|
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
FACT
SHEET
August 1996
Placement of Direct Broadcast
Satellite, Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service, and Television
Broadcast Antennas
As directed by Congress in the Telecommunications
Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission has adopted
rules concerning restrictions on viewers' ability to receive video
programming signals from Direct Broadcast Satellites (DBS),
multichannel multipoint distribution (wireless cable) providers
(MMDS), and television broadcast stations (TVBS).
Receiving video programming from any of these services requires
use of an antenna, and the installation, maintenance or use of
these antennas may be restricted by local governments or community
associations. These restrictions have included such provisions
as requirements for permits or prior approval, and requirements
that a viewer plant trees around the antenna to screen it from
view, as well as absolute bans on all antennas. In passing this
new law, Congress believed that local restrictions were preventing
viewers from choosing DBS, MMDS, or TVBS because of the additional
burdens that the restrictions imposed.
To implement this legislation, on August 5, 1996, the Commission
adopted a new rule that is intended to eliminate unnecessary restrictions
on antenna placement and use while minimizing any interference
caused to local governments and associations. This rule will become
effective after it is approved by the Office of Management and
Budget in accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
The new rule prohibits restrictions that impair the installation,
maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming.
These antennas include DBS satellite dishes that are less
than one meter (39") in diameter (larger in Alaska), TV antennas,
and antennas used to receive MMDS.
The rule prohibits most restrictions that:
(1)
Unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance
or use,
(2)
Unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance
or use, or
(3)
Preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal.
This rule means that, in most circumstances, viewers will be able
to install, use and maintain an antenna on their property if they
directly own the property on which the antenna will be located.
The Telecommunications Act and this new rule are designed to promote
competition among video programming service providers, enhance
consumer choice, and assure wide access to communications. The
rule allows local governments and homeowners' associations to
enforce restrictions that do not impair reception of these signals
as well as restrictions needed for safety or historic preservation.
The rule balances these public concerns with an individual's desire
to receive video programming. The Commission has asked for further
comment on whether additional rules should apply to situations
where a viewer wants to install an antenna on property owned by
a landlord or on common property controlled by a condominium or
homeowners' association.
This fact sheet provides general answers to questions that may
arise about the implementation of the rule. For further information,
call the Federal Communications Commission at (202) 4180163.
Q: What types of restrictions are prohibited?
A: The rule prohibits restrictions that impair a viewer's
ability to receive signals from a provider of DBS, MMDS
or TVBS. The rule applies to state or local laws or regulations,
including zoning, land-use or building regulations, private covenants,
homeowners' association rules or similar restrictions on property
within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where
the user has a direct or indirect ownership interest in the property.
A restriction impairs if it: 1) unreasonably delays or prevents
use of, 2) unreasonably increases the cost of, or 3) precludes
a subscriber from receiving an acceptable quality signal from,
one of these antennas. The rule does not prohibit safety restrictions
or restrictions designed to preserve historic districts.
Q: What types of restrictions unreasonably delay or prevent
subscribers from receiving a signal?
A: A local restriction that prohibits all antennas would prevent
subscribers from receiving signals, and is prohibited by the Commission's
rule. Procedural requirements can also impair the ability to receive
service. Thus, local regulations that require a person to obtain
a permit or approval prior to receiving service will delay reception;
this is generally allowed only if it is necessary to serve a safety
or historic preservation purpose.
Q: What is an unreasonable additional cost to install, maintain
or use an antenna?
A: Any requirement to pay a fee to the local authority in
order to be allowed to install an antenna would be unreasonable,
unless it is a permit fee that is needed to serve safety or historic
preservation or a permit is required in the case of installation
on a mast greater than 12 feet. Things to consider in determining
the reasonableness of any costs imposed include: the cost of the
equipment and services, whether there are similar requirements
for other similar installations like air conditioning units or
trash receptacles, and what visual impact the antenna has on the
surroundings. Restrictions cannot require that relatively unobtrusive
DBS antennas be screened by expensive landscaping. A requirement
to paint an antenna in a fashion that will not interfere with
reception so that it blends into the background against which
it is mounted would likely be acceptable. In general, the costs
imposed by local regulations cannot be unreasonable in light of
the cost of the equipment or services and the visual impact of
the antenna.
