Will the FCC let this guy have an LPFM?

[Cold Coffee]

Heh, say that sentence in a pirate voice:
ARGH, he was pirating from his newspaper headquarters was he? ARGH!

Aye mate, FCC sayeth all lads and lasses who hath been engaged in piracy within the last ten years must check the pirate box and walk the plank.

 

[nd2023]

Technically it was a warning. So he could claim that he didn’t know he was over part 15 and shut down as soon as he was notified that it was illegal. Then applied for an LPFM to become legal.

 

[Cold Coffee]

Technically it was a warning. So he could claim that he didn’t know he was over part 15 and shut down as soon as he was notified that it was illegal. Then applied for an LPFM to become legal.

Arrgh! Part 15 my arse. . The only exception to this licensing requirement is for certain transmitters using or operating at a power level or mode of operation that complies with the standards established in Part 15 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 15.1 et seq. The field strength of the signal on frequency 93.5 MHz was measured at 3,792,622 microvolts per meter (µV/m) at 817 meters

He was bootlegging the call letters WGPI a full power Class A CP given to someone else. 3,792,622 microvolts per mete at 817 meters is far from part 15. Likely well above 100 watts too.

 

[nd2023]

Arrgh! Part 15 my arse. . The only exception to this licensing requirement is for certain transmitters using or operating at a power level or mode of operation that complies with the standards established in Part 15 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 15.1 et seq. The field strength of the signal on frequency 93.5 MHz was measured at 3,792,622 microvolts per meter (µV/m) at 817 meters

He was bootlegging the call letters WGPI a full power Class A CP given to someone else. 3,792,622 microvolts per mete at 817 meters is far from part 15. Likely well above 100 watts too.

That’s still an argument he could make. He could say that he bought a transmitter on Amazon and assumed it was legal because it was sold on Amazon. He doesn’t have a FIM so didn’t know it was above part 15. As soon as the FCC inspected the station, he shut down because he didn’t know it was illegal. Then wanted to be legal so he applied for the LPFM

 

[Cold Coffee]

Do you think anyone in radio would think this is part 15? 1000W FM Transmitter Kit for radio station professional FM Radio transmitter | eBay

 

[Michi]

In order to demonstrate it, you must provide solid evidence such as a past FCC action. The FCC has even accepted police reports in states that have specific pirate radio laws (FL, NJ and NY). Anything else, such as newspaper reports and social media posts will be dismissed as hearsay.

 

[Kelly A]

Technically it was a warning. So he could claim that he didn’t know he was over part 15 and shut down as soon as he was notified that it was illegal. Then applied for an LPFM to become legal.

That might be the case if he hadn't already received an NAL, including documented evidence of how far over Part 15 limits he was operating this thing.

 

[nd2023]

That might be the case if he hadn't already received an NAL, including documented evidence of how far over Part 15 limits he was operating this thing.

Oh, I thought it was just a NOUO. That’s the slap on the wrist for a first offense. The NAL is issued if the pirate doesn’t stop broadcasting.

Although if he was broadcasting on the same frequency as a licensed station that chose to be silent, it could be argued that the pirate is doing a better job serving the community than the silent station.

 

[Cold Coffee]

Here's what I don't understand. There was an LPFM filing window in 2013. I would have helped him to be licensed and legal for free in 2014. I helped others in getting LPFM's during that period.

So, how does his pirating make sense when he could have been a licensed LPFM back then?

 

[bturner1]

Here is what a FCC Field Examiner told me: if they contact an illegal operator and notify them their operation is violating FCC rules, if they cease broadcasting at that point and promise to divest themselves of the equipment to transmit, it is not an official action but rather a warning. They receive a letter after the effect that they must respond to. If the warned person abides by FCC rules from the point they are warned, they can qualify to be a member of a non-profit organization duly registered and in good stand with the state at a minimum or on a state and on a federal level. They can even head up the organization. I assume it to be about like getting a warning versus a ticket from law enforcement. I would imagine this is somewhat conditional. For example, if you are running a format full of 4 letter words or promoting civil unrest versus peaceful protest, then the Examiner might choose to extend the warning to a full violation. This might be in much the same way you treat the officer that pulls you over for speeding (as a friend in law enforcement said if they're arguing with me and acting like a jerk, what would have been a warning becomes a ticket real fast).

 

[Kelly A]

Oh, I thought it was just a NOUO. That’s the slap on the wrist for a first offense. The NAL is issued if the pirate doesn’t stop broadcasting.

Splitting hairs doesn't matter when it comes to committing perjury. The application question was:
"The applicant certifies, under penalty of perjury, that neither the applicant nor any party to the application has engaged in any manner, individually or with other persons, groups, organizations, or other entities, in the unlicensed operation of any station in violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 301."

Although if he was broadcasting on the same frequency as a licensed station that chose to be silent, it could be argued that the pirate is doing a better job serving the community than the silent station.

That's not a valid argument. Operating an illegal station is still illegal. It doesn't matter what programming is on it.

