FM Broadcaster Replies Slam FCC Contour Interference Limit Plan

number of documented listeners who would be jettisoned from protection against FM translator interference,” said Beasley Media, Cox, Entercom, Gradick Communications, iHeartCommunications, Neuhoff Communications, Withers Broadcasting and Radio One. They offered a compromise of extending the cutoff to 42 dBu, and that wouldn’t be a hard barrier but instead require interference complaints based on a higher threshold of evidence. The contour proposal was the primary focus of most commenters, though not all radio licensees opposed it. Aztec Capital Partners, the company behind one of the petitions that inspired the proceeding, compared opponents of the proposal to “cattle barons” claiming dominion over the entire open range. Opponents ask for “governmental protection to service areas they are not entitled to, with FCC regulatory processes preserving their grazing rights against newcomers and other users of spectrum,” Aztec said. Bloomberg Communications said the FCC plan would create certainty for investments in translators. Numerous commenters -- such as the New Jersey Broadcasters Association -- argued that the proposal threatens the primary status of full-power FM stations, and would clutter the band. “The situation is a classic example of trying to fit 2 pounds of product in a one pound bag,” said Press Communications. NAB didn’t weigh in on the contours but took issue with FCC proposals that would limit listener participation in the complaint process: “Allowing a translator licensee to try to correct interference problems is often a cost-effective way to eliminate complaints quickly and efficiently.” Low-power FM groups opposed the FCC’s proposal to set a six complaint minimum for interference complaints. Such a high number favors larger broadcasters, said REC Networks.