Before the

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION**

Washington, DC 20554

FCC 95-412

In the Matter of )

)

Amendment of Parts 73 and 74 of )

the Commission\'s Rules to Permit ) MM Docket No. 94‑130

Unattended Operation of Broadcast )

Stations and to Update Broadcast )

Station Transmitter Control and )

Monitoring Requirements. )

**[REPORT AND ORDER]{.underline}**

Adopted: October 2, 1995 ; Released: October 23, 1995

By the Commission:

**INTRODUCTION**

The Commission herein amends Parts 73 and 74 of its Rules to waive
Section 318 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (\"Act\") to
eliminate the requirement that a broadcast station must have a licensed
radio operator on duty in charge of the transmitter during all periods
of broadcast operation. This waiver includes both the requirement that
an operator be present during broadcast operation and the requirement
that any optionally employed operator hold the Restricted Radiotelephone
Permit[^1] (\"RP\"). Also, a number of changes are made in the rules
relating to the control of broadcast stations to make them relevant to
unattended operation and to bring them up to date with respect to
current broadcast technology.

**BACKGROUND**

Section 318 of the Act requires transmitting apparatus in radio stations
to be operated by FCC-licensed radiotelephone operators, subject to
waiver of the requirement by the Commission. Prior to 1992, however,
certain types of stations, including broadcast stations, could not have
the operator requirement waived. The Telecommunications Authorization
Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-538, 106 Stat. 3533 (\"Law\"), Section
205(1) amended Section 318 of the Act to delete the expression \"(3)
stations engaged in broadcasting\...\" from the list of stations for
which waivers were not allowed. This gave the Commission the authority
to waive or modify the operator requirement for broadcast stations.[^2]

The [Notice of Proposed Rule Making]{.underline} in MM Docket No. 94-130
(\"[Notice]{.underline}\")[^3] solicited comments on the desirability of
such a waiver. Experience obtained from inspecting stations and
technical literature suggested that in many cases modern monitoring and
control equipment has rendered the need for a broadcast transmitter duty
operator superfluous. Moreover, the Commission recognized that an
applicant for an RP was not required to undergo any training relating to
proposed duties or to demonstrate any technical knowledge pertaining to
broadcast station operation. The [Notice]{.underline} also discussed
various rule amendments either ancillary to the waiver or otherwise
necessary to update the rules in a manner more consistent with current
technology. A list of parties filing comments and reply comments, as
well as the acronyms used to designate them, is given in Appendix C.

**DISCUSSION**

**[Unattended operation.]{.underline}**

With two exceptions, the commenters support waiver of Section 318 of the
Act for broadcast stations to permit unattended operation. Some comments
pointed out that when the current operator rules were adopted,
transmitters were not as well developed as they are now and needed
constant supervision; but modern transmitters are seen as suitable for
unattended use because of their high reliability, superior design, the
use of built-in protection circuits and the type of audio processing
equipment employed.[^4] There is general agreement that the technology
exists to automate the monitoring and control of broadcast stations and
that stations may be better served with constant (automated) technical
monitoring than with human attendance.[^5] The waiver, it is argued,
would permit licensees to make more effective use of resources by
implementing the operating and maintenance policies most appropriate for
their stations.[^6] Money currently spent on operator expenses is seen
as being better spent on other aspects of station operation, and
unattended operation should be extended to all classes of broadcast
stations under all circumstances.[^7]

However, two commenters currently engaged in providing remote station
monitoring and control services expressed opposition or reservations
about the waiver proposal. Waiving the operator requirement was seen as
not well thought out in that stations would be put on \"auto-pilot with
no one in charge.\"[^8] The claim was made that this would result in
\"thousands of stations operating outside their licensed parameters for
extended periods of time.\"[^9] Concern was expressed that a certain
segment of the broadcast industry would leave its broadcast stations
unattended and uncontrolled in order to cut costs without regard to the
potential for resulting interference. To remedy any such inclination,
the Commission was urged to increase the fines and forfeitures against
stations if they are operated without duty operators and cause undue
interference.[^10] The currently available remedy of employing a remote
station monitoring and control service was seen as the preferred
solution for stations wishing to minimize their operating costs.[^11]
But the more general view expressed in the comments was that most
licensees exercise due diligence in the operation of their stations and
this is not expected to change if unattended operation is
permitted.[^12]

An automatic transmission system (\"ATS\") consists of equipment
interconnected with the transmitter and other broadcast system
components so as to monitor and control the station. Under the current
rules, if ATS equipment fails to keep the station operating within
prescribed technical parameters, it is taken off the air. The equipment
also notifies designated station personnel (usually by telephone) about
any malfunction. Comments as to whether unattended operation should be
contingent on the use of ATS equipment were divided largely along
broadcast managerial and technical lines. Some broadcasters took the
position that the use of ATS equipment should be optional.[^13] A
smaller market broadcaster, for example, indicated that the purchase of
ATS equipment may be beyond its means.[^14] Broadcast engineering groups
and individuals (as well as some broadcasters) favored requiring the use
of ATS or some other means of automated station measurement and control
(sometimes referred to as \"AMC\" equipment) as a means of mitigating
possible interference.[^15] They asked that, if the Commission required
ATS equipment for unattended operation, it should state exactly what
operating parameters must be monitored and controlled.[^16] The
importance of having a competent on-call engineer available in the event
of out-of-tolerance operation not correctable from a remote location was
also stressed.[^17]

The Commission, based upon its experience in enforcing broadcast rules,
concurs with the majority opinion that waiver of Section 318 of the Act
to permit unattended operation is not likely to result in an increase in
operation outside the tolerances specified in the Rules or the station
authorization and will not adversely affect the public interest.
Significant technical malfunctions should quickly become obvious and we
do not anticipate their continuance for significant periods of time. The
waiver appears further justified for reasons of efficiency, in order
that our broadcast licensees can best decide how to allocate resources
to ensure compliance. Therefore, the rules relating to station operators
will be eliminated or revised as proposed in the [Notice]{.underline} so
as to permit unattended broadcast station operation.

In the past, broadcasters have been able to come close to achieving
unattended operation by employing ATS equipment and a remotely located
duty operator, who in practice seldom needed to be contacted. That type
of operation is of proven reliability. However, we recognize that ATS
equipment can be expensive, particularly for the smaller broadcasters
who stand to benefit the most from the reforms at issue in this
proceeding. In fact, the record indicates that some ATS equipment
currently in use only monitors transmitter power. The greatest potential
for interference would seem to lie with those AM stations that operate
with substantially different antenna patterns and power in the daytime
and nighttime. But such a circumstance would not be due to any failure
on the part of the transmitter, but failure in the mode switching
apparatus used with the transmitter and antennas. Experience has shown
that such devices operate with a very high degree of reliability. On
balance, then, considering the technical comments and our interest in
providing for the most flexible, cost-effective station operation
possible, unattended operation will be permitted for the time being
without requiring concomitant use of ATS equipment. If this decision
results in an increase in technical violations in the future, the
Commission may take appropriate responsive action, such as rescinding
the waiver for individual station licensees.

**[Universal application.]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} questioned whether there are circumstances
which do not lend themselves to unattended operation, such as AM
stations without approved antenna sampling systems,[^18] and
international, experimental and broadcast auxiliary stations. Most of
the commenters addressing this issue indicated that every type of
station could be operated unattended, although some suggested the use of
AMC equipment.[^19] Monitoring mode changes at directional AM stations
was not considered to be difficult, although two commenters favored
precluding unattended operation at stations without approved antenna
sampling systems, in order to provide further incentive for sampling
system improvement.[^20] This recommendation was disputed by others on
the grounds that even some approved sampling systems are in defective
condition due to poor maintenance. Reference was made to the fact that
the chief operator (a position not at issue in this proceeding) is
required to certify that whatever kind of sampling system is being used
is operating properly.[^21]

The comments indicate that there are no technical obstacles to the
automation of any type of broadcast station. It is clear, for instance,
that the maintenance of the antenna sampling system is much more
important than whether the particular system has been formally approved.
The Commission concurs with the comment that stations without approved
sampling systems, because of licensees\' adherence to appropriate
maintenance procedures, may be just as stable as stations with approved
sampling systems and would be more stable than a station with an
approved sampling system that is inadequately maintained. Imposing new
regulatory restraints upon licensees of such stations does not appear to
serve any useful purpose.[^22] In any event, the requirement remains
that the antenna system must operate properly, regardless of the type of
sampling system. Therefore, all types of standard broadcast (AM, FM and
TV) stations, as well as international broadcast stations will be
permitted to operate unattended. The same permission applies to low
power TV (\"LPTV\") stations with locally-originated programming.

**[Unattended operation and the Emergency Alert System
(\"EAS\").]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} sought comment on the effect any waiver of the
attended operation requirement would have on licensee\'s
responsibilities for monitoring Emergency Broadcast System (\"EBS\")
alerts. We noted that EBS monitoring appears to require human
intervention, and queried as to an appropriate relationship between
unattended operation[^23] and the institution of the new Emergency Alert
System (\"EAS\"), which can be fully automated.

