Interference In MD, Similar To What Newton Could Experience?

Fri Jul 23 20:02:00 EDT 2004

The storm took out my electricity for only about 25 minutes.

The following is straight from the GPO, which maintains the current FCC
Rules online.

I don't see any change from the 1-V requirement, nor the one-year limit on
fiscal responsibility.  Changes and CPs are specifically mentioned as
restarting the clock.

I could interpret these rules as excluding effects on wired, non-RF,
telephones. IMO, most stations would make an effort to help solve such
problems.  I see such comments in broadcast.net groups.

Bob Carpenter
============================================================
PART 73_RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES--Table of Contents

                     Subpart A_AM Broadcast Stations

Sec.  73.88  Blanketing interference.

    The licensee of each broadcast station is required to satisfy all
reasonable complaints of blanketing interference within the 1 V/m
contour.

    Note: For more detailed instructions concerning operational
responsibilities of licensees and permittees under this section, see
Sec.  73.318 (b), (c) and (d).

[28 FR 13574, Dec. 14, 1963, as amended at 56 FR 64859, Dec. 12, 1991]

============================================================
And the paragraphs 73.318 (b), (c) and (d) in the FM rules as mentioned
above.
------------------------------------------------------------

                     Subpart B_FM Broadcast Stations

Sec.  73.318  FM blanketing interference.

    (b) After January 1, 1985, permittees or licensees who either (1)
commence program tests, or (2) replace their antennas, or (3) request
facilities modifications and are issued a new construction permit must
satisfy all complaints of blanketing interference which are received by
the station during a one year period. The period begins with the
commencement of program tests, or commencement of programming utilizing
the new antenna. Resolution of complaints shall be at no cost to the
complainant. These requirements specifically do not include interference
complaints resulting from malfunctioning or mistuned receivers,
improperly installed antenna systems, or the use of high gain antennas
or antenna booster amplifiers. Mobile receivers and non-RF devices such
as tape recorders or hi-fi amplifiers (phonographs) are also excluded.
    (c) A permittee collocating with one or more existing stations and
beginning program tests on or after January 1, 1985, must assume full
financial responsibility for remedying new complaints of blanketing
interference for a period of one year. Two or more permittees that
concurrently collocate on or after January 1, 1985, shall assume shared
responsibility for remedying blanketing complaints within the blanketing
area unless an offending station can be readily determined and then that
station shall assume full financial responsibility.
    (d) Following the one year period of full financial obligation to
satisfy blanketing complaints, licensees shall provide technical
information or assistance to complainants on remedies for blanketing
interference.

[28 FR 13623, Dec. 14, 1963, as amended at 52 FR 25866, July 9, 1987]
============================================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Laurence Glavin" <lglavin@lycos.com>;
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org>
Cc: <rcarpen@erols.com>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: Interference In MD, Similar To What Newton Could Experience?

> I am under the impression that if an AM station upgrades its facilities,
it
> must satisfy, at its own expense, for a period of one year from the date
> that the FCC licenses the new facilities, all complaints of interference
> from people who reside within the 1V/m contour. The article implies
> otherwise--that is, that the requirement exists only for major changes.
> Hardly any changes, other than COL changes and frequency changes of more
> than 20 kHz, qualify as AM major changes anymore. I wonder if the
relaxation
> of the meaning of minor change has had the effect of letting stations off
> the hook on interference. If so, the baby has clearly been thrown out with
> the bath water. Neighbors' opposition to facility upgrades has multiplied
> many-fold over the past decade. Removing stations' responsibility for
> recitfying complaints of interference just adds fuel (lots of it) to the
> NIMBYs' case. Considering the militancy of the Montgomery county populace
> and the cleverness of WMET's upgrade, it is amazing to me that the station
> isn't going out of its way to satisfy complaints. (The station used to
> operate on 1150 with 1 kW-D/500W-N DA-2 from five towers. By moving to
1160,
> WMET was able to increase to 50 kW-D/1.5 kW-N DA-2 using the SAME five
> towers. The daytime power increase brings substantially all of the
district
> of Columbia into WMET's daytime 5 mV/m "city-grade" contour. Like the Oak
> Hill NIMBYs, the Gaithersburg crowd was not going to allow ANY change that
> involved ANY modification to the towers. By finding a way to use the
> existing towers, WMET was able to get its way despite the neighbors'
> objections. This doesn't seem like the time to behave in a high-handed way
> that allows the whole deal unravel--even if the FCC rules allow the
station
> to ignore the complaints. But then, the long-time money-losing station's
> lengthy series of management teams has apparently never won any awards for
> intelligence.)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Laurence Glavin <lglavin@lycos.com>
> To: <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org>
> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 5:04 PM
> Subject: Interference In MD, Similar To What Newton Could Experience?
>
>
> > Here's a link to a story about the interference residents
> > near Gaithersburg, MD are experiencing from an AM
> > station's upgrade to 50KW.  As of now, the residents
> > of Oak Hill Pahk in Newton (yea I got it right this time)
> > have nothing to fear, unless CCU appeals AND
> > greases the palms of the right politicians.
> >
> > http://www.gazette.net/200430/montgomery/news/227051-1.html
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
> >
>
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp
> ?SRC=lycos10
> >
>
>