples station denm an) connection to the translators. ' quested commcnt on the extenl to which our prupoud The commenicrs contend that this riiuation violates the ownership rules are sufficient to prevent unintended u\es intended ube 01 translaiors - io fill in dead spots in a of FM tranrlators when considered in con~unctionuith \tation's ur\icc area - and that the tran\lators are being our other proposals discussed below uud tu hcnefit the primar) station rather than the public. 19. Comments. Most of the broadcast interests comment- 22 Rule Most of the commenters on this isue agree ing on this issue support the Commission's propod to with our propod to change the ownership rule We now modih the ownership rule." NAB further suggests that adopt that propu-al. including the pro%isiondisttnguish- rhe Commission continue to permit primary stattons to ing hetueen "fill-in" and "other area" tran,lators." which ownisndor fund translators operating beyond their pro- sill permit r.~~mmercialFM \tations to own --FM tected contour. provided that the translator does not tip- translaiors onl! uhere the FH translator's coverage area is erate within the protected service contour of another enttrel) conia8ncd uiihin the cowrage contour of the commercial FM hroadcast station nor within an A.H *ta- primar) \tarion -'We tmpou no ownership limitation on tion's primary dayttme service area!' NAB also urges that WE-FM translators or on FM translators that are in- once full-urvice radio station operation begins to serw dependentl! uuncd :"While the ewabli3hmenl of indepen. the community of a translator meeting the above exccp dent part) iran.lators in these other Iocaiions indicates a tion. the primary station should be required to ccau puhlic dekire fur the programming. translators owned by ownership or funding of the FM translator within MI FM radio hroadca>t ,tations would more likely indicate a days." b Tour responds that this "white area" exception station', interest in reaching audience, in areas that lie is meaningless. since these locations are essentially oui,tde its er\icc area More generally. we helieve that to nonexistent. Capital CitieuABC. Inc. (Capital Cities ABC) relax restrictions on FM radio hroadcav >tation ownership and the Association for Broadcast Engineering Standards of translators uould conflict with our belief that the pub-' (ABES) urge the Commission to permit commercial FM IICinieresi I, hest xrved by maximizing service thqough stations to own FM translators tn "other" areas as a way the use of FM radio broadcast stations. We continue to to ensure that residents of remple and sparsely populaled beliew that the most appropriate and efficient means of areas will be able to obtain a reasonable minimum of FH probiding additkonal FM service nationuide is hy creating reception services. They suggest that FM translators opportuniiies for the esrablishmcnt and development of should be allowed to operate where necessary in order for full se~icehroadcast stations. We believe that a moditiu- a community to have at least four primary FM Ireccp- lion of our rules to permit the expansion of FM service tion) services. through the use of translators would he inconsistent with our basic allotment scheme. Such a change also NPR urges that independent owners of XCE-FH FM 20 would be particularly undesirable while we are implc translators should have some relationship or "nexus" to menting Docket No. 60-90 through the authorization of 1 the transla:or service area and be responsive 10 the con- large number of new and upgraded stations because the cerns of the local community. in order to prcwnt "flip- ping. of licensed frequencies to another owner from ihe original applicant. NPR IS concerned that such practices
I 721s 4 FCC !M-315 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Xo. 25
potential for interference hetween these neu facilaites and realistic means of mining touard ihe goal of non-eypan- new translators is substantially greater until mov or all of wmqt FM translators since ii IS rirtuall! irnp<%%lhleI,, the new and upgraded primary stations are operatmg monitor the extent of financial support to iran\lator\ h! 23 The Commission believes that the record lacks the prirnarj stauons NAB and Capital Broadca\ring CI d/ oidence to suggest that a "white area" exception to our support the Commirsion's proposl but uould al\o permli ownership rule would nottceably improve co\erage and Primar! *lation funding for FM tran\lators ~n "uhite public service and leads us to conclude that a ,pecific areas " Capital Cities;ABC proposes that an exccptmn "white area" exception is unnecessary Houever. in ritu- 5hould he made for translators ,er\lng "under>er\ed ations where a licensee establishes that ser\ice is indeed area". defined as areas receiving feuer than four radio unavailable. ue will be favorably disposed toward requests signals for waivers of this rule to address these unique clrcum- 27 .ARA Claims that the incidence of competiti\e abuse stances. Within the context of this proceeding. ue ut11 through FSI translators has heen high to Aruona. uhere define a "uhite area" as any area outside the coierage dirtant ripah exceed the number of local *lpnal\ tn \ome contour of an) full-time aural service We emphame that communities. while feu tran,lalorr ha\e heen licenud to in order for commercial prtmar? stations 10 oun oiher communiiie\ uhere ser\ice 13 trul) la~k~ngX-\B translators in iuch areas. the Commission ulll rcqulre a cite\ the example of KCLS-AU of Flaptaff. \rizona. re- shoutng of a lack of senice in accordance uith the garding the ad\er
stations. La Tour argues that this alternatire uould pre- "level playing field" could potentially undermine the de- se~eprogram variety and service to various regwns uhile \clopment of broadcast station serwce due to the lower providing some bridle for Competition. Cost StrUctures and lack of local xr\tce ohlipafionc of 29 The National Translator h.sociation IYTAi com- these reception facilities Second. Mr La Tour, uishes to ments that the Cornmission's rule proposal reflects a con- compere uith broadcasters by offering narrou I) tailored cern with suburban stations or rural stations located near formats to local communitio. yet his comments \eem to urban markets having their signals retransmitted into the obscure the categorical distinction hetueen Fk4 translators urban market NTA contends that the rule changes pro- and broadcast stations Indeed. giben ihat FM translators posed in the NOIICCare overly broad and will result in the and broadcasters are not similar entttles. the disparit) in extinction of the FM translator service in rural areas" treatment in order io promote incenti\e%for neu broad- NTA argues that the mere allegation of rule violations cast stations offering diverse programmlng formats IS rea- cannot ju~tifyrevision of the rules. since the proper rem- sonable Consequently. we find that wr IA Tours edy for such problems is to enforce existing rules rather arguments for loose conuraintr upon financial wppori for than to make new rules. NTA states that in order IO FM translators would detrimentally affect the competwe enforce the existing financial support rules. the Cornmi,- balance hetueen broadcast stations and iran*laiur facll(tle5 sion should require that each FM broadcast station in- by redisrributing revenue away from hroadcm *tation\. clude with its annual ownership report a statement of and thus. potentiall! limiting primar) radio \errire io ihe whether it pro\ides financial. technical. or in kind ,up- public port to >ny iranslator. stating the total value of support 32 We reject as unuorkable the La Tnur propo*al that provided for each translator fM translators should alw We limii. either in the form of a maximum number or be required io file btaiements of support uith their re- ranlo. the number of iranslators in each market rather newal applications. pro\iding similar information ahout than prohihit financial mpport b) the primar) stawn the amounts and wurcer of their funding These reports. Each local market has a unique capact!? to wpptwt I.M uhich uould he open to public inspection. uoulJ enahle Iranrlator%. haucl upon abailahle frequcncie. ant1 oihcr interested parties to monitor potential abures. uhile factors related to inierference. populaiwn and Income permilung primary siarions to provide reasonahle rhus. an? numher or ratlo ue mighi p~ckc~~ltl unduly amounts of financial support to translators uith mini- Constrain ur\ice to the puhlic In .ome Invances. and mum reporting requirements As a final matter. tran,latoi permit exce,+e pro-th of FV trandaior\ In uthcr aiea,. operators in Liah request that the Commission permit we alw reject hTh's propoul that ue retam the exwng primary stations to provide technical assistance to FM financial support rule and adopt financial reporting re- translaior licen\ees J1 quirement% for hoth broadcast slation and FM tran4ator 30 Rule. As proposed in the .\OIICC. the Commiwan licensees STA.5 propo*al burdens horh Iiccn*ee%and the uill allow a commercial primary station to \upport Comrnision Furthermore. YTA s alternatne doe\ not translators providing fill-in service. both before and after sohe the ewrting rule's fundamental enforcement proh- the translator station commences operation Also. we uill lem. namel? the practical difficult? and resource require- prohihit a commercial primary station from supporting. ments of determinlng the appropriate lerel of directly or indirectly." any FM iranslators protiding 5er- compen\ation from the primary $tation to ihe iranrlatm '' vice to other areas. both before and aher they commence operation In order to encourage the introduction of Fundraising by translators service m "uhtte areas". however. the Commission uill he 33 The current ruler pro\lde that tran4ators may or.%!- favorahly di5pescd toward requests for waivers of thi, rule narc one announcement per hour of up til 30 \econds. to to permit a commercial primary station to support its wlicit or acknowledge financial contnhutiom made to own translator. or an independently owned translator. defra) ihe co,is of installing. operatlng and maintaining providing service to these unserved areas. Under the cur- the translator \tation '* Such announcements are IO he rent rules. it is virtually impossible to monitor the extent made principally for the purpobe of acknouledging finan- to uhich primary stations offer financial support io cial cuntrihuiions and ma!, include identification of the translators. We helieve that this revision of the financial contributors the \m or nature of the contrihutinns and support rule is necessary io assure that tran4ators are advertwng me, 7217 ~ FCC WJ75 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd 50. 2S i I Commission permit only communit)+uned tran,lator\ io I 10 commercial radio stations." La Tour \uhwquentl! originate acknowledgements or soliclt cuntrthunons In notes that it has not been demunstraied hnu content addition. NAB argues that all FM translators should he re~trtctionsmay benefit the public subject to enhanced underwriting restrictions similar to 40. Rule The Commission will retam the exwing rule tho% Of NCE-FM broadcast stations \c hen acknuuledgmg u hich iimits on-air fundraising activities of FM iranslator, contributors1' Se*eral of the noted commenter\ also ,up- i to 30 seconds per hour. We believe that the preseni port the Commission's proposal to permii the 30 recond, 30-econd limitation prosides a reasonable opportunii! 1 10 be split during the hour. while NAB. as uell as Yurth- for FXl translatorr to acknowledge contributions a, ucll a. i land. drsagree. stating that the rule is necessar) io limii to solicit funds from their listeners as neceuary for the profit-making opportunities and to a\oid unnece5-r) fac1llt~'soperation. Furthermore. we are concerned that clutter of primary station programming. an increase in the 30-second limit would he Inconsistent 36 KBUR4WKGRS-FM alleges an example of an uith the secondary nature of FM tran,laiors" We hehew i "abuse" of the 3O-second limitation on F.M translator that an) addiiional time probision for un-air fundraising fundratsing in Burlington. Iowa KBL'RKCRS produce, a uould unnecessartly detract from senice to the pubic b! copy of a proposed translator contract and uner letter interrupting primar) station programming Mureu\er. ue signed by Dan Hendrix. an employee of La Touri Pouer heliew that additimal time allotted io on-air wlicitation Du Pre Broadcasting Co. the terms of uhich call for the and acknouledgments will fracttunalize audience, a, uell . primary station to broadcast one 60-second ad\ertiument as rerenues The existing rule remain, consislent uith the providcd by the iranslator operator per hour during each ne*. mnre restricti%e limits adopted abobe fur translator hour in which the primary station is hruadca>ting r\lw. ouner\hip and financial rupport. all of uhich are de- in the event of special programming. sports e\enr\. poliii. signed in assure that FM tiamlatoi operations are con- Cal speeches. etc.. the contract slates that the primar! ,trained tu their intended role as an auxhar) \enice i? station ma) run the ad\errixments at an alternaie lime 41 ,\\ uith the alleged ahuvs regardingounershtp and with prior uritten permiwon of the translator Iicen\ee financial .uppirt. ue are al\o concerned h) ihe purporied 37 KBURKGRS alm presents copies of hu,ine.. Lard. ahu.c\ alleged h! h8L'RKCRS Thereiure. ue ui\h io I letterhead. neuspaper adsertisements. and a neu\papcr emphame that an) Commission Iicenw which engages in article citing on-air practices. uhich refers to La Tour. a practice de,igned primarily to evade the 3O-.ecunJ limi- existing Burlington translator KZ?&jL)J \iaiwn a. taiiun potentiall! huhjects melf to the full .pantiply of "Burlington's Lite 104.9.'' KBURKGRS argue, ihat this Commlwon enforcement mechani>m\ Indeed. hecause reference misrepreKnts the nature of Mr La lour', fa- intcntitinal e\asion [if Commi,rion rule, repre\ent< hehrv- cility. which *hould be identified as "WCAZ. Carthage inr uhich jeopardizes the Commi\wn's ahilit) to dis- Illinois. on translator KDZR5DJ." KBUR KGRS >laic\ ihat charge it\ regulator) mandate. ue \le% such hehavior not only doer this practice mislead local merchant, sniu utth particular dda\or believing that they are advertising on a locall) urienied 42 We will aho permit wIiciiation\ or announcements FM station. bui listeners ma) be misinformed during to he \plit during the hour He helie\e ihat uhile the weather or news emergencies 3t!-.econd limit is the appropriate standard for fundraising 38 Several commenters suggest that FM tran*latiir\ efforts. it I* unnecewrily rcstricti\e tu rtipulate how that should be able to cover costs of necessar) maintenance lime rhould he allocated. Considering that the announce- and to generate revenues in excess of operating cw\ ment and urlicitation time is brief. a \tation's choice IO ThesC.commenters suggcsi. therefore. that the Comrniv rplii the 30 \ccond> should not nuiiceahly burden listen- sion expand the fundrai3ing opportunities fur I \l er\ through interrupted programming Likewiu. we be- translators. La Tour argues that the 30 qecond Iimiiaiwn. lie\~ that the present format for acceptable when combnned with the cessation of financial wpixm acknoule&igement\ h! commercial F>l translators - which from the primary station. will effecti\cl) eliminate in- include, identification of contributors. the sire and nature dependently owned FM translators providing narrou-fair. of wnirihuiihjn\ and ad\ertising mesmges of these conlri- mat programming Mr La Tour argues thai I \I hutorr .. gists rufficient guidance a\ to uhat should be iranslators must be offered some reliable alternaiiw and communicated during the permitted time Admittedly. the expanded means of raising rupport beyond exiriing chari- ad\erii\ing portion of the acceptahlc announcemeni table sources WTl proposes. and La Tour concur). that cauve\ uime concern to broadcasters However. translatorr FM translators should be permitted to make ube of mul- mu.# he ahle tn rahe operating fundr We believe that tiplex subcarriers as probided in Section 73 193 of the romc information about contributors must be allowql in rules. WTI and La Tour also support expanding the exi\i- order in enahle translators to encourage donations and. ing 3O-zecond per hour limit on local announcement\ 1'1 thur. prwtde the public with radio urvicc. I? addition. 60 seconds per hour. while also asking that EM tran,lalur* uc do not uish to unnecessarily intrude upon the initia- be permitted to divide or combine announcement time in ti\e of FM translator licensees who attempt to raix fundr any manner convenient to the licensee." Finally. Chrir- uithin ihe given parameters Therefore. we uill maintain tiin Media Associates. Inc (Christian Medial reque%ts a the existing language one minute block per half hour to atr acknouledgemenb 43 The rule will continue to permit a11 translaton. and solicitations. whether owned by their primary station or by m in- 39. La Tour contends that requiring FM translatois to dependent party. to originate 30 seconds per hour for solictt funds solely through local on-air announcement, fundraising purpoKs. Although NAB has suggested that will inconvenience listeners through frequent intcrrup- ue restrict fundratsing opportunities to community-owd lions by annoying solicitations inserted into primary \la- tranblators. -e find no reason to change the current rUk. lion programs. Furthermore. La Tour. as well as %TI. The Commission's rules for FM translators have new - believe that the FCC should not restrict wording or con- distinguished between various categories of independent tent of announcements beyond those restriciions applied ouncrship. Given that both community groups and "third 7216 7 ! 5 FCC Red No. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 parties" must each raise funds for their tran\latur opcr- sugeests that such Origination authorit! should ations. we uill permit all independent ouners to do SO *condarJ in Status 10 full-senice FU hroatlca\teri F\I within the parameters of the 30-second limit uithout fur- TechnoIan States rhai FM translators should he aulh(>- ther restrictions.'' rlzed 10 originate programmtng in areas wid of an! other servce that addresses their needs. KSOR wgpest. that ha1program origination authority SCE-FM translators be permitted to protide neuc \er\ILe JJ The current rules limit FM translators io rehroad- wch as election coverage. 10 the local cornmunit! casting the signal of an FM radio broadcast \ration" 48. Rule. We continue to believe that we should not Program origination by all translators. commercial and authorize program origination for F\t translators. even on YCE-FM, IS prohtbtted with the exception of origination the limited basis proposed by Ur Turro and other authority to acknowledge or solicit financial support and commenters The proper role 01 FM tramlaton among 10 provide emergency uarnings of imminent danger '* aural senices to the public is to pro\idc \econdar? .er\Ice .Woreo%er. emergency transmissions are limited in time 10 areas in which direct reception of ugnak from F\l and frequencj to that necessary to protect ltfe and prop- hroadcast ~taiionris unsatlsfactor) due to dl 71 !19 CY FCC 90375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Vo. 25 mercial AM station (WVSJI is presentl? under con-truc- of buppori. It uould be burdensome to irnpo\e additional tion in Oakland. Neu Jersey Thus. not on!) h\ the count) Program re~ponsibilitiesupon translator, La Tour cun- the recipient of ow60 radio broadcast ration,. it I, the tends [hat translators uould reasonahl: accept local *er- locus of 5 authorized radio station,. all heartng a rerpon- \Ice ohligations in order 10 offer narrou prograrnmtn., sibility and opportunity to wve the couni! In itme of formais Ne reiterate that tramlator program miginatton emergencies. Other nearby radio stations. ,uch as H'PAT- I\ inconsistent with the Commission's competitireness and AM FM. licensed to Paterson. New Jerse). broadcam the efficient) interests as expressed above. wch that an) local results of Bergen County elections. WCBS-AM F.M. 11- \enice obligations would be unuarranted Censed to Neu York City. filed comments shoutng that it provides the count} with daily traffic reports. public ser- Signal delivery \ice announcements. programming of local tnierest and bchool and ueather reports Thus. uhile a nurnher of 56 The current rule generally prokider that translators ma: onl) rebroadcast the signal of an FM radio broadcast local 5ertices are apparently abatlable to meei the de- slallon or another translator thai is recei\etl dlrectl) orer- mands of Bergen County. albeit not as en\irioned h) the-air '* The onl: exception I* that an \CE-F\l Turro. he has not shoun uh) the county cannot arrange cran4ator \lation operating on a re>er\ed channel. and uith these stations to provide an? debired programming or uuned and operated b) the Iicen,ee of ihe prirnar! .la. uh! Turro himself cannot contract uirh 1he.e or other lion. ma! ure alternative signal delner? means. ~ncludtng \tatwns to atiain hi, desired objectires Turro, lacllit) 15 hut not limited io. atellite and microuahe faciliiie, under to ahead: empowred. as are all FM translator \tautin* certain LOndttions In the .