© 2000 - Munn-Reese, Inc.
All Rights Reserved - Unauthorized Reproduction is Prohibited
News from the Offices of
Munn-Reese, Inc.
Broadcast Engineering Consultants
100 Airport Drive – PO Box 220
Coldwater, MI 49036-0220
Wayne S. Reese, President
|
Telephone: 517-278-7339 |
Internet: www.munn-reese.com |
Fax: 517-278-6973 |
October 2000
Munn-Reese Matters
As we write this edition of the Munn-Reese Newsletter, it’s Halloween. All the kids are getting ready to put on their costumes and go trick-or-treating. The kids will return with containers filled with candy and goodies. Then Dad will offer to conduct "sample tests" for them—just to be sure the candy is OK! Our wacky editor, Thumbs Feebleman, has a tongue-in-cheek theory that this whole thing might be sponsored by the American Dental Association! Actually, we think Thumbs is just jealous because he has to do his trick-or-treating at the FCC! Thumbs complains that while the kids always get good stuff, he has more trouble sorting out the treats from the tricks. We thought he’d be an expert at it by now—after all, he seems to have a permanent mask! (They don’t call him "dog face" for nothing!) Someday, we hope to find a camera strong enough to capture his image and place it on our web site. Then you’ll understand what we put up with!!
On a more serious note, it has come to our attention that some broadcasters may have been lulled into a false sense of security regarding Antenna Structure Registration (ASR) requirements. As the Commission has gained more experience with collecting the data, it has made some minor adjustments in the procedures and requirements. At first, it appeared that providing height data rounded to the nearest meter (as is done in FM applications) was appropriate. Then the Commission clarified that heights were to be submitted to the nearest tenth of a meter. In the beginning geographic coordinates could be entered in either the NAD27 or NAD83 datum. Now all coordinates are to be entered using NAD83—making conversion between the two systems necessary in some cases. Actually, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), which handles ASR matters, requires NAD83 datum, but the Mass Media Bureau (MMB), which handles broadcasters, requires NAD27 datum. Originally, it appeared that only towers that exceeded 200 feet in height (61.0 meters) needed to be registered. However, the actual height that triggers the registration requirement is dependent on the distance to the nearest airport and the terrain between the tower and the airport. Thus, some stations, especially in some of the earlier states to register, may have erroneously believed they were exempt, when in fact registration is required. To help determine the requirements for specific installations, the Commission has placed a utility called TOWAIR on its web site. You will find it on the Antenna Structure Registration page of the WTB site. All stations that bypassed Antenna Structure Registration because they believed their towers were exempt should recheck the requirements using the TOWAIR utility. The program does require a late version of Netscape to operate due to its Java content. Call us if you need assistance.
Commission Matters
Remember the filing window last January for new AM stations and major changes in existing AM facilities? Last month we announced the release of a Public Notice (DA 00-2142) announcing a list of applications that were not mutually exclusive with any others filed during the window. These applicants were directed to file full applications by October 23, 2000. Now the Commission has released a second Public Notice (DA 00-2416) that lists the remaining AM applications. Each of these has been determined to be mutually exclusive with at least one other application filed during the January window. An Attachment A to the notice lists 39 groups of AM applications that conflict with one another. Each group has been assigned to one of three categories that determines how the conflicts will be resolved and what, if any, further information is needed from the listed applicants.
Groups listed in Category I include at least one major change application for an existing AM station. Stations in these groups will be allowed to develop either engineering solutions or settlement agreements to resolve their mutual exclusivities. Engineering solutions can take the form of minor change amendments, and settlement agreements are subject to other regulations. You will want your communications attorney involved in this process! However, these solutions will only work if they resolve the mutual exclusivity for all stations in the group. Failure to provide a solution for every member of the group will send the entire group to the auction. In addition, if the group is unable to develop a satisfactory solution, and if the applications specify different communities of license, each applicant must submit a "307(b)" showing as noted below for Category II stations. The window of opportunity for these filings began with the release of the Public Notice and continues through December 29, 2000.
