It is not legal to operate a remote transmitter site without full telemetry coming back to a human (studio) operator, or (more recently) an automated system which will alert a chief engineer, which is a required designee of all licensees.
The question remains: in what ways were they operating noncompliantly?
However there's almost zero possibility that they were unaware of their antenna loss until the brush crew showed up. Unless the theft happened overnight (some AM stations shut down at night).
Even if nothing else clued them in, a transmitter without an antenna will basically shut down, and the electric bill will go to near zero.
According to Wikipedia, the station has changed hands a few times in recent years because the owners kept going bankrupt, and furthermore the station has gone off the air numerous times before due to deferred maintenance. So noncompliance seems like a very safe bet!
In light of that, it's possible they had no functional telemetry or nobody was paying attention to it, and therefore, it's plausible they really didn't notice when the antenna went missing. But if I were the feds, I would be investigating the possibility that the operators themselves sold the antenna for scrap...
> I would be investigating the possibility that the operators themselves sold the antenna for scrap...
This might sound far-fetched to many, but it's a real thing. Galvanized steel has a decent scrap value. Taking down a tower is not a trivial project, but it happens.
I was responsible for a 800-ft tower in a past life, and a pager, a 4x4 truck, and a gun were considered required equipment. I opted for the first two, but wasn't prepared to commit to the responsibilities of the third.
The most common theft scenario was an equipment smash-and-grab. But tower thefts were not unheard of.
US? I'm guessing you mean smaller towers like ~50' used for local links, utility radios, etc. Or do you mean like 75' or 150'+? Do people grab commercial towers?
Small towers are much easier, but big towers get hit sometimes too. Usually when they are in a transitioning period (new, major maintenance, decomm) because the bigger the tower, typically the more antennas are on it, and the more parties who will notice it's disappearance quickly.
> It is not legal to operate a remote transmitter site without [...]
47 CFR § 73.1400(b) permits operation with “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” (emphasis added).
This doesn’t change the licensee’s basic responsibility “for assuring that at all times the station operates [...] in accordance with the terms of the station authorization,” of course.
> in what ways were they operating noncompliantly?
If the station was off the air and the licensee didn’t notify the FCC within 10 days and seek a silent STA within 30 days, that would violate 47 CFR § 73.1740(a)(4).
Ah, thank you. There is also the "dead mans switch" monitoring option, which is probably in use at some very understaffed stations.
So this licensee's best claim is that they had some kind of major equipment failure, their dead mans switch worked and took them off-air, and someone jumped on the opportunity to take down a non-energized radiator tower and steal their equipment.
It is still unbelievable of course! The best time to find someone at a remote transmitter site is when the tower has recently gone dark. And it does not address the gap between failure and awareness/reporting.
Thanks also for the cite to the notification requirement timelines.
Which is why I trust corporations more than small businesses. Big companies can't cut corners in quite the same way as tiny shops, nor can they directly violate health&safety regulations, creating health risk for customers, without fear of consequences.
> Big companies can't cut corners in quite the same way as tiny shops,
Big companies have their own distinct ways, true. They have massive resources to deploy against regulation and oversight. By forestalling accountability or insuring it results in disproportionately small fines, they can insure non-compliance is strongly profitable. This satisfies the interests that matter most to a public corp, execs and investors.
> Big companies can't ... directly violate health&safety regulations, creating health risk for customers, without fear of consequences.
At least I would not knowingly commit crimes so the private equity makes some tens of thousands of dollars and I get a “meets expectations” and 2% annual raise at best if doing so could put me at risk of going to prison.
> if doing so could put me at risk of going to prison
The percentage of execs who are convicted - or even tried (for crimes that would gain most of us a harsh penalty) is so low it's striking when it happens.
When you have corporate-sized resources (that can outweigh the even the government's) to prevent accountability, those odds tend to be strongly in your favor.
The question remains: in what ways were they operating noncompliantly?
However there's almost zero possibility that they were unaware of their antenna loss until the brush crew showed up. Unless the theft happened overnight (some AM stations shut down at night).
Even if nothing else clued them in, a transmitter without an antenna will basically shut down, and the electric bill will go to near zero.