\oiicc. ue propo\ed tu change %er\e the count? in times of emergency h) hroadcading '- the wpal deliwry rule to permit commercial FM information in order to protect life and propert! " Where tramlators prmiding fill-in sertice to uu ierre\trial mi- the ahilit) 10 probide local public information I, wn- crDUa\e tianmission facilities Ne .rated ihat [hi\ change strained b) a\ailable funds. ne emphasize ihat our ruk. uill fJctlttJie ihc rehroadca,t of FU \ration %gIals to permli unlimited independent financial wppw for rhh rcmw or pigraphicall) inacce\uhle area, u hete wer- form of F.M trandator serxice ihe-air terrcwial reiran,mlrrion has not heen particularl! 52 Vext. Turro has not shoun that hi$ wuaiwn I\ w etfeciibe unique that other applicants uould not seek irex- >irnilar 57 Conmirnr$ Man) broadcast Iniere\t, wpport the ment. B? his oun admission through a detatlcd \iu+ Cornmiwon + proposal 10 authorize commercial FM included in his comments. numerous rounue, .imilari! tran\laior* probiding fill-in serbice 10 use terrestrial mi- hare no dedicated allocation If ue uere to grani Turio crouare iranwnirwon factliiies " \'AB fawn off-the-air requesr. ue uould he wmpelled to grant ik,e yrewmp- dclnea! t>f ugnah a, an adequate method for most FM ti\el) similar requeus 3% well. resulting tn the Lieation ot tran4aior operation,. ?;AB remain, opposed to FM a neu iransmission senice umgthe ver: facilitie. ihai ue trandator\ reLeiring ,pace wtelliie program feeds. and haw affirmed a\ king restricted to reception purpv\ci wgge\i\ ihai ihe Commiwon rebiw its ileci\ion to permit Turro's comments also overlook the fact that the Corn- atelliic IeeJ. io certain SCE-FM iran,lators However. mitrion allocates frequencies on the hasis of comrnunitie\. \.\I3 *uppirt" ihe FCC's proposal to allou "fill-in" not countiei. such that a neu s)stem of allocation uould iran4atorr io u\e microuabe links. despite prebiousl} op- be necessarily hagd on the needs of countie\ Uiihout p8twng an! tranrlator use of microuaw facilities. NAB conrideration of its consequences on the Cimmiwon'* nw ~untcndrthat fill-in use of microuar'e link Would long-\tanding distribution ohjectiver Consequenil!. for imprtne qnal quality and. thus. serw the public intereu the reawns set forth ahwe. the Cornmiwon =illden) Mi Furihcrmure. \,\f3 argues that FM translators owned and Turro's request for uairer of Section 74 1231 of ihe rule, iundcd h! primar) %tations should be permitied to use micrt,ua\e program feeds in *er\ing "uhitc areas" uniil ha1serrice obligations radial .errice hecomes abailable to the region 53 Under the current rules. FM translators hare nti jh \IIA and Lnndon Bridge oppo\e any allernalive local wvice obligations We proposed in the \oiicr 11) \i:nal deli\cr! authorit) for FM translators NPR states continue to exempt FM translaion from lwal urbicc that ihc Ctmmiwon s phtlosoph) iouard, FM translators ~)hligations In all areas We stared that impthing local a, e\idenced in the .\olice indicates that satellite delivery xrbice obligations on translators would exact a co~ton of ugnalr I. tnconsistent uiih the secondary status of FM their operalions that could jeopardize their exi\tence. con- iran4aion \PR suggests therefore that the CommiSiOn trary to our goal of extending srvice to areas that uould werturn the exception uhich permits NCE-FM orherwise remain unserved tran\lait,r* ciuned and operated hy their primary $tation to 54 Cornmenu. La Tour states that local translator oper- u.r alternaure sqnal delivery means SPR urges that the aton would be pleased to.accept public senice revJon- FCC continue to recognize the "Alaska exception" if dis- \ihilities in exchange for program origination authorit? tinction\ in signal delivery authority between commercial Furthermore. he contends that listeners uho preier the and 3CE-FM translators are eliminated. more narrow formats 5hould not be deprived of lWaI 59 La Tour notes that if noncommercial translators are weather. news. and other public service information perm~itedto use alternative signal delivery in order lo Alternativel}. La Tour contends that the Commission probide a higher quality signal. then commercial could give primary stations local service rerpon,ihiliiie\ trandators \hould also have access to the same signal for their translator markets as well as their primar} mar- dellrery authority since both forms of translalors operate kets. No other commenters specifically addressed thir 1,- on the *me principles of reception and transmiwion. La sue. Tour sugge,ts that listeners who prefer narrow formats 55 Rule. We find no compelling reason for irnpn\ing should not have to tolerate inconsislent service nor ucri- local service obligations on translator licensees Becau5e fice the quality of broadcasts when bctler technolow is FM translators are a secondark senice vith limiied means a\ailable du Treil suggests that any alternative mans 7220 G S FCC Yo. Red LS Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 should he emplo)ed. including telephone cornpan) cir- 62 Cnmmmrr. YPR and FM Technolog) .upp~the cuits Vernier states that an) abailable methods. including x CommlSslOn's proposal Other commenter\ ,upport the tuisted pair. fiher optic or satellite should he ured for Commission's propod with further suaestions UT1 fill-in 5ignal deliver) WTI supports the use of an! ,upe- ge*t> that the Commission authorze the ure of auxiltar! rior technology on all channels for all licensees Chri,tian frequencies for all FM translators. not just for tramlators Media recommends that independently ouned FXI pro\lding fill-in ser\ice Corinthians Xlll supports the use translators should be allowed use of ~atell~teor mtcrouave of auxiliar) frequencies and wgge\ts that the Cummissmn feeds grant use of the frequency despite local hroadcasrer ohjec- 60 Temple University of the Commonuealth S)stem of lions. @\en a bhowtng that it5 use uill not cause tnterfer- Higher Education (Temple). as well as a feu other pubhc ence broadcasters. propose that the option of alternatne 3ignal 65 \AB opposes the secondar) use of hroadcast delivery should be extended to NCE-FM translaiorr on auxlliar) faCiliiie5 h) fill-in translator< on the ground, ihai non-reserved channels IChannels 221.300) owned and op- auxrliar) frequencies are approaching spectrum \atura- erated by a primar) station in order to aroid interference ! iinn YAFi ar:ues that additional rpectrum u\e e\en un- with TV Channel 6 Temple suggests. further. that the der ucondar) conditions. may impede prtrnar) btation use signal delivery option should he limited to translators nf rhe frequencies YAB \tares thai hroadca\t auxiliar) locatcd within 75 to 100 miles 1120 to 160 kml %rfthe facililir\ %hould he hmiied to the Prnate Operational- primary station corresponding 10 the distance owwhich Fixed Microuave SerbiLe facilities Iicen,ed undei Part u4 a tianslator can receire an orer-the-air signal ulthout of !he Ciimmirsion'\ rules COS riare, that although pm- interference gram delixer) ma! he powhle on 950 \IHz other auril- 61. Rule We will change the signal deli\er! rule to tar! frequencie, \hould nor he wed due to the powhility I permit commercial translators pro\iding fill-in .er\ ~ceto of creating inierference uirh existing hrtiatlcauer\ In larg- uu an! terre5irial rran*mission facilities in order 1%) t,hiaan er meirqs,litan arear aural iniercii! rela) frequencie\ are the primar) station 3 ugnal includtng. hut not llmlted io. alread) uinge3ied and hwh TV and ratlit) \iatinn\ u\e the microwave. ghone cornpan) Circuits. and dedicaied fiher trv.pencie\ for eleclrnnic new, galherins put g pi he\ to EO\.- optic cahle ' In addition. for "uhite areas" uhede\cr\ire er area e\enb CBS contends that cinirdinaiion hetueen 15 indeed una\ailable. we will he favorahl) d1rpo.e.l io- the laiier media and TU tran4aiors uould he difficult io ward requests for waiien of this rule sn thw cnmmercial arrange. FU translators. ouned :ndependently or hy primar) m- hh Ride Ue uiI1 auihorize commercial FM trandators lions. ma) receive signals hy any terrestrial mean, Ne prwiding fiII.in unice to u\e auial iniercity rela) fre- Ii belie\e that this change will facilitate the rebroadca.1 of qucccier on a *econdar) haw 'I he u\e of the\e fre- .L broadcast signals to remote or geographically inaLLewhle qucncie. =ill he uintliiioned upon ad\ance coordination areas uhere o\er-the-air retransmission has not heen effec- uirh local frcquenc! coordinating committees. nr local ti%t. hroac1ca.t wen in the ohxnce of a coiirdinating commil- 62 In response to those commenterr ueking to eviend tee For "u hite areas." we uill alw he favorahl) cltspoud signal deliver? authoritj to include various aliernari\e touard reque\h for uatrers of this rule tn permit FU methods. we state that the off-the-air \ignal feed \hnuld he tran.lator\ ouned independently or h) commercial pri- 1 adecuate for mort FM translator operationr In such fill-tn mar) \tailon\ to uu aural inferctn rela! frequencies on a I inuances uhere the quality of the off-the-air signal ~iiultl leconclarr haw, We helie\e that thir ure of auxiliar) he unacceptable. our decision to authorize the uu'if an\ frcquenLie\ uith the *pec!fied Itmatatinn\ is consistent i terre,trial transmission facilities should enable trandaion utth FU!ran-lator \ role a\ a wplrlemental service 10 that I to reccibe a signal suitable for rebroadcast We helie\e tvf FU radii, hruadca,i *tauon\ S'litu!th\rantling mme par- that any further extension of authority would be incon\w tie,' argument, that these frequencie, are congested in tent uith the role of FU translators as a secondar) rer\ice man! area,. ue find ii likely that hroadca5t intercity relay not intended to supplant the services provded h! radw Lhannel .pace I, a\ailahle in tho,e more remole areas hroadcasters uhere iran4ators are needed mo\t I herefore. our au- I thorizing intercit) relay frequencies in these areas would he In the puhhc Interest hecaure it would facilitate rignal 1 Use of auxiliary frequencies delirer! Ilg,uewr. ihe secondar) nature of this propoKd 63 Under existing rules and policies only XCr.rU auihoriraiion \hould minimize its effect on the availahiliry translators owned and operated by their primary \lation of hroadcast intercity relay frequencies in those areas ma) use auxiliary broadcast frequencies for program re- u here cungewm already exists ception m In the .Vorrce we proposed to authorize com- mercial FM translators in fill-in areas to u~ aural Conditional relaying broadcast auxiliar frequencies (intercity relay stations1 on 6; The current rules permit FU translators to engage a secondary basis 'I We also proped to condition the u\e of these frequencies on advance coordination with local in "condtt>onal relaying:' i.e . retransmis~ion by one I frequency coordinating committees. or local broadcast u)- translator of the signal of another FM translator. if the ers in the absence of a coordinating committee Specifi- translator is not uxd solely to relay the signal of the I cally. we proposed to modify our rules to' 1) make aural primary station to a more distant facility." The rules state ! broadcast intercit) relay stations available for the tram- thdi each FM translator is intended to provide direct mission of program marerials between an FH radio hroad- reccpiion to the public. any other use is inctdental. We cast station and its translators; 2) authorire the proposed in the Sorcce to retain the current rule on i transmission of program material between FU radio conditional relaying for translators. .L broadcast stations and the FM translator facilities. and 21 68 Cornmenu. The various hroadcast interests com- amend the licensing procedures to accommodate such menting on this issue support the Commission's propoul usage. to retam the rule concerning conditional relayingb' 7221 10 6-- . FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd To. 25 While these commenlers generally oppose the de%elop plications. expedlle the processing of iho,e applxationr men1 of translator relay networks. SA6 mentions the and facilitate the deliwry of higher qualit) broadcast ,ig- - limited circumstance in which an FM translator wses a nalr to the public. legitimate "white area." suggesting that rela) operaiion T? Conmrcnrr Sexera1 commenters wpporr the Com- should be permissible within the "white area.'' SPR and mission's proposal."' TAB contends. houe\er. that "need" La Tour agree that conditional relay networks of signals con\iderations should go well heyond the quality of signal under the incidental service provisions of the rules pose reception In particular. the hurden of proof regarding little threat IO existing hroadcasters. even when operated need for a rranslator in a giren area should he shifted to through virtually unpopulated areas. They claim that in- the proponent. a5 the present onus unfairl) disadvantages cidental relays provide a more reliable signal IO distant opponents hy requiring a demonstration of a lack of need communities in need of service. whlle Tour highlights La ?AB helie\es that "fill-in" translalor applicant. should be the additional programming offered to the mohrle com- required to file a shadouing ,tud) indlcattng ihai terram munit) along highway systems. obstacle, prewnt adequate primar) \taiinn cwerage with- 69 Rule We hill retain the existing rule which prohih- in the releiant contour *' Simllorl!. in c\aluating 11s ube of a translator solely IO relay signals of a prlmar! iran,laiors applying to bervc other areas the FCC ihould itation to more distant facilities. but permits incidental conuder uheiher the relebant area is alread) adequatcl! relay We beliere that our ex~stingrules are adequate to rerwd through ewsiing broadcast >Ignal> u hile al5o estah- prewIt potential ahuxs through translator rela) net- Inhing monger *!antlards to di\couiake independent part! uorkb Furthermore. our revised financial support and uuner,hip of other area tranrlators. " ounerthip rules resol\e ohjectionr raised br commenier\ -3 \PR rugge\i\ that the hurtlen of proof regarding concerning tranrlator rela? networks established h) pri- "need'* ,houlil tar! according to circumqance The "lack mar) ,tations seeking to expand their broadcasts into LII+ of nee4'. huriten for "fill-tn" unvx \hould he placed Ian1 markets Lnder our new rules. an F,W radio upon qipi~nenl\uhile *htftlng the ninu- for need 10 the hroadcas %tation uould he unahle 10 oun. opeime or apl)licant In ''cvncr area'' in\tancer In tietlcr to enure .upport FM tran4ators in area, ouisde cowrage uin- opporiuniix. f<>r \Ct-F.M \tation, and orher xrbicc to tour except as prosided by uaivers for "wh!te areas" un.er\ed or undera\ed area, Tran4atorr ber%ing tho,e areas must be opercted h? In. La rclur .late\ that programming \ariet!. is an ap- dependent parties uiihout any financial contrthuilnn tram '1 propriate criteria io pr"\e *need" for F\l tranrlator ser- the prtmar) station Therefore. these re\iJed rules uill \ice He that ,uppl) and demand forces of the effeclirely prebent the establishment of translator rela!; u!, mat keiplacc are he.! .uzted to make "need" determina- ahen their principal purpose would be to extend ihe iton\ a- dem\m\iratetl inirin-icall) through an application geographic cmerage of prlmar! stations into other area, for iran4ator *nice Tour recommend, that the Corn- alread) xrwl h) A.W or FM radio broadcast stations La - rniwtrn rcter to the aril! prepared h? the staff of the Federal rtadc C8inrmiwon regarding puhllc henetit from Need requirements for translators and nectl ttir additional radio urtice,."" Finall). La Tour 70 Section 'J I?3?lb) slates that an applicant ma! he Intlicatcr ihai applicant* \hould nor he orerburdened by licensed to operate more than one FM translator. ewn if excew\e c\dentiar! requirements nor through delays in such translator$ serw auhstantiall) the same area. upon an the application proce\\ approprian \houing of need for the additional slation, "' 75 Rule Ne helie\e that 11 is appropriate io clarify. as The rule doel nor contain specific guidelines defining the propt"cd In the \oiirr. nur definition of "need" as a \houing neces\ar). 10 justifv grant of a translator appltca. criieritin in ihe Iiccn*ing proces, when applicants seek to lion or the shouing wfficicnt to demonstrate lack t3f uperaie mtirc than one iran4ator Thus. showinp of need L'nder our current standard. the need for a "need" \ha,uld fwu, upon the technical neces4ty for the iran4ator is presumed upon the filing of the application additional taLiliiic\ a\ determined h> the qualit! of rignal Onl) if a prim jucie \houing of lack of need I\ made. or reLei\ed frum the intended primar) \taiion or any operat- if an applicant IS seeking more than one FM translator 11) tng iran$laitw, taw hoih "fill-in" a* uell as "other area" rehrnadcast the same primarj station. do we require the I \I tran\laiaBr\ Nc heliese that the technical inrerpreta. applicant IO document a need for the proposed neu I \f iwn of '*need*' I.appropriate guen the role of Iranslaton tran\lator station ab a reLepittm \cr\ice To ,upport their applicalionb for 71 In the Voiice we proposed to reviu Section multiple rran4aior\ in the wlme area. appliCantS Will 71 1?3?(b) of the rules to clarifv that "need" refers solel! required to de\crthe an! rele%anrterram obstructlon as a io the quality of the primary station's signal present at a mean, of .%suing "technical need". and if useful. may receirer site (I.c.. technical necessity) and that program- Include a \hadouing stud). Contrary to the suggestion by ming content. format. or transmission needs of an area \Ir La Tour. uc are convinced that programming consid- uill not be considered in our determinations We pro- eraiionr are nor uarranted as a component of "need' poud to appl> similar standards io translators providing heL.1u.e nrf thc \econdary nature of FM translator KNiCe fill-in service. as well as IO translators provtdtng xrvu to and hecauu wch highly subjecitve deliberative crtleria other areas. We ahproposed to clarify that in order for a uould hoth delay and complicate the application process. primary station to demonstrate the need to own a Second FU tranrlator\ are intended to resolve reception prob- translator within its coverage contour. it must only show lem, the "need" for which should be determined On that a technical necessity exists for the additional technical grounds alone We also reject SPR's proposal to tran4ator. We stated that removing any issues of program- ,hift the hurden of proof to applicants for "other aN'' ming from translator applications will eliminate unnecer- iran,lators Independent ownership of translators is indi- sarily SUbjCCtire deliberatiw criteria from the appllcation caiitc of a legitimate need for service and. where techni- - proces Conditioning "neeJ" wlely on technical criteria mill clarifv the information required for translato? ap- 7222 /r 5 FCC Red No. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 Cally feasible within our parameters. ue helieve that such Definition of major change KniCe Should be authorized without creating an addi- IiOnal requirement for demonstrating rhai "need '* 79 The rules define a major change for FM translator \tations as an) change in output frequency (output chan- nelI.-or authorized principal community. or area of ser- Method for selecting among applicants \ice In the .\oircc we propowd to define "major 76 Our existing procedure for selecting among mutu- change" as a proposed change of cowrage area of more ally exclusive competing applicants for translator than ten percent of the previously authorized I mVh authortty relies upon voluntary mutual agreement among conIour.