Several comments expressed the opinion that the current EBS cannot be
reliably automated and that it would be appropriate to link unattended
operation with implementation of the EAS.[^24] The lack of an \"end of
message\" tone in the EBS is cited as being a particular obstacle to its
automation.[^25] One commenter summed up the arguments linking
unattended operation to EAS by describing such linkage as an excellent
opportunity to encourage the rapid implementation of the EAS. The
commenter believed that progressive broadcasters who take the lead in
implementing the new system should be allowed to begin unattended
operation as soon as their new EAS equipment is installed, to reward
those who risk the time and expense of \"debugging\" the new alert
system and to offer a strong incentive for licensees not to postpone
their system upgrades to the last minute. This was seen as a no risk
benefit to both the licensees and the public.[^26] Comments from the
broadcast industry, however, suggested that it may be possible to fully
or partially automate the current EBS.[^27]

As the comments indicate, the EBS was designed for human intervention.
Specifically, it does not possess the technical means of indicating
whether an EBS alert is national or local in origin, nor does it provide
an indication of when the alert message has concluded. It presumes that
someone at the broadcast station is standing by the EBS receiver and
will make such determinations and initiate an appropriate response.
Typically these duties are handled by a duty operator since that person
will always be available whenever the station is broadcasting, unlike
other station employees. Thus, the need to comply with EBS requirements
and responsibilities clearly makes it more difficult to achieve
unattended operation of a broadcast station.

The new EAS, on the other hand, is specifically designed for unattended
operation and does not require human involvement. However, various
concerns over the EAS technology have arisen in recent months which may
delay the availability of EAS equipment. The Commission is reluctant to
deny broadcast licensees the benefits intended in this proceeding
because of uncertainty in the implementation date for the EAS.

The Commission believes it should afford licensees the maximum possible
latitude in satisfying present EBS and future EAS responsibilities,
having in mind the ingenuity that can often be brought to bear in
resolving such problems. For example, some of our licensees have
employed firms which monitor for national EBS alerts and can initiate
the appropriate station response. It may be possible for such firms to
be notified of locally originated EBS alerts and respond in an
appropriate way based on guidance provided by the licensee. Licensees
may also seek to automate EBS equipment to a greater or lesser degree
which, with appropriate human involvement, will enable them to meet
their EBS obligations.

Accordingly, the Commission has decided to permit unattended operation
in advance of implementation of the EAS, provided that licensees
implement an effective method of complying with current EBS requirements
and responsibilities. This obligation is set forth in Section 73.1300 as
shown in Appendix A. The Commission cautions licensees that the
implementation of an informal method or methods of automating the EBS is
not a substitute for implementation of the EAS. Finally, the Commission
encourages licensees who currently participate in local EBS alerts to
continue to do so through whatever means they may employ to partially or
fully automate their EBS functions.

**[Maximum time period for non-compliance correction.]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} discussed various types of broadcast
out-of-tolerance operation, their probable interference impact and the
response time in which such malfunctions should be corrected.[^28] While
the objective of making the response time uniform was widely supported,
commenters differed over the appropriate value. The proposal that drew
the most attention was to replace the rather vague response time
\"immediate\" with the specific time limit of three minutes currently
used in connection with ATS-operated stations. Generally, the proposed
three-minute response time was viewed as inappropriate, especially in
the case of unattended stations.[^29] However, a number of the comments
supported retention of the three-minute response time in the case of
malfunctions with severe interference potential[^30] but with several
hours permitted in the case of lesser malfunctions.

For many years, the Commission has required licensees to react more or
less immediately to transmission system malfunctions capable of causing
interference. However, the requirement was largely based upon the fact
that such a response time was, in fact, practical (rather than
necessary), as transmitter duty operators were always in attendance. In
the case of unattended stations, requiring a rapid response becomes
impractical, if not impossible, as the commenters have noted. Further,
while technical malfunctions do adversely affect telecommunications and
must be corrected, comparatively few are so disruptive as to require
immediate correction or immediate termination of broadcasting. Thus, the
Commission agrees that a three-minute response time in the case of a
technical malfunction is unrealistic. In cases requiring the attention
of a competent technical person, even an hour may not afford sufficient
time for a person to arrive on-site and diagnose and correct the
particular problem. Moreover, the retention of the requirement for
attended stations also appears unnecessary because instances of severe
interference caused by broadcast stations are rare. Therefore, the
Commission has concluded that a substantial relaxation in technical
malfunction response time is warranted. Accordingly, the rules adopted
will indicate a generally applicable response time of three hours. This
limit will apply to both attended and unattended stations, because even
in cases where a station is attended, the duty operator may not possess
the technical expertise to resolve the more unusual types of technical
malfunctions. Thus, some more experienced person may have to be
consulted. However, because cases may arise in which the Commission
identifies a broadcast station as the source of a harmonic or spurious
product[^31] or other type of problem causing harmful interference, the
Commission will retain the requirement that a licensee be able to shut
its station down immediately ([i.e.]{.underline}, within three minutes)
upon request by our enforcement personnel. In summary, we believe that a
general response time of three hours is appropriate to enable licensees
to deal with problems that result in an incremental degradation of
service; the three-minute rule enables the Commission and licensees
properly to react to serious malfunctions causing harmful or
catastrophic loss of telecommunications service.

**[Monitoring, measurement and calibration requirements.]{.underline}**

Because the staff occasionally receives inquiries on what broadcast
station technical parameters need to be monitored, the
[Notice]{.underline} suggested that, for all stations, transmitter
power, modulation level and tower lighting status should be monitored at
a minimum. Determining proper (daytime/nighttime) mode changes at
directional AM stations also was suggested, as were readings (such as
antenna relative phases and amplitudes) necessary to ensure proper
antenna operation. The question was raised as to whether transmitter
frequency should be included in the list of important operating
parameters. Amendments to Sections 73.1350 and 73.1580 were proposed to
state which parameters should be monitored and how the monitoring
equipment should be calibrated and maintained.

The commenters addressing these issues unanimously expressed the belief
that monitoring transmitter frequency was unnecessary.[^32] Some
commenters argued that station modulation need not be constantly
monitored.[^33] The Commission was urged to exempt all types of
broadcast auxiliary stations (FM translators in particular) from the
proposed monitoring requirements, as such stations are currently
operating unattended and are exempt from making such measurements on an
ongoing basis.[^34] Several commenters complained that the proposed
rules relating to parameter monitoring leave too much discretion to
licensees and that more specific \"benchmarks\" (in terms of how often a
particular measurement should be made) should be provided.[^35] Others,
however, saw the proposals as being too regulatory in nature and urged
the Commission to adopt rules affording the greatest possible
flexibility.[^36] Specific objection was made to proposed Section
73.1580(b), which was viewed as imposing new and unneeded logging
requirements.[^37] Concern was also expressed about proposed Section
73.1350(c)(2), which was viewed as effectively tightening applicable
tolerances by requiring licensees to take into consideration the
tolerances of the measurement instruments.[^38]

The question of parameter monitoring was raised in the
[Notice]{.underline} in order to clarify what station parameters a
licensee should be concerned about and have the requisite equipment to
measure. The context of some of the comments suggests that this inquiry
was perceived as relating to what parameters ATS or remote control
equipment should be capable of measuring. That was not the intent. The
current ATS and remote control rules do not specify what parameters must
be monitored (in the case of ATS) or must be capable of being monitored
(in the case of remote control). The Commission was simply trying to
indicate what station operating parameters are considered the most
important for particular classes of stations, and require that some
means should be provided to measure those parameters as often as
necessary, whether automatically, remotely, or directly, to ensure
proper station operation. While the Commission understands the concern
expressed by some station engineers that some percentage of licensees
may not require the verification of various operating parameters at
specific intervals, the Commission is reluctant to specify measurement
intervals for various parameters. The flexibility provided by
deregulation efforts over the years has not resulted in any increase in
negligent operation. Therefore, the Commission believes that action
taken in this proceeding should continue in the same spirit of providing
the maximum possible flexibility.

Accordingly, the rules will be adopted as proposed so as to indicate the
operating parameters requiring periodic licensee attention. However, our
proposal to specifically require log entries of corrective actions will
not be included. The intent of that proposal was simply to require that
licensees maintain some minimal record of their transmission system
measurement, adjustment and maintenance procedures. The Commission
always reserves the right to question licensees found violating the
technical rules in order to determine whether or not a good-faith effort
has been made to comply with the rules. Whether a licensee\'s response
to such an inquiry takes the form of the proposed log entry or as a
reply to an interrogatory letter at the time of a perceived problem
would not appear to be of such consequence as to require specification
in the rules.