Q: What restrictions prevent a subscriber from receiving an acceptable
quality signal?
A: A requirement that an antenna be placed in a position where reception
would be impossible or would be substantially degraded would conflict
with the rule. However, a regulation requiring that antennas be
placed to the extent feasible in locations that are not visible
from the street would be permitted, if this placement would still
permit reception of an acceptable quality signal.
Q: Are all restrictions prohibited?
A: No, many restrictions are still valid. Safety restrictions are
permitted even if they impair reception, because local governments
bear primary responsibility for protecting public safety. Examples
of valid safety restrictions include fire codes preventing people
from installing antennas on fire escapes, restrictions requiring
that a person not place an antenna within a certain distance from
a power line, electrical code requirements to properly ground the
antenna, and installation requirements that describe the proper
method to secure an antenna. The safety reason for the restriction
must be written in the text, preamble or legislative history of
the restriction, or in a document that is readily available to antenna
users, so that a person wanting to install an antenna knows what
restrictions apply. The restriction cannot impose a more burdensome
requirement than is needed to ensure safety.
Restrictions in historic areas may also be valid. Because certain
areas are considered uniquely historical and strive to maintain
the historical nature of their community, these areas are excepted
from the rule. To qualify as an exempt area the area must be listed
or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
In addition, the area cannot restrict antennas if such a restriction
would not be applied to the extent practicable in a non-discriminatory
manner to other modern structures that are comparable in size, weight
and appearance and to which local regulation would normally apply.
Valid historical areas cannot impose a more burdensome requirement
than is needed to ensure the historic preservation goal.
Q: Whose restrictions are prohibited?
A: Restrictions are prohibited in state or local laws or regulations,
including zoning, land-use or building regulations, private covenants,
homeowners' association rules or similar restrictions relating to
what people can do on land within their exclusive use or control
where they have a direct or indirect ownership interest in the property.
Q: If I live in a condominium where the land and the roof are
commonly owned, or in an apartment building where the landlord owns
the land and the roof, does this rule apply to me?
A: A Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking has been
adopted by the Commission, to obtain comments from interested persons
about whether rules should apply in these situations. The Commission
will use those comments to reach a decision on this question.
Q: What types of antennas are covered?
1.
A "dishA" antenna
that is one meter (39") or less in diameter or is
located in Alaska and is designed to receive direct broadcast satellite
service, including direct-to-home satellite service.
2.
An antenna that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal
measurement and is designed to receive video programming services
via MMDS (wireless cable). Such antennas may be mounted on "masts"
to reach the height needed to establish line-of-sight contact with
the transmitter. Masts higher than 12 feet may be subject to local
permitting requirements.
3.
An antenna that is designed to receive television broadcast
signals. Masts higher than 12 feet may be subject to local permitting
requirements.
Q:
What can a local government, association, or consumer do if there
is a dispute over whether a particular restriction is valid?
A: If the local authority defines the restriction as safety-related
it is valid, unless a court or the Commission determines that
it is not safety-related or is not the least burdensome way to
ensure the safety goal. If a local government or association has
"highly specialized or unusual" concerns about antenna
installation, maintenance or use, it may apply to the Commission
for a waiver of the rule, to have its restriction declared valid.
Interested parties may petition the Commission or a court
of competent jurisdiction for a ruling to determine whether a
particular restriction is permitted or prohibited under this rule.
Q: Who is responsible for showing that a restriction is enforceable?
A: When a conflict arises about whether a restriction
is valid, the government or association trying to enforce the
restriction will be responsible for proving that the restriction
is valid. This means that no matter who questions the validity
of the restriction, the burden will always be on the local government
or association to prove that the restriction is permitted under
the rule or that it qualifies for a waiver.
Q:
Who do I call if my town or neighborhood association is enforcing
an invalid restriction?
A: Call the Federal Communications Commission at (202) 418-0163.
Some assistance may also be available from the direct broadcast
satellite company, multichannel multipoint distribution service
or television broadcast station whose service is desired.
- FCC -
|
Home
