> Hi guys & gals!
>
> Without a waiver, is an FM booster permitted within the
> city-of-license of it's primary station?
Don't let FCC double speak confuse the issue.
The "waiver" is the granting of Program Test Authority to the booster permittee, so the answer is no. All boosters would be in violation of the basic rules because it is so close to the original (co channel) signal, so if the booster proves to work as predicted and causes no objectionable interference to others and any interference to the main signal is acceptable, the commission approves it and therefore have waived the basic rules for distance, separation, etc. between FM signals.
Remember, the permittee must have demonstrated through the permit process that an area in the city grade coverage is underserved because (most likely) of obstructions creating a no reception zone. Evidence would have to have been produced (field measurements are probably the best) as well as a thorough analysis predicting no interference to adjacent channels, etc. It takes that much to just get a CP to try it out. For example, putting a booster closer to some adjacent channel's xmter might create short spacing conditions, whereas the original signal is more than far enough away.
>
> Section 74.1203(c) reads:
> An FM booster station will be exempted from the provisions
> of
> paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section to the extent that it
> may cause
> limited interference to its primary station's signal,
> provided it does
> not disrupt the existing service of its primary station or
> cause such
> interference within the boundaries of the principal
> community of its
> primary station.
>
> Does that mean that a booster's coverage area cannot touch
> anywhere within the primary's city-of-license borders?
> That's the way i am reading it.
The most recent text of the rules states:
(a) An authorized FM translator or booster station will not be
permitted to continue to operate if it causes any actual interference
to:
(1) The transmission of any authorized broadcast station; or
(2) The reception of the input signal of any TV translator, TV
booster, FM translator or FM booster station; or
(3) The direct reception by the public of the off-the-air signals of
any authorized broadcast station including TV Channel 6 stations,
Class D (secondary) noncommercial educational FM stations, and
previously authorized and operating FM translators and FM booster
stations. Interference will be considered to occur whenever reception
of a regularly used signal is impaired by the signals radiated by the
FM translator or booster station, regardless of the quality of such
reception, the strength of the signal so used, or the channel on which
the protected signal is transmitted.
(b) If interference cannot be properly eliminated by the application
of suitable techniques, operation of the offending FM translator or
booster station shall be suspended and shall not be resumed until the
interference has been eliminated. Short test transmissions may be made
during the period of suspended operation to check the efficacy of
remedial measures. If a complainant refuses to permit the FM
translator or booster licensee to apply remedial techniques which
demonstrably will eliminate the interference without impairment to the
original reception, the licensee of the FM translator or booster
station is absolved of further responsibility for that complaint.
http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/74/1203/
here's an excerpt from a related filing:
47 C.F.R. § 74.1204 is not a strict "go/no-go" rule. The Commission recognizes that strict application of the contour overlap method of predicted interference could result in the acceptance of some applications that would cause signal interference. However, the Commission has placed the burden on the objecting party to provide "convincing evidence that the proposed translator station would be likely to interfere with the reception of a regularly received off-the-air existing service..." Report and Order In the Matter of Amendment of Part 74 of the Commission's Rules Concerning FM Translator Station, 5 FCC Rcd 7212 (1990), modified, 6 FCC Rcd 2334 (1991), recon. denied, 8 FCC Rcd 5093 (1993). This evidence may take several forms, including Arbitron ratings, proof of listeners, and news advertisements. The Commission's basic query in these matters is whether or not the evidence provided is sufficient to support the threshold showing of possible interference resulting from operation of the proposed translator station.
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:...-06--30--newca.wp+74.1203&hl=en&client=safari
Hope I have been helpful.
A. <P ID="signature">______________
Electricity is really just organized lightning.
~George Carlin</P>