The intended effect of proposed Section 73.1350(c)(2) seems to have been
misunderstood by the commenters. It was intended merely as a
clarification of long-standing policy and not as a change in measurement
procedure or as an effective change in operating tolerances. An example
should suffice to illustrate the objective. Section 73.1560 requires
that a station\'s power be maintained as near as practicable to the
authorized value and may not be less than 90% nor more than 105% of the
authorized value for AM and FM stations. Thus, for an AM station
authorized 1,000 watts, the maximum permissible output power is 1,050
watts, which is the absolute limit. The proposed rule merely makes
explicit the implicit requirement that the licensee be aware of the
error inherent in the measurement instruments employed. Section 73.1215
requires that indicating instruments used at broadcast stations have an
accuracy of 2%. The rule merely acknowledges reality in recognizing that
the economical manufacture of perfectly accurate meters and other
measurement devices is impossible. However, producing measurement
devices with an error rate not exceeding 2% is economical.[^39] But even
though such devices may not be perfect, they can be compared or
calibrated against higher standard instruments so that their inherent
inaccuracy may be known and taken into consideration.

For the example cited, the power would typically be calculated by taking
the common point antenna impedance (for the purpose of the example, 50
ohms) and multiplying it by the square of the radio frequency (\"RF\")
current. Thus, the correct RF current (assuming a perfect indication)
would be 4.47 amperes for 1,000 watts and 4.58 amperes for 1,050 watts.
All the proposed rule requires is that the licensee be familiar with how
high or low relative to the true value a meter reads, so that the actual
indication can be used to adjust the transmitter to the authorized
limit. Thus, if a licensee had an RF ammeter with a full-scale reading
of 5 amperes which indicated 1% below the true current value, the
indicated error would be -0.05 ampere.[^40] That would need to be
subtracted from the ideal values in order to determine the true power.
Thus, the indication for the authorized power would be 4.42 amperes
(instead of the expected 4.47 amperes) and the licensee should be
concerned about overpower operation if the indicated value goes above
4.53 amperes (which, in reality, reflects a true value of 4.58 amperes).

The example given above should demonstrate clearly that the proposed
rule amendment does nothing to alter the practical application of
specified parameter tolerances. However, it does serve to correct the
erroneous idea that the Commission is only concerned with indicated,
rather than actual, parameter values. Therefore, the proposed rule will
be retained.

**[Antenna tower light monitoring.]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} suggested that antenna tower light monitoring
could be automated (as part of configuring a station for unattended
operation), and that such ongoing monitoring might provide for better
aviation safety than the once-a-day check currently required by the
rules as a minimal monitoring activity.[^41] Many of the commenters
agreed.[^42] Others favored automated but non-continuous tower
monitoring.[^43] Apparently, some automated light monitoring systems
currently in use can indicate a malfunction, but manual observation is
often needed to identify which light is out.[^44] There was some
discussion as to who should be notified in the event of a light
failure - the licensee, the FAA or both - but no consensus emerged.

Section 17.47 requires that a licensee with an antenna tower check the
lights once a day, either directly or via a monitor, or use an automatic
alarm system to signal any light failures. The Commission believes that
this rule adequately addresses the operation of automatic tower light
monitoring systems and that no addition to or amendment of it is
necessary in the face of expanded use of such devices likely to result
from action taken in this proceeding. The comments indicate the present
availability of several types of antenna tower light monitors. Some such
devices are currently permitted as an alternative to inspection by
individuals. No evidence has been presented that such devices have been
unreliable.

Currently, Section 17.48(a) requires that the licensee notify the
Federal Aviation Administration (\"FAA\") of any extinguishment or
improper functioning of any top steady burning light or any flashing
obstruction light that cannot be repaired within 30 minutes of
discovery. No sufficient justification was given for changing this rule.
The Commission believes that licensees ought to be promptly notified of
tower light failure by their monitoring equipment so as to be able to
initiate prompt remedial action. However, equipment which notifies the
licensee and the FAA simultaneously of tower lighting failures may be
employed optionally.

The Commission notes that Section 73.1213(c) permits broadcast licensees
sharing a common antenna tower to select a \"designated licensee\" with
primary responsibility for painting and lighting maintenance. By
inference the same licensee may be charged with notifying the FAA about
lighting problems. Should that person fail to notify the FAA in the
event of a lighting failure, however, the responsibility falls upon each
of the other licensees sharing the tower, just as it does with regard to
complying with other applicable regulations contained in Part 17. The
Commission notes that this responsibility may be subject to change in
the future, pending the outcome of WT Docket No. 95-5.[^45]

**[Contact Person.]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} indicated that it might be useful for the
Commission or other government agencies to be able to contact broadcast
licensees promptly in the event of a station malfunction. It pointed out
that a possible method of facilitating such a contact would be for each
licensee to provide the Commission with the name and telephone number of
a contact point, as is currently required by Section 74.734(a)(4) of our
rules for unattended operation of low power TV and TV translator
stations and by Section 74.1234(a)(4) of the rules for unattended
operation of FM translator and FM booster stations. In considering this
possibility, the Commission recognized that there are over 13,000 AM, FM
and TV broadcast stations and expressed concern that attempting to
maintain such a master list could be unwieldy. Therefore, another
possible alternative was suggested, which emulated Sections 74.765 and
74.1265 of the rules, which require that the telephone number and
address of the licensee or the licensee\'s local representative must be
posted at the station\'s transmitter site on the structure supporting
the transmitting antenna. Those rules, which apply to low power TV, TV
translator, TV booster, FM translator and FM booster stations, require
the display to be visible to a person standing on the ground and
maintained in legible condition. Lastly, the Commission asked whether
informal procedures existed which would obviate the need for these more
regulatory approaches.

Several commenters supported the concept of the Commission\'s
maintaining a contact person database.[^46] The suggestion was made that
to avoid the need to frequently update such a database, multiple contact
persons might be listed.[^47] Another suggestion was that the Commission
issue an annual computer-generated questionnaire to each licensee asking
if the information on record was correct.[^48] The observation was made
that if such a database was applied to FM translators (but the comment
is applicable to other types of broadcast auxiliary stations), the
on-site posting requirements currently applicable to such stations ought
to be eliminated.[^49]

However, other commenters were less enthusiastic about the proposal,
considering it an unnecessary expense and an undertaking that would be
difficult to keep up to date.[^50] Publication of station phone numbers
in public telephone directories in conjunction with \"voice mail\" or
simple telephone answering machines was seen as a possible substitute.
These could be linked to a paging service that could reach a responsible
person during off hours.[^51] A less formal means of contacting station
personnel would be to publish the 24-hour number of the master control
room or the emergency number of the chief operator.[^52] Another
commenter expressed security and practicality concerns about both the
database proposal (which was seen as being possibly vulnerable to
\"hackers\") and the idea of posting such information at the transmitter
site (such sites are often not accessible without a means of access, and
when they are, such information could result in abuse or
harassment).[^53]

The Commission concludes that the implementation of a contact person
database is unnecessary and that no changes in the current rules appear
warranted at this time. At the time of the [Notice]{.underline}, such an
idea was thought to have some promise, in that it might have added
structure to long-standing informal procedures. However, after
considering the comments, the Commission shares the concern expressed
about licensees\' diligence in maintaining such a database and believes
that effectively resolving security concerns could involve effort and
procedures that are likely to be cumbersome both for it and for
licensees. Instead, the Commission will continue to rely on informal
procedures used by its enforcement personnel in their respective
districts, where the names and telephone numbers of persons responsible
for various stations are maintained in a reasonably comprehensive way
and have generally proved to be sufficient.

The comments in this proceeding present a mixed message as to the value
of posting requirements. In many cases, numerous transmitters comprising
a multi-radio service \"antenna farm\" are bounded by protective fences
that would effectively preclude the public and FCC field personnel from
getting close enough to read a sign displaying the desired information.
There are cases, however, where transmitters are located in places
somewhat separated from stations of other radio services and the posting
requirement may assist in the identification of a transmission facility.
Accordingly, in the absence of more definitive information, the
Commission believes that no changes should be made in the current
transmitter site posting requirements, which apply only to LPTV, TV
translator and TV booster stations.[^54]

**[Transmitter and antenna system adjustment.]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} proposed that broadcast transmission system
adjustments should only be done by the chief operator or by some other
technically competent person designated by the licensee. This proposal
received some support[^55] but one commenter also questioned the value
of the chief operator.[^56] The commenter noted that the chief operator
(like the duty operator) only need hold the RP and is not required to
have any special training or skill, thus rendering the position
meaningless. Reference was also made to the fact that the licensee has
the primary responsibility for the operation of the station, not the
chief operator. Another commenter noted having seen \"broadcast
transmitters adjusted by local TV repairmen because the bill was lower
than employing a competent broadcast, or even a two-way, technician
versed in adjusting transmitters.\"[^57] The need for a competent
on-call operator in the event of a station malfunction was stressed.

While chief operators will no longer be required to hold any type of
license or permit issued by the Commission, such personnel are
responsible for the proper operation of broadcast stations and are
expected to be technically competent for the task. Eliminating such a
position would appear to go outside the scope of this proceeding, which
has been oriented largely toward the roles of licensed duty operators.
However, after reviewing the current and proposed regulations regarding
technical personnel, the Commission has concluded that proposed Section
73.1350(b) is somewhat duplicative of Section 73.1870 (which requires
the designation of a chief operator). Therefore, the proposed rule will
not be adopted.

