I read two NOUO’s today that are interesting.
http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-334970A1.html
http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-334971A1.html
In them, the NOUO was issued because the field strength was 641 and 756uv/m@3m respectively. Most FM NOUO’s are for orders of magnitude of violation on the field strength. Those two are for a factor of 2 to 3 for the field strength.
It would be nice to know if the people operating the transmitters in the above NOUO’s were using kits, unmodified transmitters sold as part 15 compliant, part 15 compliant transmitters that were installed in such a way the radiation pattern was impacted to be non-compliant, or originally part 15 compliant transmitters that were intentionally modified.
Both look like very nice neighborhoods.
Was the operator interfering with another station close by. This again will get you a NOUO no matter what. They will find a reason to keep your station shut down believe this. Another reason I'm against transmitting on anything like .2.4.6.8 after the main frequency like 88.2 Mhz.
Both are in The Bronx Ny. Need I say more. Its a case now that to look like the FCC is actually doing anyting their picking on part 15 stations now. Both of these power levels are Minuscule. Its also funny after their paper tiger team was invented this took place. Please Really guys? You have huge pirates in that very area and your gonna pick on a few micro broadcasters. You know the NAB wants a War? This is one way for them to have a really huge war. But again if these stations were at a frequency far away from any other station would this have happened? Probably not. I think this was a problem of transmitting too close to another station and a neighbor complained or an agent just happened to drive by and noticed activity on that station and got out the Patomac to see what the strength was. But its really close to Today's date. Scary indeed.
The power levels cited in the NOUOs are under the Canadian BETS level.
The measurement distance was 3 meters on both stations?
Hey...Good point I didn't think of the fact that someone could have purchased a Decade CM-10 at BETS level from an electronics shop in Canada and brought it to the USA think what they had was legal. Now that would be another reason to set USA the same as Canada. Good point and another case for our arguement. Good thinking WDCX you are doing your homework. Now we're talking. This is what I like about what I may have gotten started.
There is an adjacent local (not HD) on 99.5 8.4 miles away for the 108 Field Place, Bronx, NY 10468 NOUO.
There is an adjacent local (not HD) on 106.7 7.3 miles way for the East 221 Street, Bronx, NY 10469 NOUO.
Given the close proximity to local stations, I wonder if some adjacent channel radiation may have been picked up by the field strength meters of the field agents making the numbers look higher than they really were.
Looking at the power spectrum from FMFOOL for both locations, there are no good frequencies to put a FM transmitter, but there were better frequencies to use than adjacent to local transmitters. (For example, unless it is in use by other unlicensed broadcasters 92.5 looks possible).
So my speculation was currect. The operators were too close to adjacent stations on the dial so they picked what they thought was good enough not following the blank one channel up and one channel down from the fundamental frequency rule. I was thinking with power as low as that there had to be a reason the FC chose to issue them a NOUO. Again my mandatory transmitter scan for the newer high power transmitters would have saved both the FCC from the trouble of having to do an inspection and of course the user from dealing with having to reply to an NOUO and having to explain his operation and having to give up transmitting altogether.
Someone who lived in those beautiful buldings might have complained.
Its why I try to stay clear of any adjacent channels and even if a station only comes in part of the time I don't want to be anywhere on that frequency. Especially if they play sports and over here Country is really big too. Its why I do believe until the repack happens if ever at least get 87.9 of the gray list. Think what would have happened if those stations in Bronx, NY were on 87.9. It may have made some difference. But then we're talking Bronx, NY. I'm sure most of the frequencies are full and its easy to bleed an adjacent frequency.
it depends on what part of the country you live in as to how hard they enforce part 15 fm field strengths.
in the NYC / Philadelphia and surrounding areas all the FM frequencies are flooded with primary, LPFM, and translator singals so they are going to rigerously enforce the Filed strength regulations. where tim lives they might show a more lax philosophy to enforcement.
in oregan my understanding is that the Agent there is just a superior hard ass who busts part 15'ers for the sport of it.
there is very little actual high power pirate activity in oregon, guess he feels the need to justify his job.
the fact that both of these are in NYC comes as no surprise they got NOUO's for such small filed strengths above the limit.
agents in NYC and philly field offices are very stingent not because they are dicks but because that is such an RF intensive region especially on the broadcast bands.
it is also very population dense in a very small geographic area making potential of interference even more of a concern.
down in the florida area they have a lot of pirates, but it is not very RF intensive and the broadcast bands are not totally flooded with licensed broadcasters so they take a little more lax view on the broadcast bands toward enforcement.
they generally won't screw with you for a long ground lead on am or slightly above the limit on FM in the south eastern region.
And this too could be reason the FCC may not increase field strength no matter how bad we want it. This just shows some data how more field strength WILL cause more interference for FM. As much as I hate to admit here that is a big minus for Part 15 initiative. But its a good point even though very hard to swallow at this point.
Those NOUO's are just a little more than 50% of BETS here in Canada. You'd think that they would be informed of the problem and asked to turn down the power a bit, change frequencies, or change something to stop the interference....not be treated like "pirates" and read the riot act. Maybe more behind the scenes than we know?
It's like getting a speeding ticket at 35 in a 30 mph zone and treated like you're a racer.
Mark
Maybe the part 15 initiative should be about more than increasing the field strength. We know New York is a problem. So then why not like you said when someone is just a tad over the agent give the operator a chance to fix what is wrong? By these types of NOUO's a person can no longer operate period if I have that right. Unless I'm again missing somethig.