~2or a change in frequency All other changes the applicants. We stated in the Soiicr that in light of our uould be Considered minor changes including a change in proposal to eliminate the rules restricting FM translators the authorized principal community We noted that this io certain limited frequencies and to permit them to uv proposal uould apply to both fill-in and other area all 80 channels (Channels 221-300) of the commercial FV translaiors We also asked whether the ten percent change frequency band. we believed that mutually excIu~iveap- in cowrage area is too restrtctne. and uhcther a reduc- plications will not arise with any frequency In the rare tion in coverage of more than ten percent should be event that we are faced with mutually exclusi\e applica- con\tdered a major change We also asked whether ,tan- tions; ne proposed to assign alternative frequencies as dWdS are needed to clanfy the manner in uhich the necessary for the applicants. Applications tor F!4 rele\ant cowage change should be measured translator stations proposing to provide fill-in urvice of 80 Commenu. Couan supports the existing rule while the commonly owned primary station will be giwn prior- YcKenzie bupports the Commission's proposal Other ity ober all other applications In those instances uhere commenters inchcare that the 10% level is too restrictive there are no available frequencies to substitute for a mu- for defining a major change. and suggest appropriate tually exclusiw application. we propovd to applv the modificaiiunr VPR states that the definition for major priorit? classification specified in BC Docket Yo bll-IStl. change, in tran,lator operations should be the same as ac appropriate. in xlecttng a winning applicant for the thO%e for the FH primary rtationr. requiring at least 50 FH translator uation "" percent change in the predicted I mV m coverage area. 77 Commcnu. VAB and other hroadcast iniere\t\ 'up' >PR agree, that the intent of the proposed rule - to port the Commission's proposal Other commenier5. disuurage modification\ to adjacent markets - is neces- while supporting a priority systcm in concept. propwe ur). hut expresus concern that the specific actions may alternative ranking. For example. NPR argues thai the ultimatel) hecome cumhersome for routine service adjust- need for public radio should be a first-tier rather than a ments hillouing unanticipated changcs in growth patterns third-lier consideration due to the high federal priorii! an local communitiec Such changes could easily exceed placed upon extending puhlic radio in recent legirlaiiiin IO percent of predicted coverages and may unnecessarily WTI argues for. and La Tour supports. a priority ytem hurden FCC reu)urLe\ Other commenters also indicate uhah assigm a high priority for a displaced tran*lator that higher bhange k\eh are necessary. uith specific pro- ur\ice and an existing translator seeking changes and a p~1*11, ranting from ?I1 percent to 15 percent. including low priorit? for fill-in senice CBS proposes that (he the ECS propod that a 20 percent decrease should also priority granted to fill-in senice should be conditioned he convdered a minor change Finally. some of these upon the actual provision of fill-in service in order to propouh measure the major change according to percent pre%ent licensees from switching to another primary *[a- of population change rather than change in geographic tion at a later date. Further. CBS proposes that if fill-in co5eragc area service is necessary and spectrum is unavailable due io RI Tb\ urge, the Commission to consider any exten- distant signal importation hy a translator. the imporiing \inn of iran4ator cnberage area into the protected contour translator should be required to provide the fill-in senice of an exiwng full ,er\ice station as a major change. CBS or reiurn tts license Finally. CBS. with the upport of states that all applications \hould he considered relative to other commenters. argues that all other applicauonr ihe FM iranrlator', original authorization in order to should be granted on a "firstsome-first-vrved" hasis -" a\nid con~cuii\e minor changes which ultimately 15 Rule As proposed in the Soircc. we will reuilw amount to a major change NAB states that the definition mutually exclusive applications by substituttng frequencie\ of "map change" should include a change of principal and giving highest priority to translator applicants propir- community and primarj \tation king rehroadcrrt." AC: ing fill-in service of the commonly owned primary \ta- cording io VAB. our proposed modification would create tion In those instances where frequencies are unavailahle. internal tncunsntency with respect to the present ::need" we continue to believe that use of the priority system for standard. as translator applicants who successfully applied choosing among mutually exclusive applications for FV h) \hosing need for service to one community could station allotments (with the exception of criterion numher whsequentl> change community of service without dem- three) is best suited for resolving conflicts among onstrating similar need. NAB also states that this problem translator applicants promptly. In addition. the priority in con~unctionwith the lack of public complaint follow- system accurately orders public interest concerns Io he ing changes in coverage area could degenerate into inad- considered in choosing among mutually exclusive applica- equate interference protection ior FM stations. Finally. tions for translator licensees We believe our priority +- since the change of output channel (frequency) is consid- tern should assign a high priority to translator applicants ered a malor change. NAB suggests that a change of input proposing fill-in service. One of an FM translator's pii- channel (primary station) should be afforded parallel Iu- -1 rnary functions IS to fill in "dead spots," and thus such IUS. Yrvtces should be given priority over other applications 82. RUIC We believe that a "major" change for FM Finally. in those rare instances where the above criteria translator stations should be defined as any thane in do not resolve the mutual exclusivity. we will select ap output frequency (output channel). or any chan& or Plications using a firstsome-first-served method increase (but not decreax) in 1 mVlm coverage area Of 7223 la FCC9b-375 , Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Red So. 25 more than 10-percent of the previously authorized cov- Cast SlatlOnS COnwquently. it does not appear reasonahle - erage contour. e We believe it is appropriate to gite II- to impox multiple ownership resirtciions on translators Cenves some flexibility to make certain facility changes giren that significant concentrations of the facilities are without triggering the "major change" process We re~ect ICs, Ilkel) to occur in any particular area under the the suggestions of several commenters that we adopt a constrams of the rules. cut-off that is higher. We believe that a higher cut-off could cause abuse as it would enable FM translator 11- Cross-service translating censces to increase their coverage area significantly with- out being subject to compeung applications or publrc 87 The current rules preclude an FM translator from comment. rebroadcasting the signal of any station other than that uf an FM radio broadcast station or FM tranrlator8' We 83 We decline to adopt "change in populauon" criieria proposed in the .Lowe to retain the current rule preclud- as espoused b) some commenters Population siudies are in%an FM translator from rebroadcasting A\t ugnals more complex. expensive. and therefore burden,ome for 68 Conimenrr. Among the feeu commeniers uho addre,, applicants than analyses based on geographic areas SAB's this issue. most agree uith NAB that signals should proposal to include a change in principal community as a AM not be rebroadcast. especially in light of the FCC's at- major change uould not be a useful rewsion becaube FM tempts to improve AM broadcasting condition\ *' AFCCE tran%latorbare not aluals Iicemed to serve specific com- concurs uith the FCC's position but uould support night- munities and haw no corerage or serrice requirements time fill-in w\ice by FM translators of AM Ja!time 4s for NAB'\ reference to a change in input channel or staiions on a limited or temporar) basis Alternaiivel!. primary staiion as a criterion. our new ownership and McKenzie oppuvs the FCC proposal on the grounds that financial wpport rules will iemove both the incentlre and A.M siations ma) not be able to serve entire counties in opportunit) for changes in a primar} station that uould mounrainour regions Therefore. FM translators niay ac- require qecial attenttun Furthermore. 3tnce F\I cumpli\h \er\ice that AM radio I\ ieshnically unahle 111 tranrlators are a reception service. we find that it I\ un. prnbide *' Furthermore. !4PR state, thai man) SCE-F.\I necesar) to revieu the programming the tramlator rc- Iicen\ees hruadcasl on the AM hand hecause of the xar- Finall!. ue helieve that our new rule re\ol\e\ hroadcasts cil! of qmxrum ,pace in man) urhan areas. and should TBX\ concerns that an extension of coberage arca into be permitled to extend their \crvice through the use of . the protected contour of an existing broadcmt %tation F5I tran4ators. should be treated as a major change. Because the neu BQ Rele We conlinue to have \erious reservations that rule limits "mtnor" change co\erage area mowrnents 10 IO percent. TBA's concern is unwarranted >ince no \ig actual impro\ements in AM serbice could be gained hy nificant encroachment upon another station's coninur allouing t M rranslator\ to rehroadcau AM )tations in - could Iikel! occur uithout application of the procedural fill-in and oiher areas. We are conducting proceeding to improw the qualtty of AM radio Krvice and to enhance ufeguards prorided b) the rules for "major" change the opportunitie, and incentires for such stations 10 com- pere in the marketplace via the existing band and new Wdtiple ounership limits spectruni We heliete that the fundamental problems of 8.1 Under existing rules. FM ir~nslatorsdo not count A\l radio -- channel congestion. interference. and low again9 multiple ouncr\hip limits. We stated in the .to. fidelit) reccireri .. uill be resolred by this concerted lice that it IS reawnable to continue to exclude the o-ner- effort wiih the hroadcasting community and radio manu- \hip of FM translators for purposes of the multiple facturers. apart from further consideration of cross-vrvice ounerihip rule, in all cases. We also proposed 10 con- iranslaiing In addition. the groundnave propagation char- tinue 10 exempt F.M translators from the radio "coniour acteri\iic\ of AM signals are \uch that they normally do overlap" rule. uhich prohibits the common o*ner\hip of no lea\e .enice bods or "shadouing" (I e.. holes in cov- two or more commercial radio stations in the same broad. erage) vmilar io the "\hallowing" found in the FM band. cast senice in the same geographic area -' although licensees ma} desire to wpplement coverage in 85 Conimenu Several broadcast interests support the d~rcciion~lanienna nulls Thus ihere is generally no Commission's proposal to continue to exclude F!4 reawn for ,\>I licensees to establish fillm senice facilities translators irom the multiple ownership rules -'NAB wg- on the F\l band. Indeed. policies authorizing FM gestr. however. that the FCC impose local. if not national. tran\lator\ to rebroadcast AM signals may exacerbate the multiple Ownership rules for FM translators NAB ex- fundamental problems of the service. rather than amelio- presses concern that multiple ownership could prompt rate them Therefore. we believe that to aperove the overuhelming development of vcondary services in some general u,e of F.M translators by AM stations would con- communities. parttcularl) given the FCC proposal to a1- travene the goals of our AM improvement action IOU FM iran,lator use of the 80 commerctal channels %AB also states that the FCC might also consider placing a limit on the number of co-ouned rranrlators uith ur- TECHNICAL lSSLZS vice contour overlap Frequencies available to FM translators 86 Rule. We find no compelling reason to apply mut- 90 The existing rule authorize commercial FM tiple ownership limits on the number and location of translators to use the 20 channels of the FM broadcast translators a single party can own and'or operate hand formerly authorized for Class A stations. NCE-FM Translators are established where there is a need to sup- translators may use these 20 channels and the 20 channels plement the service provided by FM radio broadca~sta- resencd for noncommercial UK (Channels 201-?20)." In tions. and restrictions on multiple ownership could the .Sotice. we proposed to allow commercirl FH - impede the delibery of necessar! serbice to the puhlic We translators to operate on all 80 non-reserved commercial emphasize that translators are authorized on a secondary channels (Channels 221-300). We also proposed to permit basis and arc subject to displacement by FM radio broad- SCE-FM translators to w these 80 channels and the 20 1224 L i 5 FCC Rcd So. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 channels reseried for noncommercial uu Ne wughi W Rldr' Uuch has changCd 7226 5 FCC Rcd No. 25 Federal Communications Commission Recod FCC 90-375 104. NAB suggests that FM translators operating with enviro~mentalconsideration standard In of ERP 75 watts ERP or less should remain categorically exempt instad of TPO. The 100 watts ERP standard are from the FCC regulations concerning the potential envt- adopting imposes laof a burden on appiimnis than the ronmcntal impact from RF radiation as it relaies to hu. proposed 10 watts ERP standard."" man exposure. AFCCE supports amendment of Section 108 With respect to the coverage distance or HAAT 1.1307(b) requiring translator stations employing 10 uatts limits. we will reduce the proposed Iimm by a ERP or more IO consider the potential of RF exposure amouni for areas west of the .Mississippi Ri\er and h) a effects on the environment. Ion- suggests requiring state. large amount for areas in the east and southern California men8 regarding the potential impact of RF radiation Si. previously allowed I uatt TPO In order 10 enhance the Clair believes the calculation of exposure to RF radiation distinction between maximum ERP determinations and is another requirement which is completely beyond the protecuon calculations. we also are adoptmg a \IrnQlified knowledge of rural translator operators. and su$gests the procedure umg Iables instead of distance calculations requirement be limited to proposals where the transmitter The tables allow ERP and HAAT cornhinations that pouer exceeds 100 uatts produce I mV.m contour distances of 12 7 io 133 IUS RuIc In making our decision. we have sought to kilometers (km) in the west and 6 7 to 7 3 km in the ea,\ reconcile the role of iranslaiors as deli\ering hroidcari and southern California An FM Iran4aiar I\ alloued ai sienrls- io small service areas with the minimum neces\ar> least 10 uatts ERP at any HMT This permts wme power. and the fact that a significant numher of existing extended cowrage for stations at \er) high HAAT'S (for translators haw been constructed more than I6 km from example. at an HAAT of 800 meters. I rnV m cwerage the area they are serving We have decided to reduce our uould extend IS 6 km). To illustrate. part of the tahle ne proposed maximum ERP standard and to provide criteria are adopting for areas &est of the Miwwppi Ri\er. ex- for the extent 10 urrice which. uhcn comhined uiih cluding wuthern California. follou\ grandfathering diwwsed later in this do cum en^. \hould promote ihe primarj purpose of the ur%iceuhile accorn- Radial HAAT modating mobt existing authorized facilities tmncrs) IO6 The Commiwon is not persuaded hy the com- ments that pnuer lerels ahove the current \iandard mwt rewlt in increased interference. We continue to helieve that the protection criteria we are adopting today uitl effectively control interference. The new standard, creaie an equal prohahilltj of interference from translator m- lions operating at different powen by requiring higher 1310 1Mi 12 pouer \tation.r to be farther away from potentiall) affected 4UI 10 5Ul II stations. Hating concluded that interference is not a factor grcaier rhln or equal io 541 IO in ulecting the new maximum power limit. ue haw alloued for dticient facilitie, to cover the locations tradi- We recognize that ,ituauons exist where service to a great- tionally served hy translators At the same lime. ne ha%e er di\tance uould clearly w\e the puhlic intere*t.uithout incorpnraied a measure of flexibility with respect to ERP harm to an) parry. To addre,\ Ihe mwt criiicai.of such a*ir-di,tance to senice contour to permit translator \fa. situalinn~ne uill he favorably dibposed toward uaiving tions to meet the particular needs of individual areas this rule 10 1)ermit higher pouer. up to 250 uatls ERP at uhilc conforming to our rules an) tiA,\r. If an applicant demonwale$ that the I mV m I07 We are setting 350 uatts as the maximum ERP ai coverage in the pertinent direction reaches only a white uhich any FM translator may operate. The overuhelming area It c , hc)ond the protected contours of an) full time majority of translators authorired under the 1 uatL 10 uatt aural \er\icel For purposes of applying ihis waiver 5tan- TPO limits have ERP's of less than 250 uatts Very high dard in XCL-FM tran\lator applicaiwnh. the Commission pin transmitting antennas are needed to achiew an ERP uill cnn\itler an? area that is not \er\ed hy a full-servicp of 250 watts from a TPO of IO uatts at the FM hand public radio ,tation to be a uhite area Iewn if there is a frequencies Therefore. we expect that birtually all oper- full-srbice commercial station \er%ingthe areal ations with greater ERP would use higher transmitier 119 Our intention in specif?.ing use of 12 radials to powers than currently permitted. In that way, a higher determine maximum ERP is to have an administrative'ly maximum ERP limit would clearly represent an expan- uorkahle determination that still provides for Consider- $ion of the traditional translator role With the interfer- ation of terrain variations. By choosing I?radials for this ence criteria we are adopting. we also have decided that it purpose. the HAATs determined for the calculations can is reasonable to apply a 250 watt maximum ERP limit in also he used in coverage contour and protection require- all parts of the country. except for the border areas wh- ment determinations. and the maximum power autho- ject to bilateral agreements with Mexico and Canada "' rized uill he based on a fairly broad sample of the terrain Upon review of the comments and our own decisions 5urrounding the transmitter site. In the preceding para- establishing Commission requirements for environmental graph. ue have identified an alternate method Of deter- consideration of RF radiation. uc have decided that the mining maximum ERP and our rules will require this proper course in this area is to categorically exclude from method to be used a1 the proposed 12 evenly spwed the requircments for environmental assessment all ap- radials starting from True North. for azimuths that are plications requesting 100 watts ERP or The modi- not on one of the radials. the maximum ERP limit will fied environmental rule on RF radiation uill apply to f.\1 be the MERP of the closest radial. We will not require or boosters as well as F.M translators In the .Voltcc. we accept showings of higher or loner MERP values based proposed to modify $1 1307 of our rules H) that it covers on the terrain along intermediate radials. The adopted both FM boosters and FM translators and it expresm the method. with its 12 required calculations should provide 1227 /6 adequate accuracy for the maximum pouer determina- in the FM translators rules. Vernier states that the rules tions. We emphasize. howeser. that protection standards hmld allow for the ux of inexpensive directional anten- _- will he applied without this I? radial limit. sn approprtate nas in order for translator service to remain a reawnahle consideration will he given to intermediate radial heights Investment for stations He further suggests that maxl- and powers in that context mum-to-minimum radtatton should be allowed to ap- proach 24 dB for measured patterns and that the Antennas (including standards for directional antennas) Commission should work with anteha manufacturers io I IO The existing rules for licensing of multiple and develop a number of approved. low cost. off the shelf. composite antennas and the \arious forms of polarization directional antennas that can be used reliably in translator are imprecise Io'Section 74 1?35(a)(21 specifies that mul- installations. McKenzie. Alaska. Temple. Corinthians XI11 tiple antennas are permissihle as long as their radiatton and Jones state that Section 73316 of the rules would fields do not combine We stated in the .\OIICC that our excessively burden both c9pltcants as well as ihe Commw propowl to use an ERP standard to set maximum poser sion. and imposition of the standards IS unwarranted limits should cure an) ambiguity in our roles concernlng 115 Rule. In Conjunction with our neu ERP ltmm and the licensing of multiple and compostte antennas The predicted interference contour owlap standards. ii is im- tota!.radiated power in an) direction from all antennas ponant that we have specific information ahout each muci not exceed the proposed ERP limtt With respect to composite antenna. multiple antenna arra? and direc- duaror circularl) polarized antennas. we propmcd that tional antenna sjstem that is being emplo)ed ,\I the same the ERPdistance limit nould apply equall? to hoth the time. ne recognize the need to mznimlze the hurden on horizontally and wrtically polarized components FM translator licensees We bclwe the approprtate course II I The current rules do not otherui\e addre\* the u\e is to adopt the proposed rules. essentially a\ written of directional antennas h\ FM translators. and therefore The\e rules do not require FM translator direciional an- to do not Include standards "I' In the .Soiict. ne piopo\ed to tenna\ meet the FM maximum-to-minimum radiation codib ihe ux of directional antennas h) rW tranrlaior or the rate of chanpe restrictionr yecified in Section \tations and to Impo,e rtandardG fur such ux We further 73 316lhl of the rules The remaining rules should not he proposed that applicants >eeking to use direct:onal anten- unduly hurdensome. .Moreover. the full antenna pattern nas for translator Kr\ice nould need to IncluOe informa- dewriptton requirement 15 nece\sary not only for deier- tion specified in Section 73316 of the rule, a, pari of mining proiectton of other currentl) authorized \tations . their applications demonstrating conformance uith the hut ahto determine protection of the re uested facilities from \uh\equcntl) authorized tranrlaturs. 