Groups of applicants classed as Category II consist of all new applications that include multiple communities of license. The anti-collusion provisions of the auction rules do not allow these groups to develop any technical solutions or settlement agreements. The Commission has determined that its authority to auction must be harmonized with 47 USC § 307(b), which requires that it effect an equitable distribution of radio stations throughout the United States. Therefore the Commission is requiring these stations to submit a "Public Interest" or "307(b)" showing. This information will then be used to determine if one of the communities represented in the group is more deserving of a new service than the others. If this fails to resolve the conflicting applications, the entire group will be designated for auction. Specific requirements for the showing are listed in the Public Notice. You will want to use the services of a good technical consultant and communications attorney to prepare this exhibit. Those applications without a 307(b) showing on file by December 29, 2000 will be dismissed.
Attachment A also includes one group of Category III stations. This group consists of applications for new AM facilities for the same frequency and community. Since there are no 307(b) issues when all the applicants specify the same city, no further filings are necessary for this group. The group automatically progresses to the auction. Meanwhile, with the ball back in the applicants’ court, the Commission has announced that it will withhold any further action on the applications listed in Attachment A until all the requested filings have been made.
While we were preparing this edition of the Newsletter, the Commission released the Second Report and Order in Docket MM 98-93 (FCC 00-368), which deals with the streamlining of the technical rules. Obviously, we have not had time to review the Order, but it appears to deal exclusively with FM matters. From a preliminary glance, it appears actions were taken on: the extent to which stations may short-space their transmitter sites under §73.215 (the directional antenna rules); the creation of a new intermediate C0 Class (between Class C and Class C1); the kinds of issues that can be addressed in One-Step applications: and numerous NCE issues for reserved band stations—including a requirement to place 60 dBu service over 50% of the area or population of the community of license. On the other hand the Commission deferred further action on topics such as: negotiated interference agreements for FM stations; the point-to-point (PTP) signal prediction methodology; and revisions to the Class D rules. We hope to be able to provide more details in the next issue of the Newsletter.
The move towards electronic filing continues at the Commission. On April 28, the FCC announced that Forms 301, 302-FM, 314, 315, 316, and 347 could be filed electronically. At the time, it was expected that mandatory filing would be required after a six-month period. The Commission has now announced that electronic filing is required for FCC Forms 302-FM, 316, and 347 effective November 1. Although electronic filing of Forms 301, 314, and 315 is encouraged and will be mandatory in the future, the Commission has decided to gain more experience with the limited selection first. Waivers of the mandatory electronic filing will be granted under very limited circumstances. For example, those claiming to have a technical problem will be required to certify that the MMB’s Help Desk was contacted and was unable to resolve the problem. Unlike some of the electronic filings at the WTB site, MMB filings can be made with any reasonably recent version of either the Netscape or Internet Explorer web browsers.
Although we may often mutter and sputter about certain FCC procedures that annoy us, most of us will be happy to sing the praises of the FCC web site. A group of researchers from Brown University recently examined 1,813 state and federal government web sites. Each site was searched for 27 features and rated on a 100-point scale. The FCC, along with the Departments of Agriculture and Education, received a score of 84 points. This placed them in the top six government web sites! Meanwhile, the FCC would like to hear from you on how the site could be improved even more. They would specifically like to know what the public expects from the web site and how well they are meeting those needs. The scope of the evaluation is limited to the web site and does not include any of the electronic filing procedures. You may email your comments by November 10 to webeval@fcc.gov.
Miscellaneous Matters
FCC Chairman William Kennard recently gave a speech to the Museum of Television and Radio in New York. His speech, "What Does $70 Billion Buy You Anyway," was aimed at television broadcasters. The Chairman offered several suggestions for rethinking broadcasters public interest obligations. Among them were: stations should commit to carrying every single presidential debate, as well as cover state and local races; stations should recommit to showing more public service announcements during peak viewing hours to educate viewers about the issues of the day; stations should provide free time to candidates for federal office during the last few weeks of an election season; and the broadcast industry should establish a code of conduct for good citizenship by broadcasters. Mr. Kennard also indicated his desire to push the conversion to DTV so that spectrum could be made available for the wireless web. One of his suggestions was to require that all new TV receivers manufactured after a certain date, such as January 2003, be capable of receiving DTV.