**[Permissible methods for remote transmitter control]{.underline}**

Also emphasized in the [Notice]{.underline} was the need for licensees
to have prompt access to metering and control of their transmitters,
particularly the ability to turn the transmitter off in the event of a
malfunction. The Commission proposed to permit a three minute delay in
achieving such control, regardless of the kind of control circuit
utilized. This question was raised largely due to uncertainty in the
past over the reliability of non-dedicated, switched telephone circuits
(such as those used for ordinary voice communication).

One commenter argued that permitting the use of the public switched
telephone network (\"PSTN\") for transmitter control purposes was too
lenient, as even when such a system is still functional after a
disaster, it is likely to be clogged with calls made to verify the
safety of various relatives and friends.[^58] The Commission was said to
be \"naive to think that a vague requirement for an \'alternate method\'
will ensure fail-safe control.\"[^59]

Other commenters, however, disagreed.[^60] PSTN circuits were described
as being \"sufficient\" to \"extremely reliable\" by others and it was
argued that dedicated circuits were just as likely to fail as switched
circuits and may not be restored as quickly as the latter by the local
telephone company.[^61] The Commission was encouraged to permit the use
of non-dedicated (switched) lines where the use does not exceed 10%
during the nighttime hours from 6 PM to 6 AM.[^62] The inclusion of a
\"full time ON/OFF\" connection requirement was said to be an
unnecessary burden not justified by experience.[^63]

The Commission agrees with those in favor of relying on the PSTN for
transmitter control. There is no doubt that the reliability of the PSTN
is very high, and evidence that dedicated leased lines receive higher
priority from the local telephone companies has not been provided.
Moreover, the Commission is not persuaded by the arguments that
dedicated switched lines should be used for purposes other than
transmitter control, even if such use is expected to be small. It is
impossible to predict when ATS/AMC equipment may need to contact a
responsible person, or to know when designated supervisory personnel may
want to call the transmitter site to ascertain the status of the
equipment. Therefore, the rules will be amended to permit the use of a
dedicated, switched telephone line (or number) for transmitter control
purposes, in lieu of a dedicated, continual use leased line.

**[Radiotelephone Operator Permit (\"RP\").]{.underline}**

The [Notice]{.underline} questioned whether in cases where licensees
elect to continue attended station operation, duty operators should
continue to be required to hold the RP. The comments were nearly
unanimous in expressing the opinion that the RP serves no useful purpose
and represents an unnecessary expense.[^64] Several commenters noted
that the station licensee is the one responsible for a station\'s proper
operation, not the holder of an RP. However, one commenter expressed the
belief that requiring an operator license, even if only with the minimal
requirements necessary to obtain the RP, would encourage a greater sense
of responsibility, remove doubts that training for such duties is
necessary and provide a means to prevent recurrent violators from
operating broadcast stations.[^65] Another commenter reiterated the
last-mentioned point, indicating that while the RP is a card that
requires no knowledge to obtain, it does at least hold people
accountable to the FCC for their actions. They can be fined for their
infractions and in cases of gross neglect, lose the permit.[^66]

The Commission is unpersuaded that the \$35 cost of an RP and its
potential for revocation constitute much of an incentive to operate a
station responsibly. The vast majority of the commenters expressed the
opinion that the RP is completely useless. While the fee covers
processing costs, it is, in and of itself, no indicator of the value of
the permit. As an incentive for responsible operation, possession of the
RP would appear to be less effective than the damage to or severance of
an employment relationship that should be expected in cases of negligent
operation.

But the fact that broadcast licensees are held primarily responsible for
the operation of their stations is the best argument for the elimination
of the RP. We believe that most licensees do attempt to procure
competent technical personnel and that having the RP is viewed as
irrelevant to that process. Many advertisements for technical positions
include the requirement that applicants hold the older and more
meaningful General Radiotelephone Operator License and/or appropriate
certification of competence from a broadcast-related engineering
society. The latter are particularly suitable for establishing the
competency of applicants for broadcast technical and engineering
positions. Therefore, the rules are being amended to delete the
requirement that a station operator possess the RP.

**[Other rule changes recommended in the comments]{.underline}**

Several commenters recommended changes to rules either not discussed in
the [Notice]{.underline} or not included in its Appendix. In some cases,
the rules were not included in the Appendix due to oversight, but are
logical outgrowths of this proceeding or are clerical in nature.[^67]
Concern was expressed about the proposed elimination of Section
73.62(b), which relates to AM station operation during inclement
weather. Still other rule changes were suggested that go beyond the
scope of this proceeding. These included revision of Section 73.45 to
eliminate the requirement of notifying the Commission about changes in
antenna resistance, common point impedance and the use of direct reading
power meters,[^68] revision of Section 73.1560(a)(1) and (b) to increase
the upper power limit of AM and FM stations from 5% to 10% of the value
authorized[^69] and deletion of Section 73.1570(a) which relates to
minimum modulation.[^70] The recommendation also was made that the main
studio rules be abolished so that stations could be operated as
unattended \"repeaters,\" provided that toll-free access to the station
is provided by the licensee. The argument was made that maintaining and
manning a main studio is a cost beyond the reach of some licensees,
especially in the AM service. The flexibility to operate a network of
local stations from a central location is seen as providing a community
service not otherwise available, additional employment and tax revenue
and enabling local advertisers affordable access to the community.[^71]

Amendment of Sections 73.757 (which requires that a licensed operator be
present when an auxiliary transmitter is placed in operation) and
73.1230 (which concerns the posting of operator licenses) will be made
as requested, as they were omitted in the [Notice]{.underline} due to
oversight, are editorial in nature and are clearly within the scope of
this proceeding. Further, the Commission agrees that omission of the
substance of current Section 73.62(b) in the proposed revision
constitutes an omission that unnecessarily reduces current operational
flexibility. Therefore, Section 73.62 as adopted herein will retain the
former flexibility concerning operation during inclement weather.

The suggested amendment of Section 73.45 may be worthwhile, but as no
other parties commented on the proposal in reply comments, the
Commission believes that the amendment should be deferred for the
present. Furthermore, the subject is expected to be discussed in another
rulemaking proceeding.[^72] The recommended increase in power tolerance
for AM and FM stations appears to be unnecessary, as the Commission has
no complaints on record that the current tolerance is too stringent.
Moreover, no reply comments supported the suggestion. The comment
regarding main studio location is outside the scope of this proceeding,
as more than simply technical factors would be at issue, and they would
require further analysis in a more appropriate forum. Therefore, the
Commission concludes that no revision to Sections 73.45, 73.1125,
73.1560 and 73.1570(a) will be made at this time.

**ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS**

A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is set forth in Appendix B.

**ORDERING CLAUSE**

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, effective **\[30 days after
publication in the Federal Register\]**, Parts 73 and 74 of the
Commission\' Rules and Regulations ARE AMENDED as set forth in Appendix
A. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THIS PROCEEDING IS TERMINATED.

Further information on this matter may be obtained from James E.
McNally, Jr., Engineering Policy Branch, (202) 776-1671.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

William F. Caton

Acting Secretary

**APPENDIX A**

Parts 73 and 74 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
amended as follows:

**PART 73 - RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES**

The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334.

Section 73.53 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(9) to read as
follows:

**§73.53 Requirements for authorization of antenna monitors.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) \* \* \*

\(9\) The monitor, if intended for use by stations operating directional
antenna systems by remote control, shall be designed so that the
switching functions required by paragraph (b)(7) of this section may be
performed from a point external to the monitor, and phase and amplitude
indications be provided by external meters. The indications of external
meters furnished by the manufacturer shall meet the specifications for
accuracy and repeatability of the monitor itself, and the connection of
these meters to the monitor, or of other indicating instruments with
electrical characteristics meeting the specifications of the monitor
manufacturer shall not affect adversely the performance of the monitor
in any respect.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 73.57 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:

**§73.57 Remote reading antenna and common point ammeters.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) Each remote reading ammeter shall be accurate to within 2 percent
of the value read on its corresponding regular ammeter.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 73.62 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:

**§73.62 Directional antenna system tolerances.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) Whenever the operating parameters of a directional antenna cannot
be maintained within the tolerances specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, the following procedures will apply:

\(1\) The licensee shall measure and log every monitoring point at least
once for each mode of directional operation. Subsequent variations in
operating parameters will require the remeasuring and logging of every
monitoring point to assure that the authorized monitoring point limits
are not being exceeded.

\(2\) Provided each monitoring point is within its specified limit,
operation may continue for a period up to 30 days before a request for
Special Temporary Authority (STA) must be filed, pursuant to paragraph
(b)(4) of this section, to operate with parameters at variance from the
provisions of paragraph (a) of this section.

\(3\) If any monitoring point exceeds its specified limit, the licensee
must either terminate operation within 3 hours or reduce power in
accordance with the applicable provisions of §73.1350(d), in order to
eliminate any possibility of interference or excessive radiation in any
direction.