104 rule\ We also proposed to require the applicant to ad- dre\\ the impact of its proposal on nearh) ewtinp or proposed A.M. FM and TV hroadcasr antennas Interference criteria 112 Comnirnis AFCCE. Corinthians XIII. du Trell. I Ih Under the current rules. FM rran4aton must not FM Technology and Jones suppurt the Cornmissinn'\ pru- cawe either predicted or actual interference to the pub- po\als regarding multiple and composite antennas. CnS Iic'* direct reception of any authorized FM radio broad- \upports retention of our existing rules for Ircenmg these ca\t .tatton ''* Predicted interference is an application antennas. WTI asserts that an) antenna system \hould be processing standard. currently hased on Seciion 73.509 of allobed as long as the \tation is constructed w the area the Cummisbion'* rules Actual interference thal-is the nitlhn its 1 mV m contour does not exceed the area nf a result of hroadcast operation muu he corrected.-ot the circle ulth a I6 km radius. FM translator station must suspend Operation until it can 113 Although some express reservations iw request he corrected clarifications. sewral commenterr su port the Commis- Ili In the VOI~CCwe proposed to adopt Section 73.509 sion s directional antenna proposals.iOPCi~en the pending standard\ to predict interference from FM translators. ex- rcconiideration of the decision in MM Docket $0 R7-121 cept commercial Class B and Bl stations would be pro- uhere numerous parties urge the Commission to refine tected to their predicted 0 5 mV m and 0 7 mV m the pro\isions of Section 73 317. XAB and ABES wg$est contours. re 1228 5 FCC Red NO. IS Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 I19 CBS and YAB strongly support the inieni of pro- resulting in a new field strength contour o\erlap ulih an posed Section 741203(eI not Io grant translator auihoriza- FM translator staiion. La Tour riates ihat a translator lions Where the translator IS likely to interfere uith the should be protected from interference from upgrades of of a regularly received off-the-air senace. esen stations licensed to communities more than 75 miles In an area where predicted field strength contour o\erlap aua) FM Technology requests that the Commission he does not occur. On the other hand. AFCCE is concerned explicil about grounds for waiving retrictions KSOR that proposed Section 74 1203te) will preclude some non- ProtidCS informattOn supporting its awrtion that snme mterference. non-overlap situations and thus artificially interference results from poor equipment design or main- restrict lranslaior seNiCe based on fear of interference in a tenance practices and not from spectrum assignments. populous area. AFCCE suggests relytng on the "actual" I?* Generally. NAB and other commenters'"" contend Interference standard for this situation that our proposed "significant number of complainis" I20 Vernier and WTI suppon the proposed Seciion standard for determining actual interference is a nebu- 74 1203lal note. which would allow showings regarding lous. unreliable uay of amsing interference. uhich I\ population and ierrain factors that minimize ihe impact ultimaiel) too I:nient because listeners do not com- of the predicted inierference. Temple suggests that lack of plain."' SPR contends that the Commiwon's experience population be defined as the predicted interference area uiih this standard for boosters is very limited and due? nor containing over 500 persons or 0.1 percent of the not probide adequate support NPR requests actual inier. affected staiion s total service ropulation. uhicherer I5 the ference he limiied to complaints arising wlthin the pre- lesser \slue However. NPR and Pleasant conder the* dicted 3.1 dBu contour of the lisiener'r desired \lation iuo proposed "escape clause^" IO be inappropriate for ihe Vernier also contends that the Commission s propo\al econdary translator service. NPR suggests that the ab- uould he eawr 10 support if ne defined a field mengih ,ewe of population in a pen interference zone toda) point helou uhich complaints would not he consiilereil ma) not he accurate in the near future NPR is alui I25 .\RES u~gesnimposing a reawnahle huriien of concerned that uhile the premiu of intervening ierrain priwf on the complaining FM hroatlcast Iicenue. al- affecling interference is wund. the complexity of e%aluat- though the full ser\ice FM station uuuld nut need to ing the claims outweighs the potential benefit5 \PR ar- shuu that 11 is actually listened to h) any particular gues lhat the Commission should maintain 115 numher of lirteners in the alleged interference area CBS lonpranding polic) that applicants are not permitted io requests ihai the hurden of proof on full \ervice hruad- "pbke holes." theoretical or actual. in the 1 mV,m cut- casters no1 be 100 great as it is hard tu ohiain affidarits eragc areas of existing FM facilities so that the puhlic I\ from ii\iener\ CBS suggests the Commiriion accept an aswred uninterrupted serrice. affida\ii from appropriate station perwnnel attewng io 121 Capital Broadcasting CI a1 and Jones suggest ihai the numher of complaints received or other e\idence. an FM lranslator applicant should he required to whmit uhich wuld he affida\its staring ihe experience of ihe contour maps uith its application eridencing complianLe. station's iechnscal personnel or consultanis uith the inrer- La Tour wggcsts a simpler method. using separation ,tan- ference. or a suhrtantial decline in the siation's audience llards based on the predicted contours. except for applica- in the affecied area occurring rcasonabl) contcmpora- tions involving directional antennas or terrain neou4) viih the cummencement of translator operaiions. differentials. which could he required io plot contourr Ld I26 WTI proposer defining actual interference in terms Tour 1% concerned that rules uhich increase the complex- of a 20 dR dc.ired-io-undesired ratio for co-channel uper- it). and thereby the cost. of an application will dimini\h atiuns and a meawred ilesired station field strength at a the ability of a translator to survive economicall) Culum- fixed recci\ing Incation of more than IO uV m (not pro- hia al\o requests that we allow simplifying assumpiions. iccting mohile reLei\ers) WTI uould also protect pre- wch as determining height above lowest terrain using exiriing f \.I tranrlators from interference complaints by nearb? riwr elcrations. as a conxnative substitute for a ncu Channel 6 TV iran$lators and Ion puuer N siaiions derailed radial siudy. to enable participation b) groups 12- SJPHA wpport, using "*i$nificant number of uith limited technical means. cumplatnir" tn Seciion 71.1203 raiher ihan what it con- 122 AFCCE is Concerned because the rules do nor wkrs to be a \er) nebulous existing riandard found in descrihe the precision with which the interfering or pro- curreni Seciinn i4 1203(a) Christian Media argues ihat tected coniours must be predicted in order to assure lack "significant numher" is ambiguous and cuggem picking a of overlap NAB supports calculating proieciion along I2 specific numher such ab 50 Capital Broadcasting et al. radials. but urges that we also permit supplemental suggest that unles any interference caused by a tranqlaror thowings of other radials that may encompass terrain uould ha%ein he rrlolved. the translalor \tation \could features that depart from the I2 radial minimum >AB haw to cease operating. \uggesis that pleadings challenging an appliunt's shouing 128 Rule There IS general support for the propored of non-interferenct bc permiired IO demonstraie their contour orerlap method of predicting interference. and claims these supplemental showings using *e will adopt ii essentially as proposed 'Ii We recognize 123 On miwellaneous mailers relating to predicted the concern expressed regarding the proposed pOpulatiOn interference. AFCCE requests clarification of proposed and terrain exceptions. bul we expect that the provision Section 74 1?03(c). which it claims is conhrsing if it IS uull he uud \cry rarely due 10 our decision today on intended to deal with creation of new interference and atailahle frequencies. The note in the rule. along with misworded if it is intended to deal with existing interfer- Section 7J.I?03(e). will allow the processing staff to take ence Capital Broadcasting er ai agree that the Commis- special clrcumsiances into account when they are brought \ion should continue to prohibit absolutely interference to the staffs attention. This processing flexibility is COnSir io the transmission of the signal of an FM staiion. hut tent u~ihour decision regarding conflicting appllCatiOnS also suggest the Commission clarify the procedures Io be and ue believe it IS appropriate for this secondary service folloued when a primary FM staiion relocates 115 antenna. ihat uill still be subject to our prohibition on actual 7229 /ip FCC 90375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd So. 2s 3 interference. Therefore. an FM tranclator applicant may translators. terrain shielding and population dtrrrihutlon 1 -. demonstrate that. despite predicted contour oterlap. ~nter- The Signals radiated by 'most TV sattuns are horizontally ference will not in fac! occur due to such factors as polarized."' while the signals of UCE-FM translaton may k absence of population in the overlap area or mountainnus he \ertlcall) polarized only Thi, could greatly reduce the terrain. By the same token. pursuant io Section POtenllal fnr interference. The potential for interference , 74.13Wn. we will not grant an application if an objecting uould he further reduced hy adoption of the proposed party provides convincing evidence that the propo\ed ERP 5tandard since this uill make it easier to predict translator station uvuld be likely to interfere uith the accurately the areas actuall! covered by FM translators reception of a regularly received off-the-air exwng *r- Also. since FM translators are not required to place any vice. even if there is no predicted prohibited o\erlap particular field strength contour over the community or 129. We have decided nor to require applicants to in- area the? propose to serve. applicanic could use tnterven. clude an exhibit showing complrance with rhe predicted lng terrain features to rhield the Channel 6 service area If interference standards The standards will he applied dur- this approach were fa%orably recened. we proposed to ing processing and applicattons that do not comply ut11 accept an application for an XCE-FU !ranslator unlers * be dismissed With that warning. we leave it to appllcani, circumsiances waest possible interference to Channel 6 to decide the level of anal>sts the} uill appl! to clerermine wgnah 3uch as uhere the TV wgnal is elliptical or cir. the facilities they uill request. We will alw not ~pec~ha cularl! polarized and ihe translator uould he located in a degree of precision for determining contnur\ and predict- pnpulated area uithin the TV ,tation'> predicted Grade B , ing inlerference In the ewnt of ohjeclion, or uncertaini! contnur Where interference is theoreticall) conceibable as to contour location. as many radials as I\ nece%.ar! ue unuld require the translator applicant to demonstrate must be used We will slightly modi& tither Iintp$>.ed concluwel! that the proposed trandator would not caust language in Sections 74 1203 and 74 12111 to Llarih 11, interference to rhe reception of the Channel 6 TV qnal i meaning Durmg an\ re,t periods the wandator uould he required 130 We are unperwaded that a tran\latur .tatlnn I. ti1 Lea,e operaiion if an! dnterference is caused entitled to protection against an FM radio hrttadca.8 .la. Ill Crminienls There is general \upport for cltrec- tion or that the translator should he able In cduw interfer- tinn til the Cwnmiaitin'\ prnpnrals. hut consider, )le con- ' ence to an FM station or a TV Channel 6 \tation if the fuw,n mer their detail, Only Unod! and ken Ranges translator uas in existence first. The ahrcnce of ruth an felt that additional nhlectiw \tandards in this area were i entitlement is a fundamental characteriwc of the ~ct~n- nnt necerar! Mood! contends there is no e\idence of dary nature of translator wr\ice. interference cornplaints and dewrihes the Commission [)rtipi\al 3% clawc n\erkiII Corinthian\ XIII. Feaster. and 131 We helie\e it is inappropriate and unnere*ar? to Uchenzie to introduce explicit \tandards for determining u hether ac- rupport our alternatiw proposl apply leis re\iricti\e .tandar(lr determine if inrerference will tual interference exists We have modified the proptwd tn exiu 111 Channel n TV \tations from a prnpored new NCE-FM rule to mske 11 clear that we expect FM tran4atw 11- censees to attempt to resohe all interference complaint* iranrlaior \lcKenzie hclieses that the problem uill be hy appropriate means We haw not included the \ignifi. minimired h? opening all 100 FV channels to SCE-FM cant number of complaints language in the rule ne are tran,lator u\e adopt!ng. Instead. uhen con\inced that a uimplaint crr 135 Commenters pre\ented a %ariet>nf ways to clarify complaints of uncorrected interferhce are \slid. Ihe the propod requirements ?;earl) all would modify the Commission will direct an FM translator \tation to 41.- cli.tance tahle to reflect rhe low pouer allowed translator continue operation This judgment uill depend uprn !he \tatinn\ Vwt ah, wggest prohihiling the overlap of an individual circumstances presented in each wuation c%pltc~il\defined FM translator interfering contnur with a TV Channel 6 riation', Grade B contour 'I' Christian Ueclia. WTI and Vernier support providing for TV Channel Interference XPR. 6 \ertical p$>larization CBS and Great American el PI. op 132 Proposul. The existing rules protide nu ,pecific po.e an\ .uch pro\iiinn A couple of parties propose guidelines fur evaluation of predicted inrerference caused more rc,tricti\e requirement, Great American CI ul. pm to TV Channel 6 \tations by XCE-FM tranrlatur .raiwnr pow proirLtion io TV Channel 6 sersice beyond a sU- operatins on the resened band. In the .\oticc. ue prn- lion, Grade B cnntour du Treil suggests protecting low posed two methods for csaluating this potential interfer- pouer rv \rations on Channel 6 AFCCE. NJPBA,and ence that would apply to fill-in as well as other area Vernier wgge,t greater use of Section 73 525. Conversely. translators For predicted interference. we propnd a di- Great ,\rnerican et al. Jones and NPR argue qpinsr it. tance uparation table The distances were from Section >PR 'ontendl that under Section 73525. unless more 73525 of the rule. where they are currenil! udto than 3tllIO people are affected. there IS no objectionable determine Chsnnel 6 TV stations that are pn!entiaII! af- interference Great American CI ul claim that. as FM fected by an NCE-FM application. We also propo-d that trandatcm are a secondary service. interference to even any FM translator interference determination\ purwant in one perron should not be allowed. SPR suggcstS thlt We the Section 73525 procedures should be done uithtiut rel! on field tests to determine uhere interference will be consideration of population or need. For cas\ of actual caused Similarly. La Tour suggests that a more appro- interference, we proposed to require the tranrlatnr to priate approach is to use onl) the actual interference cease operation if there are a "significant numher of crireria. .MSTV opposes using field ICSIS to determine in- complatnts" that cannot he resolved hy modification of terference and argues that an effective screening standard the translator station's operations is es%ential. 133. We also asked commenters to consider the feasihil- 136. CBS. Great American et and MSTV oppose the I d. ity of adopting a less stringent standard We recognized *ignlficant number of complatnts standard for determine that several other factors could he incorporated. includmg ing actual Channel 6 interference CBS suggests the docu. use of different polarirations. the relatisely IOU pouer 6f 7230 I f 5 FCC Red No. IS Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 c mentation standards it proposed for FM actual that there may be limired sttuations where strict. anti- - tntcrferencc. Great American et 51. suggest an interference grandfa!hering rules may not inure to the public benefit ,tandard requiring the Commission's receipt of an) "balid For FM translator ctations owned or funded by primary and substantial complaint" demonstrating ihe interfer- Stations that haw existed for over a decade NAB states ence. At the least. Great American CI aI. urge the Com- that the Cornmission might consider adopting a waiwer mission to make clear the approximate numher of PUh that nould allow certain of these much older complaints that it will consider "significant". and suggest translators io continue operation under current owner- 5-10, NJPBA suggests the significant number standard ship and direct funding mechanisms. but would require apply to translators on channels 221-300 and to those on full compliance with more stringent mterference protec- the reserved channels outside the predtcted Grade B con. tion rules. SAB also argues thai primary sration-operated tour of a TV Channel 6 station Or funded translators provading service to whtte areas I37 Rule We believe that standards are neccsar) to should be allowed to continue operation under these ex- remove the uncertainty regarding the extent to uhich TV isting relationships However. NAB believes that upon the Channel 6 reception is protected from interference that In~titutiOnof new. fullvrvtce FM radio broadcast oper- could be caused by FM translator stations Standards are alions protiding cowage. or new AM primar) dayitme appropriate now that we are adopting lrmits on FW Urtice area coverage. such translators would then lo~e translator ERP and other interference protection criteria their grandfather status 'I' We have decided to prohibit contour overlap between the 140 La Tour. as *ell as a feu other commenterr. predicted interference contours of NCE-FM tranrlators on particularl) those currentl? operating FM translators. fa- channels 201 through 210 and the predicted Grade B \or complete grandfathering of existing facdities on the contours of TV stations operating on Channel 6 FH ground$ of significant "sunk" investments in translator translators operating on these channels must remain out. equipment a, uell as substantial audiences Commenters ride the TV Channel 6 stations. Grade B conioun to that fawr grandfathering underscore that these in\e,t- aboid potential interference The %tandardsfor proiectzon menr, and ,uLce*-ful cultivation of Iiiteners occurred un- ratih are consistent with the NCE-FM broadca3i \tailon der the exi\tmg translator rules and *'in good faith" that rules We expect these criteria to be admini\trail\el! uch rule, were the legitimate hasis for long term de- 1 . workable and not excesstvely burdensome since additional ciuons Furthermore. these commenterr argue that a channels are being made a%ailablefor NCE-F.W tran,laror Commiuion declrion reversing prtor rules would cause use. Accordingly. we have derived a replacement for the wgnificant damage to existing operators, potenttally proposed distance separation table based on the maximum causing dironilnued benice to the public.iib facilities limits adopted here. and produced an additional lJI Some commenters offer grandfathering positions in - table. derived from the Grade B protection ratios UK~for hetueen 1he.e tu0 extremes. du Treil. for example. stater Section 73515 interference prediction If an FH that tran4aiorc \hould he required to comply with the translator application proposes a site within the appro- neu technical rules onlv when requesting modifications to priate distance in the first table. then the second tahlc their existing auihoriations.'i- or uhen a change to an must be used to determine if prohibited overlap uith a FM ,tation rewlis in the station receiving interference TV Channel 6 Grade B contour is predicted. The TV from an txi\ting translator Alternatively. Cortnthians XI11 Channel b actual interference complaint standard uill he as uell 3s a feu oiher commenters propose that F.W the same as discussed in the preceding section for FM tran4ators ,houlJ haw a grace period to comply with actual interference neu iechnical rules. uhich should la51 from one to five \ears Corinihian, Xlll also urges that FM translators L hich hau heen providing service for many years should OTHER MATTERS he alloued io coniinue to do so even though they might no1 compl, uuh the proposed new non-technical rules. Grandfathcring crileris for existins transinton Other commenterr \uggest a different grace period apply 138. We stated in the .Vonce that we unshed to consider for an) new rer%icerulec. The suggestions range from one a number of alternatives with respect to the regulator) )ear to permanent grandfathering treatment of existing translators following our adoption of I42 Rirlr We note ihat requiring translators 10 come new or revised translator service rules. These alternati\e\ into compliance with new iechnical rules could cause included requiring compliance: (I) with all new rules Iicenues to uithdraw service from areas currently served. ultimately adopted as a result of this proceeding. grantlng a result contrary to the public intere5t At the same*lime waivers where needed: (2) with only the new technical ue uish to ensure that existing translators do not cause rules. (3) within 5 years. at which time the old rule< interference to FM radio broadcast stations. We believe would sunset: (4) at the next-wal cycleaor (5) uith that most translators are already In compliance with the the new tzchntul rules when applying for modifications iechnical rules we are adopting. If an existing FM to the extsttng authortunon. We further proposed that translator ciation IS not in compliance with some aspects pending. non-mutually exclusive applicattons should be of the neu technical rules. but is not causing interference processed under any new rules that are adopted as a result to the regular reception of any broadcast signal. we con- of this .Vouce."' clude that the public interest does not require the tmme- I39 Cornmenu. NAB states that the Commission should diate modification of that facility simply to satisfy the new strtctly enforce an anti-grandfathering policy Ever) rule requirements Thus. stations authorized prior to the translator should be required, following a period of no1 effecttw date of these rules may continue to operate even - greater than 60 days. to either cease operation or compl! if they do not comply with the technical rules set forth in with the new technical standards For non-technical op- the new Sections 74.1204. 