 

[Michi]

Here is what a FCC Field Examiner told me: if they contact an illegal operator and notify them their operation is violating FCC rules, if they cease broadcasting at that point and promise to divest themselves of the equipment to transmit, it is not an official action but rather a warning. They receive a letter after the effect that they must respond to. If the warned person abides by FCC rules from the point they are warned, they can qualify to be a member of a non-profit organization duly registered and in good stand with the state at a minimum or on a state and on a federal level. They can even head up the organization. I assume it to be about like getting a warning versus a ticket from law enforcement. I would imagine this is somewhat conditional. For example, if you are running a format full of 4 letter words or promoting civil unrest versus peaceful protest, then the Examiner might choose to extend the warning to a full violation. This might be in much the same way you treat the officer that pulls you over for speeding (as a friend in law enforcement said if they're arguing with me and acting like a jerk, what would have been a warning becomes a ticket real fast).

This is not the case with LPFM because unlike other broadcast services, there's an LPFM specific statute in federal law that prohibits those with a pirate past from being a party to an LPFM application.

• The Federal Communications Commission shall modify the rules authorizing the operation of low-power FM radio stations, as proposed in MM Docket No. 99-25, to--

• `(1) prescribe protection for co-channels and first- and second-adjacent channels; and
• `(2) prohibit any applicant from obtaining a low-power FM license if the applicant has engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation of any station in violation of section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301)

See Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, P.L. 106-553; 114 Stat. 2762A-111 (2001) at §632(a). See also Local Community Radio Act of 2010, Pub L. No. 111-371, 124 Stat. 4072 (2011) at §2.

Field enforcement agents are in now way capable of interpreting laws and regulations that are specifically handled by the Media Bureau during the application process.

 

[nd2023]

This is not the case with LPFM because unlike other broadcast services, there's an LPFM specific statute in federal law that prohibits those with a pirate past from being a party to an LPFM application.

• The Federal Communications Commission shall modify the rules authorizing the operation of low-power FM radio stations, as proposed in MM Docket No. 99-25, to--

• `(1) prescribe protection for co-channels and first- and second-adjacent channels; and
• `(2) prohibit any applicant from obtaining a low-power FM license if the applicant has engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation of any station in violation of section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301)

See Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, P.L. 106-553; 114 Stat. 2762A-111 (2001) at §632(a). See also Local Community Radio Act of 2010, Pub L. No. 111-371, 124 Stat. 4072 (2011) at §2.

Field enforcement agents are in now way capable of interpreting laws and regulations that are specifically handled by the Media Bureau during the application process.

What about those who have had a pirate station and not been caught? There could be evidence of that station existing such as social media, news articles, airchecks, DX logs, etc.

 

[Michi]

What about those who have had a pirate station and not been caught? There could be evidence of that station existing such as social media, news articles, airchecks, DX logs, etc.

Many of these have been tried, but they have been dismissed as hearsay.

 

[Kelly A]

What about those who have had a pirate station and not been caught? There could be evidence of that station existing such as social media, news articles, airchecks, DX logs, etc.

When I've busted pirate stations for interference, I've provided the Commission with enough evidence for field agents to easily find the guy and take action. Don't think I have the photos around anymore; but that evidence included photos of the building in question, map location, photo of their antenna, coax running through a window, screenshots from my spectrum analyzer of the pirate, and an audio file of said broadcast.
Generally, I've only turned them in after speaking with them first, giving them the option to shut down immediately or face the Fed's. Assuming I was able to speak with the offender, I would document that conversation and include it with any evidence. On more than one occasion, the Field Office thanked me for making their job that much easier.

 

[anotherguyTN]

Many of these have been tried, but they have been dismissed as hearsay.

In the early 2000's there was a pirate station in west TN that going by its range I had a general idea where they might be (Near Lexington, TN) but I didn't know how to pin them down or get any evidence of where they were. All I could do was call the local station in the area but they acted like they didn't know anything about it, but I don't know whether to believe that or not. I tend to believe they didn't care if they did know about it. It was on and off for years, but it was finally gone around 2010 and I don't know if they shut down on their own or if the FCC finally caught them and did something to stop it.

 

[Michi]

The issue I am referring to is not around the FCC shutting a pirate down based on what is announced in the news, social media, etc. I am referring to the FCC preventing an applicant to be a party to an LPFM pursuant to §73.854 of the rules. There were objections claimed after the 2013 window and those that involved hearsay (social media, etc.) were rejected since there was no firm evidence. The only ones that were accepted were ones where past FCC notices of violation, forfeitures and in one case a police report from Florida (in violation of their state pirate radio law) were the only ones accepted resulting in dismissals of the LPFM application.

 

[Cold Coffee]

An NCE licensee tells me they had LMA'd their station to the same group at the top of this thread and got a letter from the FCC about commercials in the educational band. Turns out the commercials didn't go over their transmitter. But instead the LMA party had set up a pirate station on the west side of Indianapolis and were bootlegging their call letters on the same frequency.

I know this is hearsay but it's also concerning.

 

[theantennaguy]

According to conversations with FCC officials, there is a big difference in a notice of unlicensed and a notice of violation. What this guy got was a simple notice where a field agent thinks he may be operating without a license, but he has opportunity to respond and show a license or other authority. If he responds and says he has authority, or says it's turned off, and/or the FCC for whatever reason decides not to pursue the matter any further, then it's a dismissed matter. There is no formal finding that bars the applicant. The only way this is an absolute bar is if the FCC proceeds to a Notice of Violation, make a formal finding of unlicensed operation, and assesses a forfeiture fine.

 

[theantennaguy]

The only ones that were accepted were ones where past FCC notices of violation, forfeitures and in one case a police report from Florida (in violation of their state pirate radio law) were the only ones accepted resulting in dismissals of the LPFM application.

Exactly