\(4\) If operation pursuant to paragraph (b)(3) of this section is
necessary, or before the 30 day period specified in paragraph (b)(2) of
this section expires, the licensee must request a Special Temporary
Authority (STA) in accordance with §73.1635 to continue operation with
parameters at variance and/or with reduced power along with a statement
certifying that all monitoring points will be continuously maintained
within their specified limits.

\(5\) The licensee will be permitted 24 hours to accomplish the actions
specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section; [provided
that]{.underline}, the date and time of the failure to maintain proper
operating parameters has been recorded in the station log.

\(c\) In any other situation in which it might reasonably be anticipated
that the operating parameters might vary out of tolerance (such as
planned array repairs or adjustment and proofing procedures), the
licensee shall, [before such activity is undertaken]{.underline}, obtain
an STA in accordance with §73.1635 in order to operate with parameters
at variance and/or with reduced power as required to maintain all
monitoring points within their specified limits.

Section 73.69 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) to
read as follows:

**§73.69 Antenna monitors.**

\(a\) \* \* \*

\(1\) Normally, the antenna monitor is to be installed immediately
adjacent to the transmitter and antenna phasing equipment. However, the
monitor may be located elsewhere provided that its environment is
maintained at all times within those limits under which the monitor was
type-approved.

\(2\) The antenna monitor installed at a station operating a directional
antenna by remote control or when the monitor is installed in the
antenna field at a distance from the transmitter, must be designed and
authorized for such use in accordance with the provisions of
§73.53(b)(9).

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 73.691 is revised to read as follows:

**§73.691 Visual modulation monitoring.**

\(a\) Each TV station must have measuring equipment for determining that
the transmitted visual signal conforms to the provisions of this
subpart. The licensee shall decide the monitoring and measurement
methods or procedures for indicating and controlling the visual signal.

\(b\) In the event technical problems make it impossible to operate in
accordance with the timing and carrier level tolerance requirements of
§73.682 (a)(9)(i), (a)(9)(ii), (a)(12), (a)(13), and (a)(17), a TV
broadcast station may operate at variance for a period of not more than
30 days without specific authority from the FCC; [provided
that]{.underline}, the date and time of the initial out-of-tolerance
condition has been entered in the station log. If the operation at
variance will exceed 10 consecutive days, a notification must be sent to
the FCC in Washington, D.C., not later than the 10th day of such
operation. In the event normal operation is resumed prior to the end of
the 30 day period, the licensee must notify the FCC upon restoration of
normal operation. If causes beyond the control of the licensee prevent
restoration of normal operation within 30 days, a written request must
be made to the FCC in Washington, D.C., no later than the 30th day for
such additional time as may be necessary.

Section 73.757 is revised by removing and reserving paragraph (b).

Section 73.764 is removed.

Section 73.1010 is revised by removing and reserving paragraph (c).

Section 73.1230 is revised to read as follows:

**§73.1230 Posting of station license.**

\(a\) The station license and any other instrument of station
authorization shall be posted in a conspicuous place and in such a
manner that all terms are visible at the place the licensee considers to
be the principal control point of the transmitter.

\(b\) Posting of the station license and any other instruments of
authorization shall be done by affixing them to the wall at the posting
location, or by enclosing them in a binder or folder which is retained
at the posting location so that the documents will be readily available
and easily accessible.

A new Section 73.1300 is added to read as follows:

**§73.1300 Unattended station operation.**

Broadcast stations may be operated as either attended (where a
designated person is responsible for the proper operation of the
transmitting apparatus either at the transmitter site, a remote control
point or an ATS control point) or unattended (where highly stable
equipment or automated monitoring of station operating parameters is
employed). No prior FCC approval is required to operate a station in the
unattended mode. Regardless of which method of station operation is
employed, licensees must employ procedures which will ensure compliance
with Part 11 of this chapter, the rules governing the Emergency Alert
System (EAS).

A new Section 73.1350 is added to read as follows:

**§73.1350 Transmission system operation.**

\(a\) Each licensee is responsible for maintaining and operating its
broadcast station in a manner which complies with the technical rules
set forth elsewhere in this part and in accordance with the terms of the
station authorization.

\(b\) The licensee must designate a chief operator in accordance with
§73.1870. The licensee may designate one or more technically competent
persons to adjust the transmitter operating parameters for compliance
with the technical rules and the station authorization.

\(1\) Persons so authorized by the licensee may make such adjustments
directly at the transmitter site or by using control equipment at an
off-site location.

\(2\) The transmitter control personnel must have the capability to turn
the transmitter off at all times. If the personnel are at a remote
location, the control system must provide this capability continuously
or must include an alternate method of acquiring control that can
satisfy the requirement of paragraph (d) of this section that operation
be terminated within 3 minutes.

\(c\) The licensee must establish monitoring procedures and schedules
for the station and the indicating instruments employed must comply with
§73.1215.

\(1\) Monitoring procedures and schedules must enable the licensee to
determine compliance with §73.1560 regarding operating power and AM
station mode of operation, §73.1570 regarding modulation levels, and,
where applicable, §73.1213 regarding antenna tower lighting, and §73.69
regarding the parameters of an AM directional antenna system.

\(2\) Monitoring equipment must be periodically calibrated so as to
provide reliable indications of transmitter operating parameters with a
known degree of accuracy. Errors inherent in monitoring equipment and
the calibration procedure must be taken into account when adjusting
operating parameters to ensure that the limits imposed by the technical
rules and the station authorization are not exceeded.

\(d\) In the event that a broadcast station is operating in a manner
that is not in compliance with the technical rules set forth elsewhere
in this Part or the terms of the station authorization, and the
condition is not listed in paragraph (e) of this section, broadcast
operation must be terminated within three hours.

\(1\) Examples of conditions that require termination of operation
include excessive power or excessive modulation.

\(2\) Additional examples for AM stations are any mode of operation not
specified by the station license for the pertinent time of day or hours
of operation and any condition of antenna parameters or monitoring
points out of the tolerances specified elsewhere in this part or by the
station\'s instrument of authorization. For these conditions, operation
must be terminated within three minutes unless antenna input power is
reduced sufficiently to eliminate any excess radiation.

\(3\) For AM stations using directional arrays, additional procedures
apply when array operating parameters are at variance, monitoring points
exceed specified limits, or authorized directional mode capability is
lost. See §§73.62, Directional antenna system tolerances; 73.158,
Directional antenna monitoring points; and 73.1680(b), Emergency
antennas.

\(e\) If a broadcast station is operating in a manner that is not in
compliance with one of the following technical rules, operation may
continue if the station complies with relevant alternative provisions in
the specified rule section.

\(1\) AM directional antenna system tolerances, [see]{.underline}
§73.62;

\(2\) AM directional antenna monitoring points, [see]{.underline}
§73.158;

\(3\) TV visual waveform, [see]{.underline} §73.691(b).

\(4\) Reduced power operation, [see]{.underline} §73.1560(d);

\(5\) Reduced modulation level, [see]{.underline} §73.1570(a);

\(6\) Emergency antennas, [see]{.underline} §73.1680.

\(f\) The transmission system must be maintained and inspected in
accordance with §73.1580.

\(g\) Whenever a transmission system control point is established at a
location other than at the main studio or transmitter, notification of
that location must be sent to the FCC in Washington, D.C. within 3 days
of the initial use of that point. This notification is not required if
responsible station personnel can be contacted at the transmitter or
studio site during hours of operation.

\(h\) The licensee must ensure that the station is operated in
compliance with Part 11 of this chapter, the rules governing the
Emergency Alert System (EAS).

Section 73.1400 is revised to read as follows:

**§73.1400 Transmission system monitoring and control.**

The licensee of an AM, FM or TV station is responsible for assuring that
at all times the station operates within tolerances specified by
applicable technical rules contained in this Part and in accordance with
the terms of the station authorization. Any method of complying with
applicable tolerances is permissible. The following are typical methods
of transmission system operation:

\(a\) [Attended Operation]{.underline}: Attended operation consists of
ongoing supervision of the transmission facilities by a station employee
or other person designated by the licensee. Such supervision may be
accomplished by either:

\(1\) Direct supervision and control of transmission system parameters
by a person at the transmitter site; or,

\(2\) Remote control of the transmission system by a person at the main
studio or other location. The remote control system must provide
sufficient transmission system monitoring and control capability so as
to ensure compliance with §73.1350.

\(3\) A station may also be monitored and controlled by an automatic
transmission system (ATS) that is configured to contact a person
designated by the licensee in the event of a technical malfunction. An
automatic transmission system consists of monitoring devices, control
and alarm circuitry, arranged so that they interact automatically to
operate the station\'s transmitter and maintain technical parameters
within licensed values.

\(4\) A hybrid system containing some remote control and some ATS
features is also permissible.

\(5\) In the case of remote control or ATS operation, not every station
parameter need be monitored or controlled if the licensee has good
reason to believe that its stability is so great that its monitoring and
control are unnecessary.

\(b\) [Unattended operation]{.underline}: Unattended operation is either
the absence of human supervision or the substitution of automated
supervision of a station\'s transmission system for human supervision.
In the former case, equipment is employed which is expected to operate
within assigned tolerances for extended periods of time. The latter
consists of the use of a self-monitoring or ATS-monitored and controlled
transmission system that, in lieu of contacting a person designated by
the licensee, automatically takes the station off the air within three
hours of any technical malfunction which is capable of causing
interference.

