Kramer Telecom Law Firm, P.C.

Kramer's Wireless Blog | Cell Site Photos | Cable TV Photos | Kramer.Firm

A Tradition of Public Service. An Antenna Siting Challenge.

"CQ DX...CQ DX"

Amateur radio operators have along and rich tradition of public service, and radio frequency experimentation.

Amateur Radio Antennas: Special Federal and State Protections Apply

PRB-1 (Continued from Page 1) Next, the ARRL wanted the Commission to set a minimum height limit for amateur antenna structures so that local governments could not regulate tower below that height. The ARRL suggested 60 or 70 feet in metropolitan areas.

The Commission declined to set minimum height standards.

We believe that the policy enunciated in PRB-1 is sound. PRB-1 did not specify a particular height limitation below which a local government may not regulate. The Commission did not want to mandate specific provisions that a local authority must include in a zoning ordinance. We continue to believe that the standards the Commission set, that is, "reasonable accommodation" and "minimum practicable regulation", have worked relatively well. Therefore, we are not persuaded that changes to the Commission's policy of leaving the specifics of zoning regulations to the local authority, including provisions concerning the height of an amateur antenna, are necessary at this time.We believe that the policy enunciated in PRB-1 is sound. PRB-1 did not specify a particular height limitation below which a local government may not regulate. The Commission did not want to mandate specific provisions that a local authority must include in a zoning ordinance. We continue to believe that the standards the Commission set, that is, "reasonable accommodation" and "minimum practicable regulation", have worked relatively well. Therefore, we are not persuaded that changes to the Commission's policy of leaving the specifics of zoning regulations to the local authority, including provisions concerning the height of an amateur antenna, are necessary at this time. (PRB-1 [1999] @ 8)

Continued next column

The Commission considered and dismissed several other proposals in the ARRL's petition, and concluded by saying,

[W]e believe that PRB-1's guidelines brings to a local zoning board's awareness that the very least regulation necessary for the welfare of the community must be the aim of its regulations so that such regulations will not impinge on the needs of amateur operators to engage in amateur communications. PRB-1 (2000)The ARRL and several others petitioned the Commission to reconsider its 1999 ruling that it would continue its policy not to disturb CC&Rs, thus allowing them to control an amateur's antenna.

The chief argument put forth in the reconsideration petition was that the FCC had the authority to preempt CC&R, and that it should do so because modernly, one "never actually agrees, and very seldom even understands when he or she buys property subject to deed restrictions that amateur antennas are not permitted." (FCC PRB-1 [2000] @ 5 quoting the ARRL's petition for reconsideration)

The Commission responded in RM 8763 that

[W]e do not believe that ARRL has demonstrated that there has been a significant change in the underlying rationale of the PRB-1 decision, or that the facts and circumstances in support thereof, that would necessitate revisiting the issue. In the absence of such showing, we believe that the PRB-1 ruling correctly reflects the Commission's preemption policy in the amateur radio context.

Continued on page 3 (click here)

Disclaimers and Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Copyright © 2006-2008 Kramer Telecom Law Firm, P.C. All rights reserved.