WJLT files to change TX site specified in CP for high power

[Dan Strassberg <dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net>]

In Thursday's FCC actions, I noted that Langer has finally filed an
application to change the site specified in his CP to increase WJLT's day
power and operate with a two-tower DA. The CP had been granted specifying an
unavailable site--the former Unisys property on Route 117 in Sudbury. That
site never was available to the station, because the town would not approve
the use for the propery for a radio transmitter. (WKOX had previously failed
to get town approval to locate its proposed 50-kW TX there.) This is the
long-awaited filing for WJLT to go to high power from its present site, 100
Mt Wayte Ave in Framingham, which WJLT shares with WKOX and WRPT.

Officially, I guess this is not what the FCC calls a "filing". The applicant
first submits the application. The FCC then decides whether the application
is accaptable for "tender". If yes, the application is then considered to
have been tendered. The FCC then reviews the application again and decides
whether the tendered application is acceptable for filing. Only if it passes
muster at this step, does the application go into the queue to be considered
for acceptance, return (I guess, for clarification or ammendment and
refiling), or denial. This sure sonds like the sort of byzantine procedure
that only a bureaucrat could love. No wonder the FCC complains that it is so
overworked!

Because the FCC no longer has the time to provide meaningful writeups of
applications at its Web site, I can't determine the details. There was a
mention of a change in the Critical Hours power specified in the CP. Given
that WKOX's 440' top-loaded towers would be much more efficient than the
240' towers that Langer had proposed for the Route 117 site, I don't
understand why the application doesn't have to specify a lower power all day
(25 kW vs the 40 kW specified in the original CP). Without question, 40 kW
from those tall towers would cause prohibited overlap of 25 mv/m groundwave
contours with WBZ. In fact, I don't understand why there is a need for
different CH facilities if there was no similar need at Route 117. Even with
no power reduction, the taller towers would radiate less high-angle skywave
than the shorter towers would. And high-angle skywave is the issue with
critical-hours interference to KYW.

M Street Journal should provide more details, but I think this application
probably appeared too late for the next issue to pick it up. I guess I'll
just have to wait another week, and hope that M Street doesn't garble the
details.

- -------------------------------
Dan Strassberg (Note: Address is CASE SENSITIVE!)
ALL _LOWER_ CASE!!!--> dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net
(617) 558-4205; Fax (617) 928-4205

------------------------------