Sections 73.1410, 73.1500 and 73.1550 are removed.

Section 73.1580 is revised to read as follows:

**§73.1580 Transmission system inspections.**

Each AM, FM, and TV station licensee or permittee must conduct periodic
complete inspections of the transmitting system and all required
monitors to ensure proper station operation.

Section 73.1635 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5) to read as
follows:

**§73.1635 Special temporary authorizations (STA).**

\(a\) \* \* \*

\(5\) Certain rules specify special considerations and procedures in
situations requiring an STA or permit temporary operation at variance
without prior authorization from the FCC when notification is filed as
prescribed in the particular rules. See §73.62, Directional antenna
system tolerances; §73.157, Antenna testing during daytime; §73.158,
Directional antenna monitoring points; §73.691, Visual modulation
monitoring; §73.1250, Broadcasting emergency information; §73.1350,
Transmission system operation; §73.1560, Operating power and mode
tolerances; §73.1570, Modulation levels: AM, FM, and TV aural; §73.1615,
Operation during modification of facilities; §73.1680, Emergency
antennas; and §73.1740, Minimum operating schedule.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 73.1820 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text
(a)(2)(iii), by removing paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5) and (b)(6),
redesignating paragraphs (b)(7) and (b)(8) as paragraphs (b)(4) and
(b)(5), respectively and revising newly designated paragraph (b)(4) to
read as follows:

**§73.1820 Station log.**

\(a\) Entries must be made in the station log either manually by a
person designated by the licensee who is in actual charge of the
transmitting apparatus, or by automatic devices meeting the requirements
of paragraph (b) of this section. Indications of operating parameters
that are required to be logged must be logged prior to any adjustment of
the equipment. Where adjustments are made to restore parameters to their
proper operating values, the corrected indications must be logged and
accompanied, if any parameter deviation was beyond a prescribed
tolerance, by a notation describing the nature of the corrective action.
Indications of all parameters whose values are affected by the
modulation of the carrier must be read without modulation. The actual
time of observation must be included in each log entry. The following
information must be entered:

\* \* \* \* \*

\(2\) \* \* \*

\(iii\) Entries of the results of calibration of automatic logging
devices (see paragraph (b) of this section) or indicating instruments
(see §73.67), whenever performed.

\(b\) \* \* \*

\(4\) In the event of failure or malfunctioning of the automatic
equipment, the person designated by the licensee as being responsible
for the log shall make the required entries in the log manually at that
time.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 73.1860 is removed.

Section 73.1870 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(3) to read
as follows:

**§73.1870 Chief operators.**

\(a\) The licensee of each AM, FM, or TV broadcast station must
designate a person to serve as the station\'s chief operator. At times
when the chief operator is unavailable or unable to act
([e.g.]{.underline}, vacations, sickness), the licensee shall designate
another person as the acting chief operator on a temporary basis.

\(b\) \* \* \*

\(3\) The designation of the chief operator must be in writing with a
copy of the designation posted with the station license. Agreements with
chief operators serving on a contract basis must be in writing with a
copy kept in the station files.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 74 - EXPERIMENTAL, AUXILIARY, AND SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES**

The authority citation for Part 74 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 4, 303, 48 Stat. 1066, as amended, 1082, as amended; 47
U.S.C. 154, 303, 554.

Section 74.5 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (c).

Section 74.18 is revised to read as follows:

**§74.18 Transmitter control and operation.**

Except where unattended operation is specifically permitted, the
licensee of each station authorized under the provisions of this part
shall designate a person or persons to activate and control its
transmitter. At the discretion of the station licensee, persons so
designated may be employed for other duties and for operation of other
transmitting stations if such other duties will not interfere with the
proper operation of the station transmission systems.

Section 74.165 is revised to read as follows:

**§74.165 Posting of station license.**

The instrument of authorization or a clearly legible photocopy thereof
shall be available at the transmitter site.

Section 74.432 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(1) to read as
follows:

**§74.432 Licensing requirements and procedures.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) \* \* \*

\(1\) The station must be designed, installed, and protected so that the
transmitter can only be activated or controlled by persons authorized by
the licensee.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.434 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

**§74.434 Remote control operation.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) A remote control system must be designed, installed, and protected
so that the transmitter can only be activated or controlled by persons
authorized by the licensee.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.436 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

**§74.436 Special requirements for automatic relay stations.**

\(a\) An automatic relay station must be designed, installed, and
protected so that the transmitter can only be activated or controlled by
persons authorized by the licensee.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.533 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:

**§74.533 Remote control and unattended operation.**

\(a\) \* \* \*

\(2\) The remote control system must be designed, installed, and
protected so that the transmitter can only be activated or controlled by
persons authorized by the licensee.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.564 is amended by revising the heading and paragraph (a) to
read as follows:

**§74.564 Posting of station license.**

\(a\) The station license and any other instrument of authorization or
individual order concerning the construction of the equipment or manner
of operation of the station shall be posted in the room in which the
transmitter is located, provided that if the station is operated by
remote control pursuant to §74.533, the station license shall be posted
at the operating position.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.634 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:

**§74.634 Remote control operation.**

\(a\) \* \* \*

\(1\) The remote control system must be designed, installed, and
protected so that the transmitter can only be activated or controlled by
persons authorized by the licensee.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.703 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

**§74.703 Interference.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(c\) It shall be the responsibility of the licensee of a low power TV,
TV translator, or TV booster station to correct any condition of
interference which results from the radiation of radio frequency energy
outside its assigned channel. Upon notice by the Commission to the
station licensee that such interference is caused by spurious emissions
of the station, operation of the station shall be suspended within three
minutes and not resumed until the interference has been eliminated.
However, short test transmissions may be made during the period of
suspended operation to check the efficacy of remedial measures.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.734 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text
and removing paragraph (a)(6) to read as follows:

**§74.734 Attended and Unattended operation.**

\(a\) Low power TV, TV translator, and TV booster stations may be
operated without a designated person in attendance if the following
requirements are met:

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.750 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:

**§74.750 Transmission system facilities.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(g\) Low power TV, TV translator, or TV booster stations installing new
type accepted transmitting apparatus incorporating modulating equipment
need not make equipment performance measurements and shall so indicate
on the station license application. Stations adding new or replacing
modulating equipment in existing low power TV, TV translator, or TV
booster station transmitting apparatus must have a qualified person
examine the transmitting system after installation. This person must
certify in the application for the station license that the transmitting
equipment meets the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) of this section. A
report of the methods, measurements, and results must be kept in the
station records. However, stations installing modulating equipment
solely for the limited local origination of signals permitted by §74.731
need not comply with the requirements of this paragraph.

Section 74.765 is amended by removing paragraph (b) and redesignating
paragraph (c) as paragraph (b), respectively.

Section 74.769 is revised to read as follows:

**§74.769 Copies of rules.**

The licensee or permittee of a station authorized under this subpart
shall have a current copy of Volume I and Volume III of the
Commission\'s Rules. Each such licensee or permittee shall be familiar
with those rules relating to stations authorized under this subpart.
Copies of the Commission\'s rules may be obtained from the
Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
20402.

Section 74.901 is amended by revising the definitions for attended
operation, remote control and unattended operation to read as follows:

**§74.901 Definitions.**

[Attended operation]{.underline}. Operation of a station by a designated
person on duty at the place where the transmitting apparatus is located
with the transmitter in the person\'s plain view.

\* \* \* \* \*

[Remote control]{.underline}. Operation of a station by a designated
person at a control position from which the transmitter is not visible
but where suitable control and telemetering circuits are provided which
allow the performance of the essential functions that could be performed
at the transmitter.

\* \* \* \* \*

[Unattended operation]{.underline}. Operation of a station by automatic
means whereby the transmitter is turned on and off and performs its
functions without attention by a designated person.

Section 74.939 is amended by revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:

**§74.939 Special rules governing ITFS response stations.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(i\) The transmitter of an ITFS response station may be operated
unattended. The overall performance of the ITFS response station
transmitter shall be checked as often as necessary to ensure that it is
functioning in accordance with the requirements of the Commission\'s
rules. The licensee of an ITFS response station is responsible for the
proper operation of the transmitter at all times. The transmitter shall
be installed and protected in such manner as to prevent tampering or
operation by unauthorized persons.

\* \* \* \* \*

Section 74.969 is revised to read as follows:

**§74.969 Copies of rules.**

The licensee of an instructional television fixed station shall have a
current copy of Parts 73 and 74 of the Commission\'s Rules. In cases
where aeronautical hazard marking of antennas is required, such licensee
shall also have a current copy of Part 17 of this chapter. Each licensee
is expected to be familiar with the pertinent rules governing
instructional television fixed stations.