In one of his more cynical moments, Thumbs Feebleman was heard to wonder if it would not be better for broadcasters to auction off political time to federal candidates. Broadcasters could even use the spectrum auctions those candidates have set up as a pattern. After all, they are the ones who said auctions were fair and efficient!
Apparently, Thumbs wasn’t the only person who took exception to some of the Chairman’s suggestions. Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth issued a statement designed to "…clarify and separate big government’s interest from the public interest in the debate over the debates." In part, his statement said, "Some in Washington believe that diversity of programming is good except when politicians debate. The suggestion that all broadcasters must provide live television coverage of presidential debates is equivalent to the suggestion that all Americans must have no choice of alternative television programming during the debates. Millions of Americans chose, for example, to watch baseball on NBC or entertainment programming on Fox or on countless cable networks rather than watch the presidential debate. Other Americans simply chose not to watch television at all. This is, of course, their choice to make, and it is the concomitant right of broadcasters to meet those market choices. It is not the responsibility of the FCC to compel Americans to watch television, nor should it be our responsibility to limit their programming choices to the debates when tens of millions would prefer to watch any number of other legitimate programs."
After four years of discussions, the FCC and Industry Canada produced a Letter of Understanding regarding the implementation of DTV along the US/Canadian border. The letter covers DTV operations within 400 kilometers of the common border. Copies of the text of the agreement can be downloaded from the International Bureau on the FCC web site.
Following an order by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals in the Radio-Television News Directors Association vs. FCC, the Commission has repealed §73.1920 and 73.1930. These are the rules dealing with broadcast personal attacks and political editorials. At the same time, the Commission abandoned and terminated its Order and Request to Update Record that was released in early October. The FCC also repealed similar rules that applied to cable television operators.
In late October, the Enforcement Bureau issued its monthly "List of Actions Taken." Four Notices of Apparent Liability were issued, along with 106 Notices of Violations. It is interesting to note that under the Notices of Violations concerning the Emergency Alert System, numerous other broadcast violations are cited. Apparently, the Field Inspectors went looking for EAS problems, but took time to find many other things as well. Among the additional items listed were: antenna structure registration problems (including not posting the registration numbers on the towers), equipment performance measurements (commonly called NRSC measurements), operating tolerances (including power and AM monitoring points), logs, chief operator agreements, and public inspection files. Even in today’s environment of consolidated ownership and streamlined rules, the Commission still expects broadcasters to follow the rules that remain!
Upcoming Matters
The FCC has scheduled Auction No. 37 for February 21, 2001. This is the auction for many vacant FM allotments. Since last month’s Newsletter, the Commission added eight more vacant allotments to the auction list. We strongly encourage you to make a relatively small investment in an allocation study before you make a major commitment in an auction—only to find out the channel doesn’t have the potential you hoped it would. We also encourage you to do this as soon as possible so you won’t be caught in a last minute rush that makes it difficult to fully evaluate your options and opportunities.
We are now well into the fourth quarter of 2000. Traditionally, the fourth quarter is the best revenue generator of the year for commercial stations. We hope yours is going well. Soon we will all be caught up in the excitement and rush (in every sense of the word!) of the holidays. Please allow us a moment to express our thanks to you for allowing us to be your technical consultants. We want to continue working with you to find ways that the ever-changing technical regulatory climate can be made to work for your circumstances. Please let us know when we can be of further service. Our telephone and fax numbers appear in the letterhead, and our e-mail addresses are shown below.
© 2000 - Munn-Reese, Inc.
All Rights Reserved - Unauthorized Reproduction is Prohibited