**DA 07-3269**

*In Reply Refer to:*

1800B3-JWR

Released: July 17, 2007

Ms. Tammy Pitt

675 N. 10^th^ Street

Lander, Wyoming 82520

John S. Neely, Esq.

Miller & Neely, P.C.

6900 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 704

Bethesda, Maryland 20815

In re: KOVE(AM), Lander, WY

Fremont Broadcasting, Inc.

Facility ID 22624

File No. BR-20050512AEN

Application for Renewal of License

**Informal Objection**

Dear Ms. Pitt and Mr. Neely:

This letter concerns the captioned application (the "Application") filed
by Fremont Broadcasting, Inc. ("Fremont" or the "Licensee") to renew the
license of Station KOVE(AM), Lander, Wyoming. Also on file is an
informal objection (the "Objection") filed by Ms.Tammy Pitt ("Pitt") on
April 7, 2005, alleging that the operation of KOVE(AM) causes
interference with her home telephone line.[^1] For the reasons set forth
below, we deny the Objection and grant the Application. In an Appendix
to this letter, we also outline the station\'s responsibilities under
the blanketing interference provisions for AM stations contained in
Section 73.88 of the Commission's Rules (the "Rules").[^2]

**Discussion.** Informal objections must, pursuant to Section 309(e) of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"), provide properly
supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a
substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application
would be *prima facie* inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act,[^3]
which governs our evaluation of an application for license renewal.
Specifically, Section 309(k)(1) provides that if, upon consideration of
the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served
the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have been no
serious violations of the Act or the Rules; and (3) there have been no
other violations which, taken

together, constitute a pattern of abuse, we are to grant the renewal
application.[^4] If, however, the licensee fails to meet that standard,
the Commission may deny the application -- after notice and opportunity
for a hearing under Section 309(e) of the Act -- or grant the
application "on terms and conditions that are appropriate, including a
renewal for a term less than the maximum otherwise permitted."[^5]

> In her objection, Ms. Pitt states that "for several years" she has had
> problems with KOVE(AM) broadcasts "coming over telephone lines." Pitt
> states that it occurs on "every phone in the house" and is "especially
> bad" with long distance calls. The type of interference described by
> the complainant may be attributable to \"blanketing\" interference,
> which can occur to electronic devices that are in close proximity to
> an AM transmitter.[^6] Irrespective of whether the interference
> situation described by Ms. Pitt is "blanketing" interference, however,
> the Objection does not raise a *prima facie* case calling for further
> Commission inquiry.

Section 73.88 of the Rules refers to Section 73.318, the blanketing
interference rules for FM stations, for more detailed instructions.
Section 73.318 states that licensees \"must satisfy all complaints of
blanketing interference which are received by the station during a one
year period. The period begins with the commencement of program tests .
. . These requirements specifically do not include interference
complaints resulting from malfunctioning or mistuned receivers,
improperly installed antenna systems, or the use of high gain antennas
or antenna booster amplifiers. Mobile receivers and non-RF devices such
as tape recorders or hi-fi amplifiers (phonographs) are also excluded.\"
Hard-wired telephones are considered non-RF devices under Section 73.318
and, as such, are not covered by this rule. Cordless telephones are
covered by Part 15 of the Rules. (*See* Section 15.3(j) of the Rules for
a definition of a cordless telephone system.)[^7] Section 15.5(b) of the
Rules states, in pertinent part, that cordless telephones may not cause
harmful interference and that interference to cordless telephones caused
by the operation of an authorized radio station must be accepted.[^8]
Accordingly, any hard-wired or cordless telephone complaints referenced
in this case are not covered by the blanketing interference rules.

In this case, the Station has not changed its operating parameters since
at least 2002.[^9] Accordingly, the blanketing interference rules, which
apply to complaints received within the first year of new or modified
technical operations do not apply here. Moreover, complaints regarding
hard-wired or cordless telephones -- Ms. Pitt indicates that the alleged
interference is received on "every phone in the house" but does not
specify whether there are corded or cordless telephones, or both, in her
house -- are not covered by the rule and are essentially unprotected
from interference by radio stations operating with authorized
facilities.[^10] Accordingly, we will deny Ms. Pitt's objection and
grant the KOVE(AM) license renewal.

However, although it has no legal obligation to do so, we encourage the
Licensee to work with Ms. Pitt in attempting to resolve the disruption
to her telephone service that may be, in part, attributable to KOVE(AM)
operation. As an Appendix to this letter, for the benefit of Ms. Pitt
and the Licensee, we have formulated a list of the five most common
blanketing interference situations and outlined a broadcast station's
responsibilities in each case. The present case is similar to those
described in Situation 4 and Situation 5 in the Appendix.

**Conclusion/Actions**. We have evaluated the Application pursuant to
Section 309(k) of the Act,[^11] and we find that Station KOVE(AM) has
served the public interest, convenience, and necessity during the
subject license term; there have been no serious violations of the Act
or the Rules; and there have been no other violations which, taken
together, constitute a pattern of abuse.

Accordingly, pursuant to Section 309(k) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, and Sections 0.61 and 0.283 of the Commission's
rules,[^12] the informal objection filed by Ms. Tammy Pitt IS DENIED,
and the application (File No. BR-20050512AEN) of Fremont Broadcasting,
Inc. for renewal of license for Station KOVE(AM), Lander, Wyoming, IS
GRANTED.

Sincerely,

Peter H. Doyle

Chief, Audio Division

Media Bureau

cc: Fremont Broadcasting, Inc.

**APPENDIX**

> We have formulated here a list of the five most common blanketing
> interference situations. The situations vary depending on the
> following:

· Whether or not the complaint was filed within the first year of
operation.