74.1205, and 74.1235. prouided eration. NAB contends that the Commlssion should gen- that they comply with the interference rules in Section erally oppose any grandfathering. However. XAB states 74 1203 ,Moreover. if an interference problem cornu to 7231 a0 FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Red Xo. 25 our attention. or the station seek to modih its facilities. language on station identification. copies of ihe rule, we will then require compliance with the technical rules emisstons and bandwidth. purpose and permtssible \er- in Section 74.1201 \ice. and eligibility and licensing requirements 143 We believe that existing FM translator operaiions should not be permanently exempt from the application Other Matters the new servtce rules. The original purpose of FM of 1.18. SA8 states that in recent >ear, it has hecome clear translators is to provide supplementary service to areas in that the television translator service has been presenttng which direct reception of radio broadcast stations is similar problems as those experienced in the FM unsatisfactory due to dislance or intervening terrain bar- translator service. NAB concedes that the iswe is more riers A decrrion to permanently grandfather existing op- complicated. as the television translator serrxe operates erations would undermine this purpose. Also. permanent along with the IOU power televismn senice ~everihele$s. exemption would create two "clasxs" of translators to they argue that the Same alleged "abuse\" !hat are the which different rules would apply. We believe that the Subject of this proceeding are also ansing In the iele\ision rules pertaining to existing FM translators would be in- translator senice. SA8 concludes that the alleged abwe consistent with those governing future FM translators should he Considered seriousl) and ihe Commission 144. The new service requirements for independentl) should promptly adopt a notice of propo,ed rule making owned FM translators are. however. more stringent than to eliminate these television translator ahUKs hhures in those imposed by our earlier rules. For example. under the telebision iranslator 5ervice to uhich V.48 refers are the new rules commercial primary stations will nor be beyond the scope of this proceeding and WIII not he permitted to provide financial support for independently addressed here If %AB uirhes io purue this matter. 11 owned translators located in other areas We kheve ihat may file a petition for rule making in accoiilance uith $ because many FM translator licensees have limited finan- 1.101 of the FCCs Rule$ cial means. KNIC~ to the public could be unnecesoril) divupted if we *ere to require rapid compliance uith these new rules Existing FM translator operaiions uiII ADXIINISTRATIVE MATTERS need some time IO obtain alternative sources of funds Flnal Regulator) Flexibility Anal!rir Therefore. we will require exwing FM translator oper- ations to come into compliance with the new KrIice ruks 1. Seed and Purpose of this Action: The resibion of the within three )ears of the effective date of these new rules FM tran,lator rules and policie, adopted herein is necn- The Cornmission recognizer the limited resources of many sar! in order to promote the intended purpose$ of the FM FM translator licensees affected by ihe new rules and tran4ator )crsice. There IS a need to clari@ and tighten desires to refrain from imposing extraordinary burden - an scwral rule, in order to ensure that F\t radio hroadcact through the compliance process Therefore. we will also nation, arc not ad\erscl) impacted b) tramlalor opr- entertain waivers for extended grandfathering periods for ations those licensee showing that the public would unduly lose service if compliance with the new service rules uere required within three years. We emphasize that in show- 11. Summary of Issues raised by the Public Comments in ing abss of service to the public. licensees should dem- Response to the Initial Regulator? Flexibility Analysis: La onstrate their attempts to substitute other sources of Tour ,law5 chat the prowed rule changer may cauu financial support. the lack of availability of alternative man! FM iranslatorr to cease operating La Tour states that all of these translator operators have gross annual funding. extraordinary cost structure concerns. as well as rewnue, less than 5 million dollars and art. there- any other aural services available to the area. of 2 fore. mall husinesses. La Tour also helieves that equip- ment manufacturers. some of them ,mall businesses. -ill Revised Rule Section be pui out of busines small market radio station, will he 14s. We stated in the .Vorice that with the numerous harmed if the) cannot support a translator: and small modifications to the exisitng translator rules proposed in bu,ines,es uill also be harmed Couan urges the Commiv this proceeding. ti would also be appropriale to undertake sion 10 establish a \mall bwiness exception. Specifically. a general revision of Part 74. Subpart L. of our rules Couan ,uggesis that translators uith a power output of IO governing the FM translator and booster services We uaits or less should not be required to comply with any proposed to reorganize these rules to make them easier to extcnsi\e engineering standards or showings. apply and to clarify the language of the ruler IO avoid misinterpretation. We noted that the only subsianiive 111. Significant Alternatives Considered and Rejected: In changer to the proposed ruler set forth in Appendix B this proceeding. the Commission examined the full range uere those discussed tn the Souce itself. Any other modi- of options for FM translator service and paid careful fications in the proposed rules reflected only our desire io attention to the effects of the various options on small clarify this subpart. entities For example. to minimize burdens on applicants. 1.16. Commenu. WTI stater provision should be made to we have decided not to require applications to include an allow Part 74 type acceptance for transmitters of any exhibit showing compliance with the predicted interfer- power. ence standards. 147 Rule. As proposed in the .Volice. we are taking this opportunity to clarify and reorganize some of our rules I49 The Secretary shall cause a copy of this Report and In panicular. we are adopting changes along the lines Order. including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Anrlpu. _- proposed for the transmitting equipment approval re- to be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Smll quiremenrr. IF separation protection of FM broadcast sta- tions. FM translator frequency tolerances and time of operation. At the Same time. we are .adopting cfiarer 1232 a/ JfCC Red Xo. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 / Business Administration in accordance with Section 8. CBS. Inc. @3(aJ of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Pub. L. No -I 9 Cedar Rldge Children's Home and School. Inc 96351.94 Stat. 116.1. 5 USC. Sectlon 601 CI srq f1981) 10 Christian Wedia Asmiat-. Inc. I I. Columbia Bible College Broadcasting Company PAPERWORK REDUCIION ACT STATEMEST I? TerryA Cowan 150. The decision contained herein has been anal)zed 13 Corinlhians XI11 Broadcasting Company. Inc. 4th respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. and 14. Bill Croghan qund to impox new or modified requirements or bur- IS du Tretl. Lundin & Rack~ey.Inc. dens upon the public. Implementation of any new or requirements will be subject to approval b) the I6 Electronic Communication SCNICC office of Management and Budget as prescribed by ihe 17 Bruce F. Elving. Ph D Act. 18. David W Feaster 151. Accordingly. IT IS ORDERED THAT pursuant to 19 FM Technology Associates. Inc authority contained in Sections 41) and 303 of the 20 Joint comments of Great American Telc%isionand Communications Act of 1934. as amended. Parts I. 73 Radio Company. Inc and .McGrav:HiII and 71 of The Commission's rules and regulations ARE Broadcasting Compan). Inc. AMESDED as set forth in Appcndtx B below. These and regulations ARE EFFECTIVE March 1, 1991. 21 Dan Hendrix 152. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the freeze on 12 Hoffman Media of Louisiana. Inc new commercial FM translator applications and major 23 Rohert A Jones. P E changes to existing commercial FM translators SHALL 24 K-BEST cOSTINUE for 60 days afier the effective date of 1he.e 25 KBCRKCRS rules and. THAT within sixty days thereafter. ap- 26 King Broadcawng. Iirc phcants with pending applications on file SHALL AMEXD their applications to conform vith the neu 27 Kneller Qroatlca4ng of Charlotte County. Inc. rules. 28 KPBX Spokane Puhlic Radio .IS3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the request 29 KRXV. Inc for waiver of Section 74 1231 of the Commission's Rules 30 KSOR (FMI Southern Oregon State College filed by Gerald A Turro on July 28. 1989 IS DENIED 31 KSPK 154. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT this proceed- 32 John S IJ Tour ing IS TERMIYATED. 33. London Bridge Broadcamng. Inc ISS. For further information on this proceeding. con- 3.1 Lotm Communications Corporation tact James R. Coltharp. (2021 632-6302. or Gordon Godfre). (203 632-9660. Policy and Rules Division. Ma\, 35 H B C Grand Broadcasting. lnc. Media Bureau. 36 Hichael A WcKenrie 37 Hinnewta Puhlic Radio FEDERZCOMMUSICATIONS COMMISSIOS 3R Wwd> Rihle lnriitute of Chicago 39 Mowc De\elopmcnt Company 411 Vaiional :\wKiaiion of Broadcasters JI. Vaiional Puhlic Radio Donna R. Scarcy J2 Yational Tran4ator Association Secretary JS Seu Jerw! Broadcasters As~ociation 14 %CY Jerw. Puhlic Broadcasting Authority 4S Veu Life Chriwan Academy APPESDIX A 46 Vorthland Urnadcasting. Inc. ISITIAL COMMESTS 47 Pleaant Broadcasters JR Prairie Broadcasting Company 1 Alpine Broadcasting Corporation JO Prexoii Valley Broadcasting Company. InC. ! 2. Arizona Broadcasting Association 50 Radio South. Inc. 3. Association for Broadcast Engineering Standards. Inc 51. Dan Ranwn 4. Association of Federal Communications Consulting 52. Uilliam Paxton Rogers Engineers 53 Sc\cn Ranges Radio Co.. lnc. S. Association for Maximum Service Television 54 Ajron W. St Clair 6. Brill ,Media Company. LP 55 Stereo Broadcasterr. Inc. 7. Joint comments of Capitol Broadcasting Corporation. 56 Sunbclt Television. lnc. Infinity Broadcasting Corporation. L M. 57 Temple University of the Commonwealth System of Communications. Inc . L .W Communications of Higher Education South Carolina. Inc.. 58 Thomron Consumer Electronics. Inc. Shamrock Broadcasting. hi.. South Fork 59 Tower Communications Broadcasting Corporation. and WAHR. Inc 60. Tucson Broadcasters Association 7233 I FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Xo. 25 .. 61. Gerard A. Turro . ....I 62. The Univernty of Alaska (b) * * 63 The University of Utah .\Or& 1. Paragraph (hl shall apply to facilities and 64. Douglas L. Vernier operations licensed or authorized under the follouing 65. Weiner Broadcasting. lnc. Parts of the Commission's Rules 5. 21 (Subpart KI. 25. 66. Western Inspirational Broadcasters. Inc. 73 74 (Subparts A. G. I. and L). and 80 Wlth respect io Pan 21 (Subpart and Part 74 (Subpart I). paragraph 67. Western Tran$lators. Inc. K) (bl is applicable only IO MDS and ITFS stations transmit- 68. Thurstan Williams ting with an equivalent irotropncally radlated power 69. WCXWDNT (EIRPI in excess of 200 wails With respect to Pari 74 (Subpart L). paragraph (bl is applicable onl: to FM boost- REPLY COMMEhTS er and translator stations transmitting ulrh an effective I. Awciation for Maximum Serbice Tele\ision. Inc radiated power (ERP) in excess of 100 uaiis With respect to Part 80. paragraph (bl is applicable onl) to ship earth Capital Citis'ABC. Inc. ?. stations Facilities and operations licensed or authortzed - 3 Communications Investment Corporaiton under all other parts. subparis. or sections of the Commw 4 Corporation for Public Broadcasting sion's Rules shall be categorically 'excluded from conder- 5. Terry A Cowan alion under paragraph (b). 6. Electronic Communicaiion Service 7. Dabid W. Feaster ..... 8. Freedom WLNE-TV Inc WRGB Broadca\iing Inc . 3 Section 73 3573 is amended hr retibing the 'sction and Freedom-TV Sub Inc heading. h? remoring the fourth \enlcnce in paragraph 9 Dan Hcndrix lallll. h) rede\ignating the Sole at the end of the *ecilon IO KBBU-FU as Koie I. and hy adding a Note 2. to read as follows 11. Klimck Communications Corp 12. KSBY. Inc and Gillett Cornmunicaiionr of D 7J.3573 Processing FM broadcast station applicallons. (a) Milwaukee. Inc. * (11 a Other requeslb for change in frequcnc) or 13. Iohn 5 La Tour'J and J Sroadcasiing Pouer . - communit) of license for FM *rations mud first he ~uh. Du Prec Broadcasting Corporation milled in the form of a petition for Rule Making to 1 14. H B C Grand Broadcarting. Inc. amend the Tahk of Allotmenis For noncommercial edu- IS Moody Bible Institute of Chicago cational FV stations a major change is any change in 16. National Association of Broadcasters frequcnc) or community of ken* or any change in pouer or antenna location or height abow average terrain 17. National Public Radio (or comhination thereof) which would result in a change . 18. National Translator Association of 50 percent or more in the area within.thc stailon's : 19. Temple University predicted I mV m field strcngih contour. 'I * 1 20. Gerard A. Turro LATE-FILED COM.MENTS *.... I. du Treil. Lundin di Rackley, Inc. \oie I Processing of applications for new low power educational FM applications APPENDIX B ..... I1 Rule Changer Uote 2 For rules on professing FM translator and Title 47 CFR Parts I. 73. and 74 are amended as bou\ier uaiions. see Section 74 1233 of this chapter. follows: 4 Section 74 501 is amended by revising paragiaph (bl I. The authority citation for Pam 1. 73. and 74 contin- to read as follows ues to read as follows: D 74.501 Classes of aural broadcart auxiliary stations. Authority: 47 USC. 154 and 303 ..... 2. kction !.1307. paragraph (b). is amended h) re*iring lbl Aural broadcast intercity relay station. A fixed Note 1 to read as follows: su- lion for the transmission of aural program material be- tween radio broadcast stations. other than international 1 1.1307 Actions which may have a significant enti- hroadcast stations. between FM radio stations and FM ronmenul effect, for which Environmental Assessments translator stations operating within the coverage contour (E&) mIyR be prepared. of their commercial primary FM stations. between FM radio stations and their co-owncd FM booster rurionr. or for such other purposes as authorized in D 74.531. 7234 a3 ! L 5 FCC Rcd NO. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 I.... (I) Other area The area where the cowage contour of 5. kction 74.531 is amended by redcsignattng para- an FM translator station extends beyond the protected -I graphs (cl through (gl as Id1 through (hl and adding new contour of the primary station (i.e., predicted 0 5 mV'm paragraph (c) to read as foollous: contour for commercial Class B stations. predicted 0 7 mV rn contour for commercial Class Bl stations. and 5 74.531 Permissible service. predicted I mV m contour for all other classes of sta- tions) 8. Section 14.1102 is amended by re%ising paragraphs ...I. (bl. Ibllll and 1b1(?1. by removing paragraphs IC).(d) and (el An aural broadcast intercity relay station IS au- the Yore to this section: and by redesignating paragraph thorized to transmit aural program material beiueen an (el a, paragraph (cl to read as follows F.U radio station and an FM translator station operaiing within the coverage contour of its commercial primary 5 74.1202 FrquencJ assignment. F.W station. This use shall not interfere with or oiherutse preclude use of these broadcast auxiliary stations transmit- ling aural programming betueen the studio and tranvnit- I.... ter location of a broadcast station or between hroailcast It1 Suhject to compliance uiih all the requmments of stations as prosided In paragraphs tal and (hl ahobe. !hi% \uhpart. FW broadca\t translators ma) he authorized io operate on the follouing FM channels. regardless of uhether the) are auigned for local use in the FM Table ..*.* of .\liotment\ tp 73 202(h) of this chapier) b Section 74 532 is amended b} retising paragraph tal 11) Commercial FM translators Channels 221-300 as to read as followv\ idenlified in S 73 2111 of ihis chapier 121 on commercial EW tran,laiw\ Channels 2OI-3l)O as idenitfied in S 73 201 $ 74.532 Licensing requirements. of thir chapter C,e of reberved channelr ?01-220 is \uh- la) An aural hroadcast STL or intercity rela) wiitin jeci to ihe reririciion\ bpecified in $ 73 501 of this chap. ter will be licensed only to the licensee or licensees of hruad- cast stations. oiher than international broadcast station\. and for use hy a broadca,t station or an FM hoo\ter ..... station owned entirel} hy or under common control of the licensee or licensees. or for use by an F\f rran4arnr ILI \n F\I hroailca6t howter rtation uill he assigned the station operating uiihin the coverage contour of the cum- channel a\%ipnecl10 11, primary \tation mercial primary FM station heing rebroadcast Seuinn -1 1203 ir rexiud to read as follow 5 74.1203 Interference. ....I ....I la) An authorized FW trandaror or boosier station will 7 Section 74 1201 is amended b) adding paragraph5 (gl. nul he permiiied io coniinue to operate if if causes any lhl and (11 ID read follows actual interference tu ,- II l the iranrmiwon of an: authorized broadcast station: B 74.1201 Definitions. or (31 the recepiion of the input hipal of any TV ..*.. tranblaior TV hiuhier. FM translator or FM booster sta- tion. or Ig) Translator cowrage contour The coverage contour 13) ihe clircct reception hy the public of the off-the-air for an FM translator providing "fill in" service I\ con- upnah c>f an) wthorized hroadcast station including TV gruent with its parent station. for a fill in translator for a Channel b *iaiwn,. Class D (secondary) noncommercial commercial Class B station it is the predicted 0 5 mV m educaiimal FW station,. and pwiously authorized and field strength contour, for a fill in translator for a com- operating FH irandators and FM hoo>ter ,iations. Inter- mercial Class BI station it is the predicted 0.7 mV m field ference uill be conbidered to occur whenever reception of ,trength contour. and for a fill in translator for all oiher a regularlj wed signal is impaired by the signals radiated classes of commercial stations a, well as all h) the FW irandaior or booster station. regardless of the noncommercial educational stations it is the predicted I quality of wch reception. the strength of the signal 50 mV m field strength contour. A fill in FM translator'> UK~.or the channel on which the protected signal is coverage contour must be contained wiihin the primar} tranrmilled ita~ton'scoverage contour. The protected contour for an (h) If interference cannot he promptly eliminated by translator station IS its predicted 1 mVim contour FM the application of suitable techniques. operation of the (h) Fill in ares. The area where the coverage coniour of offending FM translator or booster station shall be Ius- an FM translator or booster station is within the protected pended and shall not he resumed until the interference contour of the asrociated primary station 0.c. prediLted has heen eliminated. Short test transmlsslons may be 0 5 mV'm iontour for commercial Class B stations. pre- made during the period of suspended operation Io check dicted 0.7 mV:m contour for commercial Class 81 sta- the efficacy of remedial measures. If a complainant tions. and predicted 1 mV.m contour for all other classes refuses to permit the FM translator or booster licensee 10 of stations). apply remedial techniques which demonstrably will elimi- nate the interference without impairment to the original 7235 2.f FCC 90-375 p Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Yo. 2s -: reception. the licensee of the FM translator nr hooster F,C""C"L\ Inierfercnrc P-o,er cr! statton is absolved Of further responsihilit! for that com- xpurJlmn conroui of C""I0YI "1 plaint. PWaszd Ifanstaiot commrrc~al IC) An FM booster station will be exempt from ihe 1I.l110. Cld,, 0 I ,1*,10" provisions of paragraphs (ai and (b) this sction to fhe of rninannci OO7mVmi37dBu) o'rnVmtS-d~ui extent that it may cause limited interference to its prl- :R) Lnl 0 IS mVm 1st dBul 0- m\ m 157 .mu) mary station's signal. provided it does not dirrupt the JR) LHz 700mVm(:-~Bu1 O'm\ rnis'j~~) existing service of its primary station or cauu such Inter- Dm LltZ ~OOmVmiO~JBul O-m\ n(S7d0u) ference within the boundaria OF the prtncipal cornmunit) of its primary station. 