[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 15, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69926]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32409]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 1

[CS Docket No. 96-83; FCC 99-360]


Preemption of Local Zoning Regulation of Satellite Earth Stations 
and Restrictions on Over-the-Air Reception Devices: Television 
Broadcast Service, Direct Broadcast Satellite and Multichannel 
Multipoint Distribution Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petition on reconsideration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document denies three petitions seeking reconsideration 
of the Second Report and Order in which the Over-the-Air Reception 
Devices rule was expanded to apply to antenna restrictions on rental 
property where the viewer has exclusive use or control. The Commission 
also concluded in the Second Report and Order that antenna restrictions 
on common or restricted access areas were beyond the scope of statutory 
authority for the rule. This document concludes that the findings in 
the Second Report and Order are reaffirmed, as no new facts or 
arguments are raised in these petitions for reconsideration.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 15, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eloise Gore at (202) 418-7200 or via 
internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Order 
on Reconsideration, CS Docket No. 96-83, FCC 99-360, adopted November 
19, 1999 and released November 24, 1999. The complete text of this 
Order on Reconsideration is available for inspection and copying during 
normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257) at its 
headquarters, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036, or may be reviewed via internet at http://
www.fcc.gov/csb/

Synopsis of Order on Reconsideration of the Second Report and Order

    1. Three petitions were filed by: (1) Community Associations 
Institute (``CAI Petition''); (2) Personal Communications Industry 
Association (PCIA), Teligent, Inc., Association for Local 
Telecommunications Services, WinStar Communications, Inc., and Nextlink 
Communications, Inc. (collectively, ``PCIA Petition); and (3) 
Association for Maximum Service Television and the National Association 
of Broadcasters (``NAB) (collectively, ``NAB Petition''), requesting 
reconsideration of certain decisions in the Second Report and Order, 
which amended 47 CFR 1.4000, to prohibit restrictions on over-the-air 
reception devices on rental property.
    2. CAI asks the Commission to reconsider the decision to permit 
tenants, who live in community associations, to install individual 
antennas without the permission of the home or unit owner from whom 
they rent. It argues that the only way for homeowners to prevent damage 
to their own property is through prior approval of tenants' antenna 
installations. While prematurely filed, the Commission addresses the 
merits of CAI's petition and concludes that there is not sufficient 
justification presented for allowing homeowners who rent out their 
property to require prior approval of antenna installations. Moreover, 
the threat of property damage in connection with antenna installation, 
as well as prior approval by a property owner, were issues which were 
already amply discussed and decided in the Second Report and Order and 
Order on Reconsideration of the First Report and Order (63 FR 67422), 
respectively.
    3. The PCIA Petition seeks reconsideration of the Commission's 
conclusion in the Second Report and Order that prohibiting antenna 
restrictions in common or restricted access areas is beyond the 
authority granted to the Commission by Section 207 of the 
Telecommunications Act. Section 207 authorizes neither the imposition 
of affirmative duties on property owners nor the compensation mechanism 
necessary to avoid a potentially unconstitutional taking of private 
property. While PCIA Petitioners disagree with the Commission analysis 
in the Second Report and Order, they do not offer evidence or arguments 
that were not already thoroughly considered and discussed in the Second 
Report and Order.
    4. Similarly, the NAB Petition disagrees with the Commission's 
analysis and interpretation of Section 207, but it too fails to offer 
new arguments or evidence to justify reconsideration of the 
Commission's conclusions in the Second Report and Order.
    5. The parties have presented no new arguments or facts in the 
pleadings filed and the Commission is not required to reconsider 
arguments that have already been considered. Consequently, the 
Commission denies the petitions for reconsideration and affirms the 
Second Report and Order.
    6. Accordingly, it is ordered that pursuant to Section 1, 4(i), 
5(c) and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 
151, 154(i), 155(c) and 405, the petitions for reconsideration filed by 
the Community Associations Institute; by the Personal Communications 
Industry Association, Teligent, Inc., the Association for Local 
Telecommunications Services, WinStar Communications, Inc., and Nextlink 
Communications, Inc.; and by the Association for Maximum Service 
Television and the National Association of Broadcasters are denied.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 99-32409 Filed 12-14-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P