Section 74.1203 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:

**§74.1203 Interference.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) It shall be the responsibility of the licensee of an FM translator
or FM booster station to correct any condition of interference which
results from the radiation of radio frequency energy by its equipment on
any frequency outside the assigned channel. Upon notice by the
Commission to the station licensee that such interference is being
caused, the operation of the FM translator or FM booster station shall
be suspended within three minutes and shall not be resumed until the
interference has been eliminated or it can be demonstrated that the
interference is not due to spurious emissions by the FM translator or FM
booster station; [provided]{.underline}, [however]{.underline}, that
short test transmissions may be made during the period of suspended
operation to check the efficacy of remedial measures.

Section 74.1234 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and removing
paragraph (c) to read as follows:

**§74.1234 Unattended operation.**

\(a\) A station authorized under this subpart may be operated without a
designated person in attendance if the following requirements are met:

\* \* \* \* \*

**APPENDIX B**

**Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis**

I. [Reason for Action]{.underline}

A revision in the Communications Act of 1934 has given the Commission
authority to waive the requirement that broadcast stations be operated
by licensed transmitter duty operators. A waiver of this requirement
would permit such stations to be operated unattended for the first time.
This [Report and Order]{.underline} specifies the conditions relating to
such operation.

II\. [Objectives]{.underline}

The action taken herein is intended to update the rules to provide for
unattended broadcast station operation and to clarify the technical
responsibilities of broadcast licensees, particularly those operating
unattended stations.

III\. [Legal Basis]{.underline}

The action taken is authorized by Sections 4(i) and (j), 302, 303 and
403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

IV\. [Description, Potential Impact and Number of Small Entities
Affected]{.underline}

The action taken in this proceeding is expected to benefit smaller
broadcast licensees by eliminating the need for a transmitter duty
operator. This is expected to result in a significant operational cost
savings. However, taking advantage of the flexibility provided by the
proposed new rules is entirely optional. Licensees may continue to
operate as they currently do if they so desire.

V. [Recording, Record Keeping and Other Compliance
Requirements]{.underline}

Comments directed toward the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
contained in the [Notice of Proposed Rule Making]{.underline}
(\"[Notice]{.underline}\") were filed by Ted Miller, who complained
about new record-keeping and other requirements proposed in the
[Notice]{.underline} when the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
indicated that there were none. Strictly speaking, Mr. Miller\'s
assertions are correct. However, the Commission concludes that the new
record-keeping requirements proposed in the [Notice]{.underline} were
insignificant compared to the many other deregulatory aspects of this
proceeding. However, all of Mr. Miller\'s complaints and recommendations
have been accommodated and are addressed either in the text of the
attached [Report and Order]{.underline} or in the rule appendix, so that
there is in fact no adverse regulatory impact whatsoever on smaller
broadcast licensees.

VI\. [Federal Rules which Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict with this
Rule]{.underline}

None.

VII\. [Any Significant Alternative Minimizing Impact on Small Entities
and Consistent with the Stated Objectives]{.underline}

None.

**APPENDIX C**

Parties filing comments in MM Docket No. 94-130:

Allison Associates (Allison)

Association of Minnesota Public Educational Radio Stations (AMPERS)

Anderson, Andy (Anderson)

Association of Federal Communications Consulting Engineers (AFCCE)

Baker, Vernon H. (Baker)

Batesville Broadcasting Co. (Batesville)

Bellingham Broadcasting (Bellingham)

Birch Bay Broadcasting Co. (Birch Bay)

Broadcast Electronics Inc. (BEI)

Broadcast Signal Lab (BSL)

Burk Technology Inc. (Burk)

Burrow, R. Morgan (Burrow)

Capital Cities/ABC Inc. (Cap Cities/ABC)

Equity One Media Partners (Equity One)

Flick, Curtis W. (Flick)

Gentner Communications Co. (Gentner)

Gray, James P. (Gray)

Hallikainen and Friends (Hallikainen)

Ham Broadcasting Co. (Ham)

Harris Corporation (Harris)

Herald Broadcasting (Herald)

KM Communications (KMC)

Liberty Temple Full Gospel Church Inc. (Liberty Temple)

Miller, Randal J. (R. Miller)

Miller, Theodore C. (T. Miller)

Moody Bible Institute of Chicago (Moody Bible)

National Association of Broadcasters (NAB)

National Public Radio (NPR)

Osenkowsky, Thomas Gary (Osenkowsky)

Platinum Broadcasting Inc. (PBI)

Reich, Raymond F. (StationWatch)

Rio Grande Bible Institute & Language School (KRIO-AM/KOIR-FM)

S&S Communications Group (S&S)

Silver King Communications (Silver King)

Society of Broadcast Engineers (SBE)

Soucise, Joseph R. (Soucise)

Smith, Thomas C. (Smith)

State Broadcasters Associations (SBA)

Taconite Broadcasting, Inc. (Taconite)

Tidewater Broadcasting (Tidewater)

Tradewater Broadcasting Co. (Tradewater)

Wagner, James P. (Wagner)

Wind River Communications (Wind River)

KIOW-FM

KOLY-AM/FM

KSUE \[93 JDX\]

KUGR/KYCS

WATS/WAVR

WGOG

WHYL-AM

WJLR-FM (Reising, Keith)

WNPC Inc. (WNPC)

WSWO

WVOW

Reply Comments were filed by:

Capital Cities/ABC Inc. (Cap Cities/ABC)

Community Broadcasters Association (CBA)

National Association of Broadcasters (NAB)

[^1]: ^?^ The application for an RP principally requires that the
    applicant certify as to his or her familiarity with the rules
    relating to the type of station being operated.

[^2]: ^?^ The relevant portion of Section 318 formerly read as follows:
    \"The actual operation of all transmitting apparatus in any radio
    station for which a station license is required by this Act shall be
    carried on only by a person holding an operator\'s license issued
    hereunder, and no person shall operate any such apparatus in such
    station except under and in accordance with an operator\'s license
    issued to him by the Commission; [Provided, however]{.underline},
    That the Commission if it shall find that the public interest,
    convenience or necessity will be served thereby may waive or modify
    the foregoing provisions of this section for the operation of any
    station except (1) stations for which licensed operators are
    required by international agreement, (2) stations for which licensed
    operators are required for safety purposes, (3) **stations engaged
    in broadcasting**, and (4) stations operated as common
    carriers\...\" The Law deleted the expression \"stations engaged in
    broadcasting\" and made \"stations operated as common carriers\" the
    third and last class of station for which licensed operators are
    required.

[^3]: ^?^ 10 FCC Rcd 509, 59 Fed. Reg. 64387, December 14, 1994.

[^4]: ^?^ Comments of BEI (p. 2), KTRL, (p. 1) and NAB (p. 6).

[^5]: ^?^ Comments of S&S (p. 1), KTRZ (p. 1), WNCG-FM (p. 1) and
    WNPC-AM.

[^6]: ^?^ Comments of the AFCCE (p. 2), KOLY (p. 1), WHRZ-FM (p. 1).

[^7]: ^?^ Comments of BEI (p. 2) and NAB (p. 3).

[^8]: ^?^ Comments of StationWatch (p. 7).

[^9]: ^?^ Comments of StationWatch (p. 1).

[^10]: ^?^ Comments of Moody Bible (p. 3). In its reply comments (pp.
    5-6), NAB specially opposed Moody Bible\'s proposal for additional
    forfeitures, saying that it was based \"on the wholly unfounded
    presumption that broadcasters, in general, will become
    irresponsible.\"

[^11]: ^?^ StationWatch indicates that monitoring services cost about
    \$275 per month, or less than seventy-five cents an hour (p. 7).

[^12]: ^?^ Comments of Birch Bay (p. 1), Burk (p. 2), KIOW (p. 1), KTRZ
    (p. 1) and SBE (p. 2).

[^13]: ^?^ Comments of BEI (p. 5), KIOW (p. 3), KM Communications (p. 3)
    and NAB (p. 10).

[^14]: ^?^ Comments of Birch Bay (p. 2).

[^15]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 2), Cap Cities/ABC (p. 3), Equity One
    (p. 5), SBA (p. 4) and SBE (p. 4) and Cap Cities (p. 3).

[^16]: ^?^ The comments were unanimous in stating that transmitter
    operating frequency is so stable that it does not need to be
    monitored. Several commenters argued that modulation need not be
    monitored. SBE recommended that the following parameters be
    monitored for the indicated type of station: (1) AM - operating
    power, mode of operation, time of operation, antenna monitor
    indications of base current ratios and phases, modulation, tower
    lighting (if required) and EAS alarm; (2) FM - operating power,
    modulation, tower lighting (if required) and EAS alarm; and, (3)
    TV - aural and visual power, aural and visual modulation, tower
    lighting (if required) and EAS alarm.

[^17]: ^?^ Comments of Silver King (p. 2).

[^18]: ^?^ Sampling systems pick up the signal radiated by each antenna
    in a directional array, relaying them via coaxial cable to an
    antenna monitor which displays the signal phases and amplitudes
    necessary to demonstrate that the array is functioning properly. An
    \"approved\" antenna sampling system is one that meets the
    requirements of Section 73.68(a), which specifies certain necessary
    design characteristics, and has been informally recognized as such
    by the Commission. Sampling systems which do not meet the
    requirements of Section 73.68(a) may tend to be less stable and
    require more human intervention than approved systems. Stations may
    operate with sampling systems which have not been approved.

