By Randy Dunn 

My past experience with commercial stations and the FCC is they will visit your station and go down their little check list.  A LOT used to depend on how the examiner felt at that time, but things have changed and I think the field inspectors are a different breed of individuals than the earlier (pre 1980) FCC.  I have heard they are trained better and typically qualified better.
During an inspection they will pleasantly chat with you and sometimes tell you what you need to work on or tell you that you are clean; either way, NOTHING is official until you receive a notice in the mail of violation (IF you do).  Usually, unless it was a second offense, a blatant ignoring of the rules or such a poorly run station to start with (multiple obvious violations), the notification will ask you to correct the problem and report back within a time-period -- usually 30 days, in writing.  Sometimes you got multiple violations cited and maybe a $500 forfeiture for one.  Now this was the typical small station and often the station owner could call the FCC and talk them down on the fine (sometimes around 50%), but in my experience, fines are actually pretty rare unless the FCC is trying to make a point about some specific item with several stations in a sweep (which could be happening here -- this is the reason I would like to see the list). Often you will never hear from them again.....now, be aware, that was the typical method of commercial stations for the past 20 years.
My GUESS and this is ONLY a GUESS, is that they are doing this to see how well the LPFM self-regulation is actually going and how well LPFM works without interference to others and they may well be checking our commercial friends to make sure they are being fair with us too.  If I can get some areas where inspections are occurring I will make some contacts and see if commercial stations in those areas have been inspected at the same time.
Nobody should panic.  Simply do the BEST YOU CAN WITH WHAT YOU CAN DO!  The FCC does require ALL of their rules to be met in that particular service, but they also appreciate "effort" to stay legal.
Let me make a couple of suggestions about dealing with the inspectors.  They are Federal Agents and as such if you LIE to them, you are breaking the law!  Do NOT lie to an agent, but again they are WELL TRAINED in their interrogation ability and my suggestion would be what your lawyer would tell you.  DO NOT volunteer information that is NOT asked for.  Even if they buddy up to you, that is nothing more than a good agent's method of interrogation.  You ONLY have to respond to what they ask and answer specifically, do not ADD a lot of background to the story unless it is required to explain something and above all do not LIE.  If you have a legitimate complaint about a competitor, make the complaint and make absolutely sure you just tell the facts.  Let the agent make his own opinions and conclusions.  Then shut-up about it.  In other words, don't keep harping on a competitor that you feel has done you wrong. 
If you will be polite and responsive to them, you are more likely to come out better.  If you refuse access for a period of time or act like you are hiding something, watch-out.  Just make it a professional visit and understand that they are trained agents who are there to obtain information regarding your operation, so the less said, if it is not brought up, do not bring it up.  I am NOT saying to hide anything, just don't tell your station's life story, he or she does not want to hear it anyway.
If you have a deficiency, you are not required to deal with it unless asked and then give them the facts, no lying and show how you are attempting to correct it.  They WANT you to operate properly so their task is easier and if you can show reasonable effort then that will help.  Put any documents of discussions with your transmitter manufacturer in your station file and that way they can see that you have at least attempted (within your power) to rectify any issues regarding Certifications or anything else.  They are not Gestapo out to shut you down, and my guess is they will send out some correction notifications to almost everybody (because every station usually has at least one issue they could do better on) and just be sure to do what they say and respond in a timely manner, these inspections will pass when the FCC is satisfied that we are taking steps to make and keep our stations within their regulations.  I honestly think this is somewhat of an experiment on the FCC's part AND it may be to cover themselves with the NAB and other groups that have complained about LPFM "before the fact".  If they can show they have pro-actively monitored LPFMs then nobody can point the finger at the commission for creating and allowing LPFM to become a viable, and alternative method of broadcasting.  Stay positive and don't panic, I have not heard of one citation as of now.
Randy Dunn

Hopefully, I can set these terms straight.  I tried to summarize based on my own interpretation of the rules, as printed in 1996 and in 2002.  Please make corrections if I've misstated something.  The terms *do* get confusing, and I probably missed subtilties while perusing the rules.
"Type authorized" means the equipment can be legally imported and marketed.  "Authorized" means you have "registered" your equipment with the FCC and thus it appears in a database.  There must be some legal way to use your equipment in the US, although it may require a license to do so, and it may not be applicable to all possible uses of the equipment.  All of the following are types of authorization.
"Type approved" - (obsolete) The FCC has physically examined and measured sample units at its labs.
"Type certified" and "type accepted" - The FCC or an authorized agency pores over submitted measurement and design data and gives a stamp of approval.  The "stamp" nets a permanently affixed plate to the equipment.  "Accepted" originally referred to equipment used for licensed services, such as part 73 services, and "certified" referred to unlicensed uses, such as part 15 services.  In 1998 terms were consolidated into "certified" for both licensed and unlicensed uses.
"Type verified" and "type notified"  - Manufacturer takes measurements or steps to ensure equipment is compliant.  No data submitted.  No sample submitted.  "Notified" disappeared in 1998, coincidentally at the same time that "verified" appeared.
"Declaration of Conformity" - Similar to "verified."  The last person to make changes to the equipment ("responsible party") takes the measurements.  Usually used for small build, non-mass-produced (experimental) equipment.
To sum it up, when Mr. Bickel says "certified" or "accepted" is OK, he restated the rule that implies that basically all operating LPFMs are in violation (since no type certified or accepted equipment is available).  I agree with Leo that "verified" was the answer everybody wanted to hear.
Would it be proper to file for a waiver of 73.1660 to authorize verified equipment until certified equipment becomes available or existing equipment becomes certified, with perhaps a six month grace period?  This would be similar to how EAS was handled.  Although, I'd be hardpressed to have an on-air station admit they were in violation by filing the waiver.  Probably only a good option if the station hasn't yet fired up. 
For aged CPs, would filing for an extention based on the fact that "no suitable transmitter is available in the marketplace" be an acceptable excuse for not building?  A stream of those may help any petitions to apply the same "verified" rule to LPFM as applied to FM.  The part that boggles me is that this issue really isn't that new, yet the FCC has remained silent.