131 All Orher Classes of FM Stations (Protected Con. tour. I mV'm) (d) A fill-in FM translator operating on the first. second or third adjacent channel to its primary station s channel will be exempt from the provisions of paragraphs la) and Frcqucncr InlcricrcnEe PlOWClCJ lLprllloo co"l0"r C*"lOYl of (bl of this section to the encnt that it may cauv ltmited of pm-d IrJnL4lOr .I?('?,he, interference to its primary station's signal. probided it doer ,t.l110" .tall"" not disrupt the existing wwce of its primary \tation or cause such interference within the boundaries of the pnn- ro.hannCi 0 I mvim 110 JBul I m\ m 1,QJJou) 200 .HI 0 S mV m IY dBvl I m\ tr IN) d:Br) cipal communtty of its primary station. JW LHt lOmVmlMuBul InVmttOJBuj le) It shall be the responsibility of the licenree of an NX! &HZ 100 mV,m ttW JBUI I m\ m itO~8ui FM translator station or FM booster station to correct an! condition of tnterference which results from fhe radiatton lhl The follouing standards mukt he uud to cumpuie of radto frequency energy by its equipment on an) fre- the diriance, to the pertinent contour\ quency outside the aulgned channel. Lpon notice h) ihe III The dl*tances to the protecietl cuntuur\ are corn. Commission to the station licensee or operator that ,uch puled wing Figure I uf 5 '3.333 lFt5ti.5tl) cur\e\l of this tnterference is being caused. the operation of the chapter translator station or booster station shall be immediatel! 121 The dixiances to the interference cuniuur%are curn- suspended and shall not be resumed until the interference put4 wing Figure la uf I 73 333 IFt5O.ltll curbesl of this has been eliminated or it can be demonstrated that the chapier In the cwnt thai the di\iance to the contour is interference is not due io spurious emissioni h! the F'.t hclou Ib kilometers lapproximatel) IO miles,. and there- translator station or FM hooster station. probiJed. hou- fore nw cinered h! Figure la. curbe, In Figure I musi be ! ewr. that short test transmisstons may be made during the ured period of suspended operation to check the efficac) of 1.31 The effectiw radiaied power IERPI to he used is the remedial measures maxlmum ERP of the main radtaied luhe in the pertinent IO. A new kction 74 I204 IS added to read as fnllou\ azimuthal direction If the trananitting antenna i\ not horizuniall? polarized only. either the wrtical component 5 74.1204 Protection of FM broadcast stations and F51 or the huriznnral component of the ERP bhould he uud. .* translaw. uhichew is greater in the pertinent azimuthal darection 1 taMn application for an FM translator station uill nut fJ1 The antenna height io he uud is the height of the I be accepted for filing if the proposed operatton unuU radiation center ahove the average terrain along each i involve overlap of predicted field strength coniours uith pertinent radial. deiermined in accordance with J any other authorized station. including commercial and 73 3I3ld) nf this chapter noncommerctal educational FM broadcast stations. FH IC)An application for a change (other than a change in translators and Class D (wcondary) noncommerctal ellu- channel1 in the authorized facilities of an F\l trandator cattonal FM stations. as set forth below: station uill he accepted e\en though merlap of field (I)Commercial Class B FM Stations (Protected Con- wength cuntuurs uould occur with another *iatton in an tour. 0.5 mV:m) area uhere \uch uwrlap does not alread) exist. if: 11) The toial area of overlap uiih that ,tation would not Frequency lnurfrrcncr Prolccld be incread uprn1,on LOlllOYI of COniOYr of 121 The area of overlap uith any oiher station would propacd translalor commercial not increase. SUIlO" CI*, B U.lmn i 0)The area of overlap does not move sigrtificantly 0 os mVm 134 JBd 0 S mVim ill JBrl clovr to ihe station receiving the owrlap: and. (J) So area of overlap vould be created uith any station wth which the overlap doe not now exist. (d) The provisions of this section concerning prohibited (2) Commercial Clas E1 FM Stations (Protected o%erlapwill not apply where the area of such overlap lies Contour: 0.7 mVlml entirely over water. In addition. an application otherwise precluded by this Kctton will he accepted if if can be demonstrated that no actual inlerference will WCUr due 10 inter\ening terrain. lack of population or such other hc- torr as may be applicable. (el The provisions of this section will not apply to owrlap betueen a proposed fill-in FM translator sution and its primary station operating on a first. xcond or 5 FCC Rcd No. IS Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 c third adjacent channel. provided that such operation may .. 143 not result in interference 10 the primary station within 115 .. 141 principal community. . .I10 (0An application for an FM translator station will not . . I37 . . I35 be accepted for filing even though the proposed operation -w. . would not involve overlap of field streng~hcontours with . . I35 209... 135 any other sution. as set forth in paragraph (a) of ths ?IO. . . . 135 retion. if the predicted 1 mV/m field streng~hcontour of LII ...... 135 the FM translator station will overlap a populated area 212. . . . . 135 alrudy receiving a regularly used. off-the-air styal of any 211.. . . . 135 authorized co-channel. first. second or third adlacent 214 . . . 134 channel broadcast station. including CIw D (secondar) 215 . . . . 1% noncommercial educational stations and grant of the 216 ... . . I33 FM 217.. authorirstion will result in interference to the reception . 133 LIR . 132 of such signal. . LIY ., . I32 (g) An application for an FM translator station specify 220. If1 tng a channel that is separated by 53 or 54 channels from the channel of an FM radio broadcast station will not be (b) Collowrrd Stairom. An application for a accepted for filing if it fails to meet the required separa- noncommercial educational FM translator saiion operat- tion distance set out in f 73207 of this chapter. For ing on Channels 201-220 and located at 0 4 kilometer purpous of determining compliance with 8 73 207. lapproximately 0.25 milel or less from a TV Channel 6 translator riarions -ill be treated as Class A stations. pro- station uill he accepted if 11 includes a certification that rldetl. houe\er. that translator stations operating uith II) the applicani ha, cwirdinated its antenna with the affected uatts or 1es ERP %ill he treated as Clau D stations and TV 5iation will nor he subject 10 intermediate frequency separation IC) Conrorcr otrdq Except as provided in paragraph :equirements Ib) of this uction. an application for a noncommercial lh) An application for an FM translator station uill not educational FM translator station operating on Channels he accepted for filing if it specifier a location within 320 201-220 will not be accepted if ihe proposed operation kilometers lapproximately 199 miles) of either the Cana- uould in+olw overlap of its interference field strength dian or Mextcan border, and 11 does not compl) with S contour wlth an) TV Chancel 6 station's Grade B con- 74 1235(d) of this part tour. as set forth below (i)FM booster rtations shall be subject 10 the require- 11) The distances to the TV Channel 6 station Grade E ment that the signal of any first adjacent channel station 147 dEul field mength contour will be predicted accord- must exceed the slgnal of the booster station b) 6 dE at ing to the procedures specified in $ 73.684 of this chapter. all points uithtn the protected contour of any first adp- using the F150.50) curves in 5 73.699. Figure 9 of this cent channel stawn. except that in the case of FM sta- chapter tions on adjacent channels at spacings that do not meet (2) The distances to the applicable noncommercial edu- the minimum distance separations specified in 0 73 207 of cational FU trandator interference contour will be pre- .. this chapter. the signal of any first adjacent channel sta- dtcted according to the procedures specified in D tion must exceed the signal of the hster by 6 dB at an) 7.1 120.1lb) of thib parr. point uithin the predicted ~nterferencefree contour of the 0) The applicahle noncommercial educational FM adlacent channel station. translator inierference contours are as follows: (j) FM translator stations authorized prior to March I. 1991 with factltties that do not comply with the predicted Interference interference protection provisions of this yctton. ma) Coniour continue to operate. provided that operation is in confor- F\I FISO. IO) mance in 5 74 I203 of this part regarding actual interfer- Channel curves (dBu) encc Applications 10 modify such FM translator stations 201 . . ?4 must 'pecify facilities that comply with the provision5 of LO2 . 5b this uction. 103 . , . .5Y -w. . . . bZ I I A new Section 74.1205 is added 10 read as follows. 205 . ..M 206 . ... w 8 74.1205 Protection of Channel 6 TV broadcast stations. 2n7 , . ...73 (a) An application for a construction permit for new or 2un . ...73 73 modified facilities for a noncommercial educational Lou...... FM 2 IO ...73 translator station operating on Channels 201-220 must 211. ...73 include a showing that demonstrates compliance with 212.. ...74 paragraph (b). (c) or (d) of this 5ection if it is within the 213.. ...75 folloving distances of a TV broadcast station which is .~21J ... 77 authorized 10 operate on Channel 6 215.. , ...78 ! 210. . ...w 21: . , .81 F M Dl%Unte ... 218 85 Channel (kilometen) ... . . 210 . . ...a 201 ...... 148 220 ...90 2n2. . .. I46 7237 a6 I FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Yo. 25 (d) FM translator ,tations authorized prior to March 1. Vote For paragraphs 74 1231lhl and 7.1 123l(hi. auub 195'1 with facilities that do not comply -8th the predicted ia? intercity relay station frequencies may be used to interference protection provisions of this uction. ma! deliver signals to FM translator and booster stations on a continue to operate. provided that operation 15 in confor- secondary hasis only. Such use shall not interfere uith or mance with I 74.1203 of this pan regarding actual rnier- othcruiw preclude use of these frequencies for transmit- ference. Applications to modify such FW tran4ator ling aural programming between the studio and transmir- stations must specify facilities that compl! uith the prwi- rer location of a hroadcast station. or heiween broadcast sions of this section. stations. as pro\idnl in paragraphs 7J.531(al and (bl 12. kction 74.1231 is amended by revising paragraph Prior to filing an application for an auxiliary intercitj (b) and adding an accompanying Note. re\i\ing para- relay microwave frequency. the applicant shall notify the graphs (el. (el. (gl. and (h). and an accompan)ing Vote to local frequency coordination committee. or in the ab- lh). and remobing paragraph (I) to read as fullour sence of a lo4 frequency coordinatmn commiitee. any liccnues assigned the use of the proposed operating fre- 0 74.1231 Purpose and permissible ser\ice quenc! in the intended location or area of operation lcl The transmiwon, of each FSI translator or hoo\ter \tauon .hall he intended onl) for direct reception h) ihe ..... general public An FM translator or booster rhall not he (bl An FM translator ma) he used for the purphe uf operated lolelv for the purpose of rcla)ing signals to me retransmitting the signals of a primar! t \I radio bri,ad- or more fixed receibed points for retransmission. Jistrihu- cast station or another translator station uhich haw heen lion. or further rela!ing in order to estahlirh a point- receired directl? through space. con\erted. and .uii3hl! to-point FM radio relay sj\tem amplified Howwr. a commercial FM tran*lator prottd. ing fill-in unite may use any terre\trial I~LIIIIICI to re- ,\n I \I ht%hter ..... ceive the signal that is king rebroadcast 5tation or a noncommercial educational t \I iran*latur (el .\n FM translator *hall not deliheratel) retrammil station operating on a resened channel (Channel the .ignah of an! station other than the \tation it is ?01-2201 and owned and operated hy the licenue of the authorized tu retransmit Precautiunr -hall. be taken io primary noncommercial educational TH *tation it re- a\oid unintentional retransmiwon of ,uch other wgnals broadcasts may use alternati\e signal deliver) mean,. in- cluding. but not limited to. satellite and icrre*trial ..I.. microwave facilities Provided. houe\er. that an applicant for a noncommercial educational FM translalor \iatinn tgl 1 he aural maierial transmitted ab permitted in para- operating on a reserved channel (Channel 3ll-~~ll~and graph tfl of !hi\ uction shall k limited to emergenc) owned and operated by the lieenwe of the primar! warning, of imminent danger and to ueking or acknowl- noncommercial educational FM station 11 rehniadca\t\ edging financial upport deemed necesar) to the contin- complies with either paragraph (bMlI or lhlt2l 7238 27 5 FIX Rrd No. 25 Feden1 Communications Commission Record FCC 90-315 authorized within the protected contour of the class of uith the primary FM station. Interested and connected station being rebroadcast as predicted on the basis of the Parties extends 10 PUPOwners. corporate parents. share- maximum powers and heights set forth in that Kction for holders. officers. directors. employees. general and limited the applicable class of FM broadcast station concerned partners. family members and business associates Such an 13 Section 74.1232 is amended by revising paragraph FH translator station may. houever. receive technical as- (b) and adding a Note. by revising paragraph Id). remor- sistance from the primary station to the extent of install- ing the notes following paragraph (d). by redesignating ing or repairing equipment or making adjustments to paragraphs le) through fg) as paragraphs (0 through th). equipment to assure compliance uith the terms of the revising new paragraphs (0 through (hl and adding new translator %ation's construnion permit and license. FM paragraph (e) to read as follows: translator stations in operation prior to March 1. 1991 may continue to recetve contributions or support from 5 74.1232 Eligibility and licensing requirements. the commercial primary station for the operation and maintenance of the translator station unit! March I. 199~. Thereafler. any such FM translator staiion shall be ubjcct ..... to the prohibitions on support contained in this wciion fb) More than one FM translator may be licensed to the If1 An FM broadcast booster station uill be authorized same applicant. uhether or not such translator\ ur\e onl? tu the licenue or permittee of the F>t radio hroad- substantially the same area. upon an appropriate shouing cart station whose signals the bwster station will of technical need for such additional stations. FM retran\mit. 10 Yrw areas within the protected contour of translators are not counted as FM stations for the purpou the primar? satton. rubpct to Yote. Section 7J 12311h) of Section 73 3555. concerning multiple ownership (g) Vo numerical limit is placed upon the number of hole. As usd in this section need refers to the qualit! FV bower -.tations uhtch ma) be licend to a single licenue A uparate application is required fur each of the signal receired and not to the programming con- FM tent. format. or tranmission need, of an area htBthier \tation FM bmadcart boo\ter >tations are not counted a\ FM hroadcabt stations for the purpous of Section 73 5553 concerning multiple ounership *.... th) .\ny authorization for an FM translator station is- to described Id) Id) An auihoriution for an FM translator show ct~r- *ucd an applicant in paragraphs and (e) era@ contour extends beyond the protected wntour of of thi5 uction uill he iuued suhject to the condition that the commercial primary station will not be granted to ihe it ma! he terminated at any time. upon not less than sixty licensee or permittee of a commercial FM radio hrnadca,i IMII day uritten notice. uhcre the circumstances in the station Similarly. such authorization uill not he granted cornmunit\ or area urwd are KI altered as to haw pro- hihitcd grant of the apphcanon had such circumstances to any person or entity having any interest uhbtsoever. or any connection with a primary FM station. Interested and exirted at the time of its filing connected parties extends to group ouners. corporate par- I4 Veu Section 74 1233 15 added io read as follouv ents. shareholders. officers. directors. employm. general and limited partners. family members and business asub 74.1233 Processing translator and station 8 FSI booster ! ciares For the purposes of this paragraph. the protected applications. contour of the primary station shall be defined as follou* fa) Applicatitms for F>l translator and booster stations the predicted 0.5 mV m contour for commercial Class B are dibided intu iuo groups stations. the predicted 0.7 mV m contour for commercial 1 I) In the fir\( group are application, fur new stations Class BI stations and the predicted I mV.m field strength or for malor change, in the facilities of authorized sta- Lontour for all other FM radio broadcast stations. The tions. In the cau of FM translator stations. a major Contours shall be as predicted in accordance with Section change 's an! change in frequency foutput channel). or 73 313fa) through Id) of this chapter. In the case of an change fonl) the zain should be included In determining FM radio broadcast station authorized with facilities in amount of change) or increase (but not decrease) in area excesr of those specified by Section 73.21 I of this chapter. io be *er\ed greater than ten perceni of the previously a co-owned commercial FM translator station uill onl) he authorized I mV m contour. All other changes will be authorized within the protected contour of the class of considered minor All major changes are suhject to the station being rebroadcast. as predicted on the basis of the pro\irionr of Sections 73.3580 and 1.1104 of the rules maximum powers and heights set forth in that section for pertaining to major changes the applicable class of broadcast station concerned FM I?)In the wond group are app!ications for IiCeIIreS An translator station in operation prior to March I. FM and all other changes in the facilities of the authorized 1991. which is ouned by a Commercial FM (primar!) uation station and whose coverage contour extends be)ond the protected contour of the primary station. may continue io (h) Applicaticns for FM translator and booster stations be owned by such primary Station until March I. IWJ wdl be processed as nearly as possible in the order in Thereafter. any such FM translator station must be owned uhich the! are filed. Such applications will be placed in by independent parties the processing line in numerical sequence. and will be draun by the staff for study. the lowest file number first. (el An FM translator station whose coverage contour In order that those applications which arc entitled Io be goes beyond the protected contour of the commercial grouped for processing may be fixed prior to the lime primary Station shall nor receive any support, before or prochwng of the earliest filed spplicalion is begun. the after construction. either directly or indirectly. from the FCC uill periodically release a Public Notice listing ap commercial primary FM radio broadcast station Such plications uhich have been accepted for filing and an- support also may not be received from any person or nouncing a date (not less than 30 days after publication) entity having any interest whatsoever. or any connection i, Fcc m375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd So. 2s on which the listed applications uill be considered avail- and with the bearing of the first radial heing true north , able and ready for processing and b? uhich all mutually Each radial HAAT value shall be rounded to the nearest exclusive applications andlor petitions to deny the listed meter For each of the 12 radial directions. the MERP IS applications must be filed. the value Corresponding to the calculated HAAT in the (c) In the case of an application for an instrument of fOllO~ingtable that is appropriate for the location of the authorization. other than a license pursuant to a construc- translator For an application spectfyng a nondirectional tion permit. grant will be based on the application. the transmitttng antenna. the specified ERP must not exceed pleadings filed. and such other matters that may be of- the smallest of the I?.MERP'r. For an application specify- ficially noticed. Before I grant can be made it must be ing a directional transmitting antenna. the ERP in each determined that: azimuthal direction must not exceed the MERP for the closest of the I? radial directions (1) There IS not pending a mutually cxclust~eap- (11 For FM translators located east of ihe Mississippi plication filed in accordance with paragraph (b) of Rirer or In Zone I-A as descnhed In $ 73 2OSlb) 01 this this section. chapter. Radial HAAT \laxmum CRP (21 The applicant is legally. technlcally. financtally tmcicrsi (SIERF an uaitsl and otherwise qualified: 131 The applicant is not in violation of an) probi- Ihihan equal io 32 sions of law. the FCC rules. or cstablirhed policies or 231 33 I" IU of the FCC and 1-11 UI IO J: 120 (41 A grant of the application would otheruise vrve JU IO 5- Nl the public interest. convenience and necesslt) ?U IO M 55 m IO x2 ?X 43 to UO ,- (dl Applications for FM trenslator station) proposing to u- 1" I 1: IU provide fill-in service (within the primar) statmn's pro- IIh Iu 1411 1.7 tected contour) of the commonly owned primary station greater than uill be given priority over all other application, or equal III lit Ill (e) Where applications for FM translator riatioms are mutually exclusive and do not involve a propool tu pru- (2) Tor FV translaiors located In all other areas: vide fill-in service of a commonly owned primar) station. the FCC may stipulate different frequencies as nece\rar! for the applicants. (fI Where there are no available frequencie\ to wh- slitute for a mutually e~clusiveapplication. the FCC udl base 11s decision on the following prioritier (I1 first full- time aural service; (?) second full-time aural service. and (3) other public interest matters including. but not limit. It5 ed to the number of aural services received in the pro- UZ posed service area. the need for or lack of puhllc radio 75 service. and oiher matters such as the relative we of the hZ proposed communities and their growth rate. 50 41 Ig) Where the procedures in paragraphs (dl. (el and (0 34 of this section fail to resolve the mutual exclu,i%tt). the ?X applications will be processed on a first-come-first-xr\eJ 23 basis. 