A happy camp story.
They have a functional radio station with substantial acceptance by the camp leaders and campers.
What I was most impressed with was the "positive" comments made by very positive people. I myself included. I impressed myself and that's very hard to do when you're a doofus. I especially like the word you used: Virtual, meaning "in effect though not in fact."
It sounds like their range was less than 200 feet, which is about the best you can do to measure compliance without test equipment.
But I do have an aversion to the use of "subtantially compliant". It's like "she's almost pregnant". Either you are (compliant, that is), or you're not. It's a binary system, and I don't think quantum physics applies.
If you'd known Kornelia in grade school she was almost pregnant.
Two positives equal a negative.
My stations are probably compliant.
KDX-FM is one F.I.M. short of compliance.
As long as the signal does not exceed Part 15 limits outside of the camp's property border, then I don't see how the FCC has any grounds to suspect a violation. Inside private property lines, it's not the government's business to monitor radio emissions. Heck, many people have cheap Chinese battery chargers and dimmer switches whose RF emissions exceed Part 15 limits!
Part 15 operation between 88-108 is still at 250 uV/M whether it's on private property/your house/camp/etc..
FM operation does not enjoy the "campus" allowance that AM does.
but the reality is if the singal at your closest property boundary is 250uV/m @ 3m they are likely going to give you a pass and you are likely not going to be turned in to the FCC to begin with if you are not higher than 250uV at the property boundary. so legally you may be in violation but relistically no one is going to care at such a low signal level at your property boundary.
There is talk of being "community" stations.
Ignoring the fact that no collective "community" has appointed us to be their station, we have these active imaginations that can see it clearly... yes we serve all those homes and businesses lucky enough to be within our circle-of-coverage.
Are they not our campus? Are we not their educational station and they our "students of life" seeking the uplift of our smart programs?
The FCC understands these distinctions and, whereas they don't say so in direct language, we can read between the lines and realize that they agree with us.
Carl Blare wrote: ... we have these active imaginations ... The FCC understands these distinctions and, whereas they don't say so in direct language, we can read between the lines and realize that they agree with us.
Suggest that such advice is risky to those who accept it.
Compliance with FCC Part 15 requires factual understanding and operation -- not "active imaginations," or to "read between the lines," and/or the belief that the FCC will "agree with us" when following such advice.
Even Socrates had scoffers
I think this is deja vu all over again. If that is the case where I live the LandLord owns several feet of property. My station would be compliant no worries.
Mr Ding Dong said: "I was at the FCC Laboratory several years ago when then Lab Chief Charles Cobb said to me, "we don't do enough to work with people in our own country when it comes to the certification program. We tend to hurt them rather than help them.""