Given that so many heavy-hitters are against the petition (Clear Channel, the NAB), I think it's safe to say that it is DOA.
I would disagree. The NAB and Saga both used at their main arguing point that "the FCC looked at this in the early 90's and didn't allow it, why should they allow it now" (Paraphrased.) Also was the "This is not what the service was originally designed to do."
Now when the FCC agreed to look at this issue in May, they clearly knew both points and thought it was worth another look. I'm not seeing that the Big Broadcasters want to go back to the way things were in the early 90's. Public Service commitments... National ownership caps...No moving stations almost at will to larger markets... No relaxed main studio rules.... Most of the reason why these translator prohibitions existed in the first place was to protect small market struggling FM's. That issue doesn't ring true after deregulation in '96. A lot of rules have been modified to allow more choices to the listener since the early 90's. This just isn't one the existing broadcasters like because it creates more choices and doesn't favor "THEM".
I objected to the proposal mainly because of the Great Translator Invasion of 2003 and the abuse that came about as a result of that FCC window. In view of that event, I felt that the translator proposal would simply allow the wrong parties to capitalize...
I can see why the emotional response is "That's not fair" but remember one thing. Class "D" translators are a licensed service just like LP's. In fact the've been around a lot longer. And LP 100's had the first opportunity after RM 99-25 was enacted to apply for spectrum. Only after everyone in the country had an initial chance to apply for the LP service, did the translator service get a window. New translator operators deserved a window and after waiting for a LONG time, they got one. Since the initial LP-100 window there have been 2 commercial FM windows and auctions. Where's the outrage over that? Everyone takes turns.
The fact is, several services share the FM radio band and they always will. Non Comm FM, Commercial FM, Low Power FM, Translator FM and TV-CH6 (A little of it). The issue here isn't "Should we have licensed these translators". There are thousands of these Class "D" translators and many paid license fees and cash to install these transmitters. They aren't going away. You just can't get the poop back in the horse.
The issue is "WHAT ARE THESE TRANSMITTERS GOING TO BROADCAST?" Will a few translator operators have the option of ability to originate programming that serves their listeners? Or will those listeners be limited to imported programs from afar.
The fact is the vast number of FM translators are going to continue to be just that. FM Translators. However, not "ALLOWING" the few that would like to originate that option is just silly. Or self serving. Or just downright vindictive.
There were several very good points raised in the filed comments about why this proposal "SHOULD" be enacted. While the FCC will be very cautious, I think they will relax content rules for FM translators. Just like they did for AM radio, FM Radio, TV, Low Power TV, TIS/HAR etc...
All that said, I would wholeheartedly support and encourage the idea of translators dropping their relays to broadcast public safety information during a declared state of emergency.