14 I5 5 I3 IS. kction 74.1235 is revised in its entirety to read as II follow: in 8 74.1235 Power limitations and antenna systems. (a) An application for an FM translator station filed h) (cl The effectiw radiated power of FM bopstcr stations the licensee or permittee of the primary station to pro\ide shall be limited such that the predicted servite contour of fill-in service within the prtmary stacon's coberage area wch \tations computed in accordance with 8 73.313. will not be accepted for filing if it specifies an effecti\e paragraphs (a) - (d) of this chapter. may not extend radiated power (ERP) which exceeds 250 watts. hqond the area covered by the predicted service contour (b) An application for an FM transhior statton. other of the primary station that they rebroadcast and that ruth than one for fill-in service which is covered in paragraph FM booster effective radiated power may not exceed 20 (a) of this section. will not be accepted for filing if it percent of the maximum allowable effective radiated pow- specifics an effective radiated power (ERPI which exceeds er for the primary station's class the maximum ERP (MERP) value determined in accor- (dl Applications for FM translator rtations IWIC~with- dance with this paragraph. The antenna helght abow in 320 km of the Canadian border will not be accepted if average terrain (HAAT) shall be determined in accor- they specify more than 50 watts effective radiated power &nce with 8 73.313(d) of this chapter for each of I? in any direction or have a 34 dBu interfcrcnce contour. ,- distinct radials, with each radial spaced 30 degrees apart calculated in accordance with Section 74.1204 of !his prt, 7240 b I Red NO. 25 Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-37s [hat exceeds 32 km. FM translator stations located uithin ...*e 320 kilometers Of the Mexican border must be separated 17. Section 74.1137 amended by revising paragraph wm Mexican allotments and aistgnments in accordance (d) to read as follows: -I *ah 8 73.207(b)(3) of this chapter and are limited to a lransmltter power output of 10 watts or less. For purpovs 5 74.1237 Antenna location. ,,f ,,f compliance with that section. FM translators uill be @nsidered as Class D FM stations. (e) In no event shall a station authortzed under this ..... subpart be operated with a transmitter power ouiput (d) The transmitting antenna of a commonly owned FM (TPO) In excess Of the transmitter type-accepted rating A translator or booster station shall be located within the ,Miion authorized under this subpart for a TPO that IS protected contour of its FM station. subject IO than its transmiiter type-accepted raiing shall detcr- Note. Sec- tion 74 1231fh) its TPO in accordance with J 73.267 of this chapter md its TPO shall not be more than IO5 percent of the 18. Seciion 74 I250 is revised to read as follows authorized TPO (0 Composite antennas and antenna arrays may be uyd D 74.1250 Transmitters and associated quipment. the iota1 ERP does nor exceed the maxtmum deter- tal FM translator and booster transmitting apparatus. mined in accordance with paragraph la). (b) or (c) of this and exciters employed 10 provtde a locall) generated and yction modulated input signal to translator and booster equip- (g) Either horiwntal. vertical. circular or ellipttcal po- ment. used by stations authorized under the provtsions of hritaiion may be uud provtdcd that the supplemental this subpart must be type accepted or notified upon the ,ertically polarized ERP required for circular or ellipttcal request of any manufacturer of transmitters in accordance polarization does not exceed the ERP otheruise autho- uith this section and Subpart I of Part ?. of this chapter If rized Either clockwise or cuunterclockwise rotation ma! accepiable. the apparatus will be included an the FCC's used Separate transmitting antennas are perrntttcd tf "Radio Equipment List. Equipment Acceptable for Lt both horizontal and bertical polarization IS tu be prokided. ccnmg " In addition. FM translator and booster stations ma! use FM broadcast transmttling apparatus notified or (h) All applications mu51 comply uith 5 73 316. para- 1)pe accepted under the probisions of Pati 73 of thls graphs (d)-lh) of this chapter. chapter (i)An application that specifies of a directional use lbl Transmiittng antennas. antennas used to receiw sig- antenna must comply uith $ 73.316. paragraphs nals to be rebroadcast. and transmission lines are not (c)(l)-IcN3) of this chapter Prior to issuance a Incense. of subject to the requirement for type acceptance the applicant mu% 1) certify that the antenna is mounted In accordance with the specific instructions provided h) (E) The following requirements must be met before the antenna manufacturer. and 2) certify that the antenna translator. booster or exciter equipment will be notified or muunied in the proper Orientation In instances uhere 1)pe accepied in accordance uith this section a directional antenna is proposed for the purpose of pro- I I) Radio frequency harmonics and spurious emissions ding protection to another facility. a condition may be must conform with the >pectficattonr of 5 74 1236 of this included in the construction permit requiring that before part. program tests are auihorized. a permittee: 1) must submit I?) The local oscillator or oscillators. including those in the results of a compleie proofd-performance to establish an exciter emplo!cd io provide a locally generated and the horizontal plane radiation patterns for both the hori- modulated input signal to a translator or booster. when zontally and wrrically polarized radiation components. subjected to tartations in ambient temperature between and, 2) must ceriif) that the relalive field strength of minus 30 degrees and plus 50 degrees centigrade. and in neither the measured horizontally nor vertically polartred primary supply wltage between 85 percent and 115 radiation component shall exceed at any azimuth the percent of the raied balue. shall be sufficiently stable to value indicated on the composite radiation pattern au- maintain the output center frequency within plus or mi- thorized by the construction permit. nus 0 005 percent of the operating frequency and to en- (j) FM tranrlator stations authorized prior to March 1. able conformance uith the specrficallons of 5 74.1261 of 1991. with facilities that do not comply with the ERP this part limitation of paragraph (a) or lb) of this section. as appro- (3) The apparatus shall contain automatic circuits io priate. may continue to operate. provided that operation is maintain the power output in Conformance with 4 in conformance in 5 74 1203 of this pan regarding inter- 74 l13S(e) of this part If provision is included for adjyst- ference. Applications to modify such FM translator sia. ing the power output. then the normal operatin8 tions must specify facilities that comply with paragraph constants shall be specified for operation at both the rated (a) or (b) of this section. as approprtate. power output and the minimum power output at which 16. Section 74 1236 is amended by revising paragraph the apparatus is designed to operate The apparatus shall (a) to read as follows be equtpped with suitable meters or meier jacks so that the operating constants can be measured while the ap paratus is in operation. 5 74.1236 Emission and bandwidth. (4) Apparatus rated for transmitter power Output (a) The license of a station authorized under this of more than I watt shall be equipped with automatic cir- subpart allows the transmission of etther F3 or other types cuits to place it in a nonradiattng condition when no Of frequency modulation Isee 2 201) upon a showing of D input signal is being received in conformance with need. as long the emission complies with the following 4 as 74 12631b) and to transmit the call sign in conformance with 1 74 1?83(c)(?). ~~ 7241 pcc 90.375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Red No. 25 (5) For exciters. automatic means shall be pro%idedfor tion. Within 48 hours of the station's return to operation. limiting the level of the audio frequency voltage applied the licensee must notify the Commission of such fact All to the modulator to ensure that a frequency swing in notification must be in writing. exus of 75 kHz will not occur under any condition of c (d) The licensee of an FM translator or booster station the modulation. must notify the Commission of its intent to permanently 19. Section 74 lZSi is amended by revising the section discontinue operations at least two days before operation heading, revising paragraphs (b). (b)(7). (b)(8). removing IS discontinued. Immediately after discontinuance of op- panpph (bl('4). and adding paragraph (c) to read as eration. the licensee shall forward the station license and follows: other instruments of authoriration to the FCC. Washing- ton. D C. for cancellation, D 74.1251 Tcehnicpl and equipment modifications. (e) Failure of an FM translator or booster station to operate for a period of 30 or more consecutive days. except for caws beyond the control of the Itcenxe or as ..... authorized pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section. shall (b) Formal application on FCC Form 354 is required of be deemed evidence of permanent discontinuance of op all permittees and licensees for any of the following eralion and the license of the station may be canceled at changes: the discretion of the Commission ?? Section 74.126'4 is revised to read as follows: e.. I. D 74.1269 Copies of rules. 17) Any change of authorlred effective radiated pouer (8)Any change in area being served. The licensee or permittee of a station authorized under (c) Changer in the primary FM station being thi, subpart shall have a current copy of Volumes I (Parts retransmitted must be submitted to the FCC in writing 0. I. 2 and 17) and 111 (Parts 73 & 74) of the Commir- sion's Rules and shall make the same available for use by 20. kction 74.1261 is revised to read as follous the operator in charge. Each such licensee or permittee shall be familiar with those rules relating to stations au- 5 74.1261 Frquency tolerane. thorized under this subpart. Copies of the Commission's (a) The licensee of an FM translator r)r bonster siation Rules may be obtained from the Superintendent of Docu- with an authorized transmitter power output of IO *ails ments. Government Printing Office. Washingion. D C. or less shall maintain the center frequency at the output 20402 of the translator within 0.01 percent of its assigned fre- 23. Section 74 1283 is revised io read as follows: quency .- (b) The licensee of an FM translator or bw\ter \tation 5 74.1283 Station identification. with an authorized transmitter power output greater than watts shall maintain the center frequency at the output la) The call sign of an FM broadcast translator station IO wdl consist of the initial letter or W followsd by the of the translator or booster station in compliance with the K channel number assigned to the translator and two letter5. requirement of Section 73.1545(b)(l). The use of the initial letter will generally conform to the ?I.Section 74.1263 is revised lo read as followur. patiern used in the broadcast ser-ice. The two letter-- hinations following the channel number will be assigned 5 74.1263 nme of operation. in order and requests for the assignment of particular (a) The licensee of an FM translator or booster station combinations of letters will not be considered. is not required to adhere to any regular schedule of Ih) The call sign of an FM booster station will consiu operation. However. the licensee of an FM translalor or of the call sign of the primary station followed by the booster sution is expected to provide a dependable serwce letters "EM" and the number of the booster station being to the enent that such is within its control and io aboid authorized. e 8.. WFCCFM-I. unwarranted interruptions to the service provided IC) A translator station authorized under this Subpart (b) An FM translator or booster station rebroadcasting shall be idenrified by one Of the fOllOwing methods. the siyul of a primary station shall not be permitted io I I) By arranging for the primary station whose sution radiate during extended periods when signals of the pri- IS being rebroadcast to identify the translator statiqn by mary station are not being retransmitted. call sign and location Three such identiftcatio?s shall be (c) The licensee of an FM translator or booster siaiion made during each day: once between 7 a.m. and '4 a.m.. must notify the Commission of its intent to discontinue once betueen 1?:55 p.m. and 1:05 p.m. and Once between operations for 30 or more comutive days. Notification 4 p m and 6 p.m. Stations which do not begin their must be made within 10 days of the time the station first broadcast before 9 a.m. shall make their firs identifiu- discontinues operation and Commission approval must be tion at the beginning of their broadcast days. The licensee obuincd for such discontinued operation to Continue be- of an FM translator whose station identification is made yond 30 days. The notification shall specify the causes of by the primary station must arrange for the primary the discontinued operation and a projected date for the station licensee 10 keep ip its file. and available to FCC station's return to operation. substantiated by $upporting personnel. the translator's call letters and loution. givinl documenution. If the projected date for the station's re- the name. address and telephone number of the I~cenreC turn to operation cannot be met. another notificaiion and or his service representative to be contacted in the Mnt further request for discontinued operations must be sub- of malfunction of the translator. It shall be the respon- mitted in conformance with the requirements of this see- sibility of the translator licensee to furnish Current in- - formation to the primary station licensee for this purpou. 7242 3( :WC Rtd %a. 1; Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 (2) By transmillin& the call sign in International Morse - J7 CFR I :J.l23l(al. Code at leut once each hour. Transmitters uf FM broad- - e HI Rad. Reg. Id at IWI cast translator stattons of more than I watt transmttter output power must be equipped with an automatic ke!ing The FM translator ruler are set forth at J7 CFR 5p de>ice that will transmtl the call sign at least Once each -J I201.'J.I2RI The Cornmisston has also tsrucd a Gutdr IO Fif hour. unless there is in effect a firm agreement utth the ~mns1alO~Ruler and Pokier to emphastre the need for tranrlator's primary station as provided in 4 74 1?83(cI(l). translator licenxes and applicants to conform IO the existing FSf Iranslaior rules. Sre Publrr \oocc. 55 Rad. Reg, 26 (P&F) Transmission of the call sign can be accomplished b) 137 lIU(14l. See Note J7. tnfm. (i) Frequency shifting key: the carrier shift shall not be knre of Inqwry. 3 FCC Rcd 366.1 l I~NIII less than 5 kHr nor greater than 25 kHr. * These ptrrrons. and responsive comments io them. were discussed in detail In the \01. See 3 FCC Rcd ai 3~5.3~ lii) Amplitude modulation of the FM carrter of at lo 5 FCC Rcd 2lub I IWI). last 30% modulatton The audio frequency tone UK shall not be wtthin 200 hertz of the Emergency It Appndu A lists pantes commenimg in ihtt procecdtng du Broadcast System Attention stgnal alerting frequen- Trcil. Lund:n. d: RacLle). Inc. filed late comment, vhch uc ctes. haw xcepted in the interest oi compAn$ a, complete a recurd as prtblc (d) FM broadcast booster stations shall be identified h! I: The cr85ling rule reprdmg the xcondar? >latus 'if FM their primary stat~ons.by the broadcasting of the primar) translators requires that their opcrairun nut CJYX interference station's call signs and locatton. in accordance utth the 10 an) other broadcast ?lation Sw J7 CFR P -4.1202 protisions of Section 73 1201 of this chapter I' The amended rules are xi forth m Appcndm U (el The Commtssion may. tn its discretion. specif! other 'I 4- CFR 6 -4 l?32(dl methods of identiticatton " 31 Rad Reg ?d at 1541. para h '* J- CFR 6 -4 I232ld)l I) 211 Rad Rrg ?d at 1541. para h FOOTSOTES '- I. Srr Wrpuri ann IJnirr and Itcmorandillcm Opinion and Ihdu I Currently. there are approximately I.WP FM iranslaiort tn \It1 D~ki\u *.I 12. upra. The rules rcqvlre that. durmg ' on-the.azr. Conslruciion prmirs have been granted for anofher a ttme-)car iran\ltlun prmd. appllcani, fur wch >CE.FM -90 .translaton Iranhinr, prupntng to YU aIicrnait%c IIgnal dchrer) mu51 dcmm%iratc rhal an JIternallrC frequcnc? pru\ldmg comparable The current rules also recognize Fhl booster st;ito,~s curerage I\ awlable Applicants need noi mak a *huwny if the uhich receive. amplify and retransmit ngnals on the prupcd irandainr 8% eaiher whm MI Lllumcterr (?I1 mdesl of same frequencies as the FM radto broadcsrt miion the prcdiaed 1 m\ m coniour of the prlmar) \talian or i5 Buoster stattons are auihorized only to the licensee uf the praier than IN) hilameter\ IIIXI mllc%l from any VCE.F\I primar) statbon they rebroadcast and afford a mean, vatiun uhereb) the licensee of a primary statton may probide '* The Cmnmnwon.\ rules ttaie that a irantlator license may sertice to areas at low signal btrenpth uithin 11% prtmary bc granted to "an? qualhfied mdi\sdual urgnized group of service contour. Srr 47 CFR 0 7J 1231(h). The Cummlr. tndt\idual> ar laral cib11 government bod)" In addtiion to the won revised its Fhl booster rules to authorize hieher I~cenw~eof an F\I radio hrnadcari (tatiun See J7 CFR S puer FM boaterr and to prmit them to rebroadcast -4 1?32ta1 Thlr catcgur! uf Itcenue *ill hr referred io as an 5lgnals receiwd by any distribution technology the 11- "indcpndeni" par!) cenxe deems suitable. See Rcpon and Order 5151 tn '"?I1 Rad Keg 2d tP&Fl at I%l. para h Docket No. fi.13. 2 FCC Rcd 4625 (1987). Other than The cnmmenter\ wppming the Cammlrsun s ounerrhip clarifications in the booster rules necnsitated by thhr propmal Include \,\O du Treil. hnellcr BmadcJwng of Char- Repor1 and Order. ue make no change5 to the rule% luite Count, Inc Ihnelleri. RSOR.F\I Southern Orewn State eowrning the FIl bierser\ace. See IS 1.130:. -33573. ~. College thclKI \orthland Brnadcastin&!. Inc lWonhl;nd). Sev. -4 1202. 7J 1203. 74.1-W. 74 1231. 74,1232. 74 1221. rn Ranger Kadia (a (Seven Ranges). Towr Communications 74.1235. 741237. 74.I250. 7J 1261. 7J.1263 and 74 12x3 (Tnuer) Wugla\ Vrrnicr (Vernierl. Nestern Tnnslrron. Inc. ' . An F51 radto broadcast ztatbon vhac signal is rebroadcast b) IUTI) Arizona Brvadcasilnp Assactalion (ABAI. London Bridge an FM translator is referred to as the "priman station." See 4s Brcadcanmp. InC ILondon Uildpel. CBS Inc (CBSI. Mopdy CFR 5 74 1201ld). Bible Inwiuie 01 Chicago (hlond)l. Brill Media Compny. 1.P. Recently. the rules were modified to prmit l~cenxesof tUrtlll. and Jomt Comments of Capital Broadcasting Corpora- noncommercial educational FM stations to use any distribuwn toon ti a1 Prairie Broadcaning Compny (Prairie Broadcasting) icchnology they deem suitable to transm~tprogrimmtng to thew states that the prohibition regardins primary sation ownenhip own translaton oprattng on reurved chmnels subject to ccr. of "other area" FM translators should extend to family members lam conditions. See Report and Older In MM Docket \o of the primar? siallon Ircenxe. ( 198L)). in m .. wb- 112. 