[^19]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 3), Herald (p. 2), Moody Bible (pp.
    6-7) and SBE (pp. 6-7).

[^20]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 2) and SBE (p. 6).

[^21]: ^?^ Comments of Flick (p. 2).

[^22]: ^?^ For example, logging requirements were greatly reduced in
    1983 for all broadcast stations except AM stations without approved
    sampling systems (see Section 73.1820(a)(2)). The logging
    requirement was retained for such stations largely as an inducement
    to upgrade their sampling systems. Currently, about 200 AM stations
    operate without approved sampling systems. It is evident that the
    licensees of those stations believe that their current sampling
    systems are adequate and that the cost of upgrading substantially
    outweighs the ongoing expense of making periodic logging entries. In
    view of the questionable value of withholding unattended operation
    from such stations and considering the sampling system maintenance
    observations made by Flick, the Commission concludes that new
    regulatory burdens should not be imposed on such stations.

[^23]: ^?^ Unattended operation of a broadcast station is operation that
    does not involve humans in directly overseeing and controlling the
    transmitting apparatus. A station may be \"unattended\" even though
    persons are present for management, sales, programming and other
    duties.

[^24]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 4), BEI (p. 7), BTI, (p. 3), Cap
    Cities/ABC (p. 4), Hallikainen (p. 8), SBE (p. 7) and Smith (p. 4).

[^25]: ^?^ Comments of BTI (p. 3). The difficulty in automating the EBS
    is not in determining when an EBS alert has arrived, or when or how
    to insert it into station programming, but in determining when the
    alert message is over so that normal programming can be resumed.

[^26]: ^?^ Comments of BEI (p. 7).

[^27]: ^?^ Comments of NAB (p. 17); comments of CBA (p. 5) and Wagner
    (p. 6).

[^28]: ^?^ [Notice]{.underline}, paragraphs 25-31.

[^29]: ^?^ [See]{.underline} comments of KIOW (p. 4) which suggested
    7-10 minutes, SBA (p. 6) which suggested \"at least three minutes,\"
    Wagner (p. 5) who suggested \"five or ten minutes,\" Gentner (p. 3)
    who stated \"This period, while workable, may be in some situations
    be of too short a duration\", NPR (pp. 3-4) which recommended no
    limit if interference does not actually result but at least
    \"several hours\" in any case, and AFCCE (pp. 6-8) which recommended
    various time limits from three minutes to several weeks depending on
    the specific problem. Cap Cities/ABC expressed the opinion that the
    \"proposed blanket three-minute rule is vague, unworkable and
    counterproductive.\" Moody Bible (p. 11) expressed support for the
    three-minute limit in the case of unattended stations, but argued
    that attended stations should be permitted up to 30 minutes. Other
    commenters expressed similarly diverse opinions.

[^30]: ^?^ As an example of such conditions, AFCCE (comments, p. 6)
    suggested \"If the power of the station is more than two times that
    authorized for the mode of operation, or where the modulation
    exceeds 150%.\" Failure of an AM station to effect a mode switch was
    also cited as being potentially severe but deserving some latitude
    (30 minutes) in terms of correction due to the time for propagation
    conditions to change. AFCCE (comments, p. 7) also challenged the
    preference expressed in the [Notice]{.underline} (paras. 28, 30 and
    31) for relying on field strength monitoring points as the final
    arbiters of proper antenna array performance. Antenna sampling
    system monitor readings (which typically derive their signals from
    small loop antennas mounted on the main antenna towers) were seen as
    more reliable.

[^31]: ^?^ A harmonic is an integer multiple of the operating frequency.
    A spurious product is any other undesired emission that might be
    generated by the transmitter. Typically, the power contained in
    harmonic or spurious frequencies is insignificant. Occasionally,
    however, due to some failure in the transmitter, such signals can
    become significant and potentially cause interference. The
    Commission has never required that such a failure be detectable by
    ATS or any other kind of equipment. Such a diagnosis requires human
    investigation.

[^32]: ^?^ [See]{.underline}, for example, the comments of AFCCE (p. 8),
    BEI (p. 2), KIOW (p. 5), BSL (p. 2) and NPR (p. 5).

[^33]: ^?^ Comments of BSL (p. 1), Flick (p. 3), Gray (p. 2), KIOW (p.
    5) and NPR (p. 5). The comments of BSL (a manufacturer of ATS and
    remote control equipment) are particularly significant, as they
    suggest that some ATS equipment currently in use does not monitor
    modulation.

[^34]: ^?^ Comments of Moody Bible (p. 15).

[^35]: ^?^ Comments of Moody Bible (p. 12), BSL (p. 2) and SBA (p. 12).

[^36]: ^?^ Comments of NPR (p. 6), Flick (p. 3), KM Communications (p.
    4) and Wagner (p. 4).

[^37]: ^?^ Comments of NAB (p. 15) and Miller (p. 2).

[^38]: ^?^ Comments of Hallikainen (p. 14) and Miller (p. 2).

[^39]: ^?^ In many cases, meters and other measurement devices
    manufactured to meet a 2% specification may, in fact, be
    considerably more accurate, but such accuracy cannot be relied upon.

[^40]: ^?^ Meter accuracies are usually expressed as a percentage of the
    maximum indicated reading.

[^41]: ^?^ Section 17.47(a)(1).

[^42]: ^?^ [See]{.underline}, for example, the comments of AFCCE (p. 4),
    Birch Bay (p. 3), Harris (p. 2), Moody Bible (p. 10), NAB (p. 12)
    and SBE (p. 7).

[^43]: ^?^ Comments of NAB (p. 12) which favored the use of either
    continuous or \"on request\" monitoring and KIOW (p. 4), which
    favored the latter approach.

[^44]: ^?^ Comments of Cap Cities/ABC (p. 4).

[^45]: ^?^ \"Streamlining the Commission\'s Antenna Structure Clearance
    Procedure and Revision of Part 17 of the Commission\'s Rules
    Concerning Construction, Marking and Lighting of Antenna
    Structures,\" 10 FCC Rcd 2771, 60 Fed. Reg. 8618, February 15, 1995.

[^46]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 5), BEI (p. 7), Moody Bible (p. 9) and
    SBE (p. 8).

[^47]: ^?^ Comments of NPR (p. 4) and SBE (p. 9).

[^48]: ^?^ Comments of BSL (p. 2).

[^49]: ^?^ Comments of Moody Bible (p. 10).

[^50]: ^?^ Comments of StationWatch (p. 5) and Wagner (p. 7).

[^51]: ^?^ Comments of Wagner (p. 7).

[^52]: ^?^ Comments of BSL (p. 2).

[^53]: ^?^ Comments of Cap Cities/ABC (p. 4).

[^54]: ^?^ See Section 74.765(c).

[^55]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 9).

[^56]: ^?^ Comments of SBA (p. 8).

[^57]: ^?^ Comments of Flick (p. 4).

[^58]: ^?^ Comments of SBE (p. 11).

[^59]: ^?^ Id.

[^60]: ^?^ Comments of Burk (p. 4), Hallikainen (p. 15) and NAB (p. 15).

[^61]: ^?^ Comments of CBA (p. 3). General support for the use of
    switched circuits was also indicated by AFCCE (p. 9), BEI (p. 8) and
    KIOW (p. 5).

[^62]: ^?^ Comments of KIOW (p. 5).

[^63]: ^?^ Comments of BEI (p. 8).

[^64]: ^?^ Comments of AFCCE (p. 5), Anderson (p. 3), Burk (p. 1), Smith
    (p. 2), Flick (p. 2), Equity One (p. 3), Hallikainen (p. 9), Ham (p.
    3), Moody Bible (p. 9), NAB (p. 8), NPR (p. 2), SBA (p. 7) and SBE
    (p. 7-8).

[^65]: ^?^ Comments of AMPERS (p. 1). AMPERS also expressed the belief
    that the \$35 fee required to obtain the RP would screen out some
    who are not really serious about broadcasting.

[^66]: ^?^ Comments of StationWatch (pp. 5-6).

[^67]: ^?^ [See]{.underline} comments of Osenkowsky (p. 3) concerning
    Section 73.757(b), which requires that a licensed operator be in
    control whenever auxiliary transmitters are placed in operation, and
    Section 73.1230(c), which concerns the posting of operator licenses.

[^68]: ^?^ Comments of Osenkowsky (p. 4).

[^69]: ^?^ Ibid. This change is recommended solely for the benefit of
    older transmitters without an automatic power control function.

[^70]: ^?^ Comments of Harris (p. 1).

[^71]: ^?^ Comments of Osenkowsky (p. 6).

[^72]: ^?^ [Notice of Proposed Rule Making]{.underline} in MM Docket No.
    93-177 (An Inquiry into Commission Policies and Rules Regarding AM
    Radio Service Directional Antenna Performance Verification) 8 FCC
    Rcd 4345, (1993).