· Whether the complainant is located inside or outside the blanketing
contour.

· Whether the device experiencing interference is covered under the
blanketing interference rule.

**Situation \# 1**

The station is financially responsible for resolving complaints of
interference to electrical devices covered under Section 73.318 if the
complaint is filed within the first year of program test authority and
the complainant is located **inside** the station\'s blanketing contour.
*See FM Broadcast Station Blanketing Interference* ("*Blanketing
Interference* "), FCC 84-514, 57 RR 2d 126 (1984) at paragraph 15.

**Situation \# 2**

The station is not financially responsible for resolving complaints of
interference to electrical devices covered under Section 73.318 if the
complaint is filed within the first year of program test authority and
the complainant is located **outside** of the station\'s blanketing
contour. However, the station is expected to cooperate with the
complainant by providing effective technical assistance in determining
the cause of the problem and advice on corrective measures. *See
Blanketing Interference* *supra* at paragraph 17.

**Situation \# 3**

The station is not financially responsible for resolving complaints of
interference to electrical devices covered under Section 73.318 if the
complaint is filed **after** the first year of program test authority
and the complainant is located **inside** the station\'s blanketing
contour. The station is required to provide effective technical
assistance to the complainant. This entails the providing of information
on the cause of the interference and also providing information on
proper corrective measures. *See Blanketing Interference, supra,* at
paragraph 20.

**Situation \# 4**

The station is not financially responsible for resolving complaints of
interference to electrical devices covered under Section 73.318 if the
complaint is filed **after** the first year of program test authority
and the complainant is located **outside** of the station\'s blanketing
contour. However, in similar past cases, to promote goodwill within the
station\'s community, licensees have taken steps to assist in
alleviating interference complaints.

**Situation \# 5**

The station is not financially responsible for resolving complaints of
interference to electrical

devices not covered under Section 73.318. However, in similar past
cases, to promote goodwill within the station\'s community, licensees
have taken steps to assist in alleviating interference complaints.

**Effective Technical Assistance**

47 CFR Section 73.318(d) states, \"\[f\]ollowing the one year period of
full financial obligation to satisfy blanketing complaints, licensees
shall provide technical information or assistance to complainants on
remedies for blanketing interference.\" The rule requires that the
station provide information and assistance sufficiently specific to
enable the complainant to eliminate all blanketing interference and not
simply that the station attempt to correct the problems. Effective
technical assistance entails providing specific details about proper
corrective measures to resolve the blanketing interference. For example,
providing complainants with diagrams and descriptions which explain how
and where to use radiofrequency chokes, ferrite cores, filters, and/or
shielded cable. In addition, effective technical assistance also
includes the recommendation on replacement equipment that would work
better in the high radiofrequency fields. Also, effective technical
assistance does not mean referring the complainant to the equipment
manufacturer.

**Complaint Report**

The Commission intends that broadcast stations take very seriously their
responsibility to resolve blanketing interference. Accordingly, the
station must respond to **all** the complaints that have been filed and
must submit a detailed report of the steps taken to resolve the
complaints within 60 days from the date of the staff letter advising the
station of its obligations under Section 318 of the Rules. The report
must contain the following information for each complaint:

1\. Date of the complaint

2\. The affected devices (i.e., the manufacturer, model number and
serial number);

3\. Whether or not the complainant is within the blanketing contour;

4\. The dates and description of the assistance provided; and

5\. Whether or not the interference has been resolved.

The report must include a map showing the following:

1\. The station\'s transmitter site;

2\. The 1V/m blanketing contour; and

3\. The locations of the complainants.

The station must determine which of the five situations described above
apply and take the appropriate aggressive actions required by
Section 73.318 to fulfill its obligations. The complainants will be
expected to cooperate fully with the station\'s efforts to resolve the
interference problems; their failure to do so could lead to a finding
that the station has fulfilled its obligations pursuant to Section
73.318. Excessive postponements of appointments by either party will be
viewed as an obstructive tactic in delaying the resolution of the
blanketing interference. These requirements are in place to insure that
all parties cooperate fully and immediately. Any further complaints
received by the FCC will be forwarded to the station for investigation.
We will respond separately to the station\'s report, which explains how
each individual complaint was resolved.

[^1]: The Licensee did not file an Opposition to the Objection.

[^2]: 47 C.F.R. § 73.88.

[^3]: ^3^ *See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc.,* Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6
    FCC Rcd 193, 197 n.10 (1990), *affirmed sub nom. Garden State
    Broadcasting L.P. v. FCC,* 996 F.2d 386 (D.C. Cir. 1993), *rehearing
    denied* (Sep. 10, 1993); *Area Christian Television, Inc.,*
    Memorandum Opinion and Order, 60 RR 2d 862, 864 (1986) (informal
    objection must contain adequate and specific factual allegations
    sufficient to warrant the relief requested).

[^4]: ^4^ 47 U.S.C. § 309(k)(1). The renewal standard was amended to
    read as described by Section 204(a) of the Telecommunications Act of
    1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). S*ee Implementation
    of Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
    (Broadcast License Renewal Procedures)*, Order, 11 FCC Rcd 6363
    (1996).

[^5]: 47 U.S.C. §§ 309(k)(2), 309(k)(3).

[^6]: ^6^ *See* 47 CFR §§ 73.88 and 73.318.

[^7]: 47 C.F.R. § 15.3(j).

[^8]: 47 C.F.R. § 15.5(b).

[^9]: *See* Application No. BZ-20020328AAW (application for direct
    measurement of power), granted on June 20, 2003.

[^10]: There is no allegation or evidence that KOVE(AM) is operating
    with facilities other than those authorized.

[^11]: ^10^ 47 U.S.C § 309(k).

[^12]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.61, 0.283.