3 FCC Rcd 2 I% recon. granted pari. denied .. Terry Cowan (Couan) and Alpine Broadcvting Corpora- pan in 50 .Memorandum Oplnion and Order MM Docket tnon IAlpinel rupport Ihl5 aspci of the %AB propowl ML6-l12.FCC (19-216. J FCC Rcd 6.45'4 (Iw19l. See also Furrhrr " \AB also 5UggeSlS that the FCC consider. following adop \oiue of Proposed Rvlr .Ua.hn(l in MM Gket ho Ub-I I?.3 tion new translator rules. permitting independently owned FCC Rcd 2202 l19d81. of iranslaiors an fill-in and white ireas only. See Vonce of Promxed Rule .Wokmi rn Docket No 17159. 14 Throuyhout ihis Report and Order. we will refer 10 thcx tu0 clas\tfications when one rule 1s not appropriate lor both caiegories Uhen no classification 15 specified. the rule will be I 7243 32- P& 94-315 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd No. 25 lor all translaton. Funher. we want to emphasize that under '' we alsa believe th~Commmion has ample authorq ""der , the revised rules. where the predicted coberage contour of a Sections Yi) and 303 to adopt rules limiting financial a,sl,tanc~ proposed commercial FM translator would xr\c an area that to translaton. - mnu the fill-in definition in pan and the other area definitton '* 47 CFR S 74.l23lig). in pan. the primary station would be prohibited from translator ownership. '' Id. The rules will also be amended to prohiblt translator oun- Sre Gwdc IO F.W Tranrlaror Rules and Policies 55 Rad Reg enhrp by any perron or eniity having any mierest or connec- 2d (P&F) at 1248. This policy agatnst profit-making from tion with the primary FM sution. lntcresied and connected translator opration mas not codified In the rules. He stated ihat parties errend to group ownen. corporate parents. shareholden. any new rules we may adopt in this proccedmg will. of course. oficen. directon. emploFes. general and limired prtnen. fam- supersede any guidelines set forth ~n the Gwdr 10 FM Tra~lmor Rules and Polmer. supra, See n. 47, rnjh ily members and businns asyxmtes. Due to the potenttal for abuse. we intend for this prwisron to be broader than the " See FCC Public NOIICC. FCC N6-161 April II. 1q1I)Xh Commission's general attribution rules. " CES. London Bridge. AEA. du TrcA F\l Technolog,. '' Consistent with the translator policies that habe been In hneller. and Sunbelt Telc\ision. Inc ~Sunbcli) effect for the past two decades. we decline to adopt TPRL " Sewn Ranger. Yorthlmd. Vernier. and ABr\ w~pestthat a proposal to impme additional restrictions on sndependent prty standardized format for acknonledgementr and rool~~tatmns ornership of translators We believe tbt the need to aiiract should be otablirhcd to prebeni F\I iranslaiur llccnwes from fundins from listeners rill adequately ensure rcspomlvenns to airing di,puiud commerctalr. consumers' preferences. 1, Dan Hendrir. referenced ahre in cornmenis b! .- A commercial primary station applying for an FM hECR hGRS. states ihat FM tranrlaiars do not dnert adwriir- iranslator whou coverage area i5 prrt%rllyli1l-m but alw ex. tn& re\enun from full service sIaI)onb kcau~of their compara- tends into a "uhrte area" should follow the *nh!ie area" vai\er ti\eI> ma11 liwnershtp. prncedure b! demonstrat~nga lack of serwcc m the area he)ond " UTI alro arks thai indcpendenil?.onned fill-in iranhtun ihe primary station s coverage contour. should haw acccs io fundratsing tu wpplcmeni an) primar) :' 47 CFR S I4 1232(d)(2). We note that rherc is no prohtbo. w1on wpprrl Ne note that our rule, prohibit commcrwl tion apmsi financial support by FM siation kcnun to in- primar) ~IICwppirt of "other area" iranrlatur,. limit onmr dependent parim lor the Construction. operailon or ~liciranonsIr 3)-seconds per hour. and restrict the kinds of maintenance of FM translators either within the prmary sta- announcements that can be made by \CE-FSI iranslators. but tion's I mV/m predicted contour or in areas where there IS no impor nu uther rc~tretionron ihc fundraming ahiliiy of FII predicted FM VNICC. tranrhtor licenvn " 47 CFR 6 7J.l232(d). Note 2. In Ne alw reject UTI and h Tour's prop~lthai translators bc permitted to uu multiplex subcirrien as a source of rev. _- y, Ue did not propox to tmpow a financial ,uppurl rerlric. enue. addition III charxiable contribuuon, Translators are tlon on SCE.FM translaion. In intended to rebroadcast signals into areas experiencing ruepiion " CES. AEA. TEA. New Jersey Public Eroadcastinp Author- problems rather than io originate programming and 8nformai8on try INJPEA). Bill Croghan (Croghan). du Treil. F.M Technology urvices He belicvr thai the subcarrier option nould improp- Associat~. Inc. (FM Tuhnolosy). London Bridge. Robert A erl! establi,h FIf translaion as an origination wrvice while alw Jones. P E. (Jones). KRXV. Inc. (KRVX). and Vernier In addi. undermining incentires for broadcast )iations lo dewlop vhere tion. Plewnt Eroadcasters (Plednt) sum that linancul sup financtally \table. port should be prohibited noi only by an FM radbo station but The guidelines ut forth in !he Gurdc Io FIf Tranrlaror also by any penon or entity having any interest whatsoever. or Rulrs and Polmcs supra. are superseded by the new rules an) connection with an FM station. adopted here Hoverer. those canstmy translators eligible for Klimek Communications Corp. (Klimek) and Communica- '' "grandfathering" as discussed mnfra. will remain subject 10 the tions Inwstmcnt Corporation (CIC) state that primary FM sta- Polq Statement ,provision >iai!ng that "translators ma) not tions should be permitted to provide financial support to Fhl make fundraising announcements ior the purpose of making a translaton operating beyond their protecied contours profit" The non-profit aspect uf the Policy Siaamenl will be )'Tower. MEC Grand Broadcasting, Inc. (MEC Grand). and retamed for three years following the effective date of the new KBEU-FM agree with NTA on this point. KEEU sutn that the ruln. coinciding with the "grandfathering" section's similar pa- Commission should prmit local origination and ad\eriisements rameter. He note that the new rules no longer require licensees on FM translators as an altenutive to primary station support. of FM translators to operate non.profit facilities. )r Informal comment submitted inlo the record of this pro- " Scr J7 CFR PO 74.12UUa). i4.l23l(al and 7&EIb(a). ceeding by R. Kent Parsons on behalf of Wayne. Pwic. and 47 CFR 5 74.123I(g). Garfield counties in Utah. 47 CFR I 7J 1281(b). 47 U.S.C. P 32Xa). 'I The rules will be amended to prohibil financial iuppon to si Erdl Media. Capiul Emrdcstmg CI a1.. Cowan. du Treil. an "other area" translator by any penon or entity haviny any Bruce F. Elring, Ph.D. (Elving). New Jersey Eroadurten ASS- interest or connection with the primary station. Srr Note 25. ciation (NJBA). NJPBA. Knellcr. Mckenrie. Sewn hprVer- supra. nier. and Corinthians Xlll Broadcasting Compny. Inn% Js Primary stations will still be permitted. however to proride (Corinthians XIII). as well as others. catepricall) OppX au- "technical Usistmce*' io FM innslaton in other areas. to the thorizing program origination authority for FM frUIsk100. extent 01 installing. repairing, or nuking adjustments io equip- Plrront stain that the rules should expressly lorbid the arip ment to assure compliance wnh the terms of the iranslator ping out or intmductlon of subcarriers or other mulliplea sip station's construction permit or license. In !his regard. iethnical nab by the iranslator. - assistance will be excepted from the mdirect support prourip- taon m our rule. 1244 t Federal Communications Commission Record FCC 90-375 92 We undcrxore the statutory requrremcnt that an "I Supporling commenten include AFCCE. sebenR~~~~, owned iranrlaior. prowding fill-an xn ICC or xr- TEA. Jones. HTI. and hkKenzle. AFCCE qudlficr (I, rupprrl v,ce to other areas. must obtalo the permisston of the prmar) as It '5 0p-d 10 multlPk FM translators xrvlng the same area IUtion to rebroadcast its programming. See 41 USc s .wI~) on different frcqucnctes carrying one s1at10n 5 r,gnal '3 On July 2s. 1989. Turro filed a requerr for uatwr of "" ABES and Capiial CitievABC 5upport this propoy~ ycrion 14.1231 the COmmis$ion's to prmtt hls FSI e- of Ruler TEA offers a similar proporal iranslator station to originate local programmrng 8) Publtc ** pdotrce. DA 89-933. relelvd Augur1 3. 1089. [he Commlssaon CommCntS submltied Into the record of tht, procecdtng by auesied comment on this waiver ptitton. the Bureau of Economics of the Lniicd Slates Federal Trade Commisrion. August 15. 1088. 9 ke F.U Broadcast Rules IFirsr Repon ad Order) JII FCC *O Srr BC Docket Vo Ro-130. W FCC Zd xx (IWZ) The &. 664. 665 (1%2): AM Sunon Assrgmenr SiadarN ( \PR WI, Commrrwn cmplo?, four crucna to compare prup~irIO Rad Reg. (P dr F) 1615. 1617-l6lR 11963). Cf Pillar of Fwc. 2 amend Ihc FV Table of Allotmenis arc I) FCC Rcd 519 11987): Plamwew Radzo. 24 FCC W5. 42 I I IY?XI. The% cntcrla fin, full.ltmc aural ur*Icc. 2) second full.ttmc 3uml un~c.3) fir,, cltmg \Omh Plains Broadcamng. 7 Rad Reg K F) Y? llh (P IuaI ur\m and Jl tither public micre,t maiicn Conudcrarcun (1951). of "other public interest mallen" tncludcr rhc numkr of aural See 47 CFR 5s 74 I23llf) and (g) KrbIcC) reccl\cd In ihe proposed xrvtcc area. thc number uf 4- CFR 5 7J I?.ll(b) local ur\nceI the need fur ur lack of puhlic radio *cr\tce and " See .Wemorandrrm Opinion and Order In >l\l Dochct \O other matiers >uch a> the rclatne size of the propwcd cummu. ~ll?.supra. A proposal to expand the auihortiy io tndepn. niim and theu growth rate He prophcd IU cmplo) thcu dentli owned XE-FM translators 15 contained in the Fwhrv criicria to cIaIuatc mutuall} excIusi\e appl!caitonr for r\l \OIICI of Proposed Rule Makmg In hlM Docket \o r+Ii? ? iranrlatur %taiwns uiih ihc erccpiton of ihr "lt~alV~ICC'' FCC Rcd 2202 ( 10W) crncrtun Clncc F\I iranhior\ ha\e no program urlg8na:non authuritr .tatcd that uc uould not cunvdrr uhrthcr an '. AsS(yta1ion of Federal Commun~auonsCun,ulttng En. uc applacant uall he prm!d#ng a lwal ur%~ccThu. uc propuud ginerrs (AFCCEl. Brill. Couan. CBS. Caplial Broadca,thng et a1 . Electromc Communication Serbzcc (ECS). Fhl Technolog). thai the ihmd cr!icrlun uould nut bc conwlcrcd. and "the numher of lo:aI uould nor be one hnellcr. Vorthlmd. Sewn Ranges. TEA. and Cortnthlan. Slll %r%rCC\" con-tderrd 3s of the '*.iiher puhllc oniererl martcrs" are among the commenterr ,upporting the Commi,ston. pro. pal. KBBL' rupprts the Commission', proporal and alw rcc. -'' ) ~ 1245 ~ FCC 90-375 Federal Communications Commission Record 5 FCC Rcd Yo. 25 Although the new rules continue to prohibit common ouner. chanr in 6 74.1233dI. In the meantime. Indt\ldual sttuatIon5 ship of two AM or two FM stations in the same cummunit: of will be evaluated on a Cau-b)-cax bmr and If nccessar! license. they do prmrt dual ownership In some caus wtthtn thc ferrrd to Canada or Mexico same AD1 market The revised rules arc sei forth ai 4- CFR 0 0" Applicants prowing higher pouer must dctcrmmc wheth. T3.322?(a)( 1) and (2). er or no1 their facilit) would crpov worhcrs or ihe general -P TBA. Seven Ranges. WTI. du Trell. FII Technolug). Jones. public to cxcessi~ele\els of RF radmon A uorst case calcula- ! and \lchcnzrc lion for a single IC0 uatts ERP source redis In RF radlatlon Capd Broadcasting Corporation et a/ state that mdcpn. exceeding the erisllng standard for human exposure wlthln dent panus should not be prmtrted to own translators uith about 2 meters of the antenna Assummg that Fhl translators overlapping or adjacent service areas. ulll not be located shere significant RF radtation IS contributed @' J7 CFR 9 74 12Wc). by other slations and that the tranrm~ilingantennas arc nor- ! mally more than 2 meters from accerrlble loarlun). such crpu- '' du Treil. ABES. Byron U SI. Clair (St Clatrl. and London Bridge sure should not occur. t IUuIt 15 aIw more conitstent ukth the Current rule uhtch IS " Klimck also opposes thc Commisrzon's proporal statmy that I on IO uaits \lost tranrlators uv a A\l wations wuld haw added expure and cnhancc program baed TPO F\I hierrand iranrmitimg antenna ulzh sufficwnt fat" IU pnduce an FRP dwersit) ,if the? were prmmed to rebroadcast \ta an F\I iranrlatol. - that 1s Muern two and ten times thmr TPO "" J7 CFR (0 74.1235 and 74 1220. -'Ser \met of Proposed Rule .Makmg In \l\l Duckc! \o K-2b- 2 FCC Rcd 5014 (IVlli). Reporr and Ordrr in \1\1 Doclei ": 47 CFR P -J 12.15 \a NU-46 (Pol~ctcs10 Encourage Interferencc Rcductlon Bc- '"' Thou commcnwrs supportmy the Jircitlonal anrcnna pro. lueen A\I Broadcast Station,). 5 FCC R;d JJU2 (IW). and phll Yere F\I Technolop CBS. NAB TBA XJPBA \loud) Repon and Order m \ISI Docket >o XX-376 IAmcndmeni of the UTI. \PR 51 Clair and AFCCE (omrnw,ion\ Rules to Impro%c the Ouallt? of ihe A\I Broad. I, 1 \I*NJ:concur) uuh AFCCE'. p>ritron cast Scr\rce b? Reducing Adlacent Channel Interference and b\ 111s Some of the wit5 are denbed from F\I bruadcast stailon Eltminat~ngRotrrctwns Pertatnmg to the Prowled Da)itmc dircctwnal antenna rules adopted tn \lM Docket ko U7.121 it Contour) 1 FCC Rcd 3235 (1W9) Uc~prlcpending rrconwderaiton pctitmm m that procccdtnr uc '' 4: CFR PI 74 12l)?(b)iI) and (2) heliere the rule we are adoptlng here -ill be adequate for this "* \AB. CBS. ABA. TBA. KPBX. Northland and hnellcr rcondar! ur\icc In vhrch F\I translator wtion\ remam re. .-Cummenicn ,upporting the Commirswn's pmpd arc rponwblc for correcting an) actual interference that may result unprcdxwd Jirtii~onalanicnna pcrformancc CapllaI Bnudcasting et a/. ABES. du Tred Eiving. D3.d U from Fearlrr tFra,terl. FV Technolog). Cortnthnns XIII. June, Sc,. "'" 5rr 1' CFR 5 -1 lX.1la)-id) - en Ranges. St Clair. hPR. Mtnnesota Public Radw (\IPRi. "I. >n Rcp>rtand Ordrr in \1\1 Dock! Yo X7.I.1. mpra. \JPBA. \bod). Temple. Asscation for \Iumum ~cn~ce I"' ( UI I .rrinthmn, XIII. \loody. ABES. >AB Brill htedia. rcle\won iSIST\ ) SlcKenzte. Vernier. UTI. and AFCCE Feawr. rhlng. Sewn Range,. Vernler. UTI, and Capital \PR. MPR. \JPBA. !doody. MSTV. SI CImr. \lchcnrw. Broadca,!tng tt d UTI and Temple. 'Iw Pleauni \lchcnm du Trebl. NPR. and ABES. '* Srr &wr and Order in BC Docket ho Il(l-Ul, UJ FCC ?d "'\,\I3 whmiiied a copy of 11, "&nlerfcrencc complatni' 152 1 iSx3) >wdr duumrniing ~1%concern kc "Broadcast Tcchnacal Inter- *' \lad! has requested that the Cammisston not require a ference Cumplam Sune:. Uhat Does the Public Do Uhcn >houing of nonavatlabtl~yof rmrved-band channel5 Current The: Eipcr tnce Signal Inwfrrcncc*" R V Duce). Research practices do not require such a showmg and we will no1 mpnc and Planning Drparimcnt, '.AB. June. IVX7 one 31 !his time. 'I' Tu omprow the organnation of !he new rule>. we haw '' 17 CFR § 74 l232la) rearran@ (hem viih actual 8ntcrfercncr In 'i 74 I203 predicted ': Additionally. rules were proposed to adwu apphcani\ of F\I tnterkrenic In 5 74 1204 and predicicd TV Channel b further limits un the power of Fhl translaiors in the area, inicrfercncc in 9 74 12112 Thus. the propacd note 10 4 ulihin 320 krlomcters of either the Canadian or \leucan hrr. 74 l3l3iaj 4% now part of 0 7J 121l4(dl and the propoud 6 der 74 I?ll?tCI 1. ""Y 9 74 I2IHIfl '' An ERP of i kW at 77 meters produces a I mV m contour 'I: 4- CI R kctmn 73 N?la)( 141. at I6 km based upon the FCC FM F(.cO.SO) chart. 'I' Chrwaan \ledla. du Trcil. the Joint Comments of Great See Rrport and Order in Gen Docket Yo U7.551 3 FCC Amcririn Tclc\twon and Radio Company. lnc el bl. (Great Amcrtcap. rr $1 I. SISTV. SAB. Thommn Con,umer Electronics. Rcd 7332 (IVXX). and Errarwn in Gcn. Dockct No. N7-55l. J FCC Rcd 1761 (IuW9) Inc IThumwnI. and WTl Supporting commenten tncludc London Brldge. AFCCE. "I Cpun adoption of the LO!. we imposed a freeze on ap- VPR. TEA. KSOR. Elring. UcKcntic. Cedar Ridge Children's phcaimnr for new commercial FM translators and major Home and Schml. Inc. (Cedar Rtdge). Seven Ranges Wmd? b changes to authorized commercial F\I translators. See 3 FCC at Tour. ABE;Ltapital Broadcasting CI at.. and Corinthians Xlll Rcd 3073 Applicaiions for new NCE FM tran5lators seeking asstgnmcnt io the reserved frequency band were ercmpl from '"CBS. +tB. YTA. du Treil. Crophan. WTI. Pleasant. borih. ihc freeze x) that the revised noncommercial signal delivery land and Prairie. technolog) rule could be given cffcct. See Repon and Order in "- VPR. ABES. La Tour. The University of Alaska IAlaskaI. \I\I Docket vo 86-112.wpa. We imk this action because or hPBY. Dan Ransom (Ransom). SI Clair. Vcrnlcr. and Ucsicrn our concern that the volume of applications for FY tran5lalon "'He utll dscuss the border area proposals during upcoming could mcrease substantially during the pendency OI this pro - with Any meetings the Canadian and hlcxtcan gobernmenis reeding The freeze will continue for M) days after the effcclirc changes that arc agreed upon will be reflected by an appr3prialc daw of any new rules adopted and. thereafter. we will provide I ~ L WX? kd%io. 2s. Federal Communications Cornrni&ion Record FCC 90-375 60 day period for applicants io amend their appl~iaiions to publtc service to local cornmunitla Too many imported Conform with the new rules. We noted that if a prndlng mull- Signals ma) indeed undermine continued local %mice by fiCatiOn applicauon would become a '*major change" under ihe incumbent FM stations. new rules. applicants would be required to pa) nru processtnp On the other hand. we need to be concerned also about 1 fees in order for the Commission to process those appkauonr the public's in!ere,t in diver* voices and viewpoints This 'I' Several commenten generally support NAB s anin- action of the Commission. in my Judgment. does not grandfathering powion These commcnters tnclude ~lpme. adequately grapple with these competing concerns In- Brrll Media. CBS. Capml OtieYABC. ABA. TEA. Croghan. stead. it focuses on returning FM translators to their Northland. Prairie. Prewott Valley Broadcasttng Company. Inc original. "proper" role as a fill-in xrwce IPrcmt). Radio South. and London Bridge (which also spectfi. In addition. uhtle I do not necessaril) want to see the ully supports NAB'S proposed *white area" exception). Pleasant de\elopment of a full-scale "low power FM \er\ice." I supporis grandfathering only primary artion-ouncd tran%laton think it might haw been raluable for the Commission to of long-standing and translaion prowding sewice tn vhtte areas explore the potential of FM translators as a ua: for mall Christian Media. Columbia Bible Colle~.NPR. ECS. entrepreneurs. in certain special circum\iancer io gain a Ehmp Feaster. h!BC Grand and Moody Btble suppori pcrma. foothold in the hroadcast indumy. nent grandfathering of existing FM iranslator stailons AFCCE I am wung for this item hecawe. on halance I hellev and Cowan state !hat exisling FM iranslators should be that our giqcridzng puhltc poltc) concern must he the grandfathered under the old rules but should be made IO come need to he# fuIl-*er\ice Flf &,tation%. uhich ha\e explu inlo conformance uith the new ruln if. at wme future itme. puhltc ser\ice ohligations. serve the needs of the lirienlng the) cause any interference to a full-factllty statton Hcndrlr public suggests that translators licensed prior 10 the imposition of the freeze should continue under financtal agreemenis prmlttcd at the lime of their hcenwng. and translator applications rubmttted during the freeze %huuldbe allowed fire years io cumpl! -8th ihe new rules "- kSOR and Uestern lesp!rational Broadca5ters. Inc tUnt- ern Inspirattonal) ,upport this proposal hBBL also erpre,u\ suppori for this grandfathering option if full grandfathering 8% unacceptable UTI $tam that a tran~laior should k grandfathered uniil ti proposes 10 expand its population cub- crage area b) more than 3) percent SEPARATE STATEMEST OF CO.\lMlSSIONER SHERRIE P. MARSHALL In the hlaner of Amendment of Part 74 of the Commission's Rules Concerning FM Translator Stations I have no doubt that translators have the potential 10 undermine our FM allocations scheme. Bur in 11s effort, to protect against improper uses of FM translators. this Jeci,ion goes 100 far and throws the baby out utrh the bathwaler Indeed. the effect of this decision may uell he to den? the benefits of FM translator scrvtce to significant portions of rural America Thus. at a minimum. I uould ha\c. first. remowd our sewre restrictions on tranSlaiOrS ihat uould bring F.W to nearby communiiics which re- ceive no radio service at all and. xcond. invited requeslh to uanc tho% restrictions for translators hrtnging an FU signal to neighboring communities not already enjoying a minimal level of radio service I therefore vote for this item rubject to thex reservations SEPARATE STATEMEhT OF COMMISSIOSER fRVIS S. DLCGAN - In the Matter of Amendment of Part 74 c of the Commission's Ruin . 4 2.-- Concerning FM Translator Stations I find myself someuhat torn between two competing policy goals raised by this item On the one hand. we need to be concerned ahour localism. about the viability of full-service stations. cspe. ctally in small and rural markets. about their continued