# DA-09-1674: WILLIAM CULVER (07/29/09): WILLIAM CULVER

> Federal · Rulings · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_09_1674

## Section

- **Citation:** DA-09-1674: WILLIAM CULVER (07/29/09)
- **Heading:** WILLIAM CULVER
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Rulings
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** FCC Declaratory Rulings / WILLIAM CULVER

## Text

Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1674
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of:
William Culver
Petition for Declaratory Ruling Under 47 C.F.R. �
1.4000
))))))
CSR 7925-O
DECLARATORY RULING
Adopted: July 28, 2009 Released: July 29, 2009
By the Acting Chief, Media Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Petitioner William Culver (�Petitioner�) filed a Petition for Declaratory Ruling
(�Petition�) seeking a determination that the antenna restrictions in the Amended Declaration for North
Ridge Farms Homeowners� Association, Inc. (�Association�) are prohibited by the Commission�s Overthe-
Air Reception Devices Rule, 47 C.F.R. � 1.4000 (�Rule�).1 The Association filed a response to the
Petition and Petitioner filed a reply. For the reasons discussed below, we grant Petitioner�s request and
find that the Association�s restrictions prohibiting installation of a digital television antenna on his single
family home in Crestwood, Kentucky are impermissible under the Rule.
II. BACKGROUND
2. The Rule, which prohibits governmental and private restrictions that impair the ability of
antenna users to install, maintain, or use over-the-air-reception devices2 was adopted by the Commission
to implement Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the �Act�).3 This provision was
intended to advance one of the primary objectives of the Communications Act of 1934: �to make
available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States . . . a rapid, efficient, nation-wide, and
world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges. . . .�4
1Section 1.4000(e) provides that parties may petition the Commission for a declaratory ruling under Section 1.2 of
the Commission�s rules to determine whether a particular restriction is permissible or prohibited under the Rule. 47
C.F.R. � 1.4000(e)
a rapid, efficient, nation-wide, and
world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges. . . .�4
1Section 1.4000(e) provides that parties may petition the Commission for a declaratory ruling under Section 1.2 of
the Commission�s rules to determine whether a particular restriction is permissible or prohibited under the Rule. 47
C.F.R. � 1.4000(e).
2See Preemption of Local Zoning Regulation of Satellite Earth Stations and Implementation of Section 207 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996; Restrictions on Over-the-Air Reception Devices: Television Broadcast Service
and Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service, 11 FCC Rcd 19276 (1996) (�Report and Order�), recon. granted
in part and denied in part, 13 FCC Rcd 18962 (1998) (�Order on Reconsideration�), Second Report and Order, 13
FCC Rcd 23874 (1998) (�Second Report and Order�). The Rule became effective on October 14, 1996. Public
Notice DA 96-1755 (Oct. 23, 1996).
3Section 207 requires the Commission to �promulgate regulations to prohibit restrictions that impair a viewer�s
ability to receive video programming services through devices designed for over-the-air reception of� certain
enumerated services. Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, � 207, 110 Stat. 56, 114 (1996).
4Communications Act of 1934, � 1 as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 151.

Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1674
2
3
egulations to prohibit restrictions that impair a viewer�s
ability to receive video programming services through devices designed for over-the-air reception of� certain
enumerated services. Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, � 207, 110 Stat. 56, 114 (1996).
4Communications Act of 1934, � 1 as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 151.

Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1674
2
3. The Rule applies to antennas that are one meter or less in diameter, or any size in Alaska,
and are designed to receive or transmit direct broadcast satellite services; antennas that are one meter or
less in diagonal measurement and are designed to receive or transmit video programming services through
multipoint distribution services, including multichannel multipoint distribution services, instructional
television fixed services, and local multipoint distribution services; and antennas designed to receive
television broadcast signals.5 For the Rule to apply, the antenna must be installed �on property within the
exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has a direct or indirect ownership or leasehold
interest in the property� upon which the antenna is located.6 The Rule does not apply to restrictions on
installations in common areas.7 The Rule provides that a restriction impairs installation, maintenance, or
use of a protected antenna if it: (1) unreasonably delays or prevents installation, maintenance, or use; (2)
unreasonably increases the cost of installation, maintenance, or use; or (3) precludes reception of an
acceptable quality signal.8 There are exceptions to the Rule for restrictions necessary to address valid and
clearly articulated safety or historic preservation issues, provided such restrictions are as narrowly tailored
as possible, impose as little burden as possible, and apply in a nondiscriminatory manner throughout the
regulated area.9
4
nce, or use; or (3) precludes reception of an
acceptable quality signal.8 There are exceptions to the Rule for restrictions necessary to address valid and
clearly articulated safety or historic preservation issues, provided such restrictions are as narrowly tailored
as possible, impose as little burden as possible, and apply in a nondiscriminatory manner throughout the
regulated area.9
4. The Rule provides that parties who are affected by antenna restrictions may petition the
Commission to determine if the restrictions are permissible or prohibited by the Rule.10 The Rule places
the burden of demonstrating that a challenged restriction complies with the Rule on the party seeking to
impose the restriction.11
III. DISCUSSION
5. Petitioner resides in a single family home located in Crestwood, Kentucky in the North
Ridge Farms Homeowners Association.12 Petitioner requested permission from the Association to install
a digital television antenna on the side of his home near the roof peak, but his request was denied. The
Association maintains that the Petitioner can receive an acceptable quality signal from a location at the
back of the house below the roof line. Alternatively, the Association suggests that Petitioner purchase a
new antenna from a list it provided. The Petitioner asks the Commission to find that the Association�s
restrictions do not comply with the Rule.
6. The community is governed by the Association, which has adopted Amended
Declarations of Restrictions (�Declarations�) that address, among other aspects of the community, the
placement of antennas. The Declaration at issue here, adopted in 2002, reads as follows:13
547 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a). In October, 2000, the Commission amended the Rule to apply also to antennas that are used
to receive and transmit fixed wireless signals. Promotion of Competitive Networks in Local Telecommunications
Markets, Wireless Communications Association International, Inc
ommunity, the
placement of antennas. The Declaration at issue here, adopted in 2002, reads as follows:13
547 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a). In October, 2000, the Commission amended the Rule to apply also to antennas that are used
to receive and transmit fixed wireless signals. Promotion of Competitive Networks in Local Telecommunications
Markets, Wireless Communications Association International, Inc. Petition for Rulemaking to Amend Section
1.4000 of the Commission�s Rules to Preempt Restrictions on Subscriber Premises Reception or Transmission
Antennas Designed to Provide Fixed Wireless Services, 15 FCC Rcd 22983 (2000).
647 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a)(1).
7Second Report and Order at para 62.
847 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a)(3).
947 C.F.R. � 1.4000(b).
1047 C.F.R. � 1.4000(e).
1147 C.F.R. � 1.4000(g).
12Petition at 1.
13Declaration at para 39.

Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1674
3
Concerning the placement of satellite dishes, television antennas and wireless cable
antennas, under no circumstances will satellite dishes greater than one (1) meter (39.37�)
in diameter, AM/FM radio antennas, amateur (�ham�) radio antennas, Citizen�s Band
(�CB�) antennas or Digital Audio Radio Services (�DARS�) antennas be erected on any
lot structure without the written approval of the Association. The Association advises all
homeowners to place approved television and satellite dishes on their property in a
manner that retains the overall attractiveness of the property and is in a location that is the
least visible from the street.14
7. Petitioner has requested the Commission to find that he is entitled to install the digital
television antenna that he has already purchased on the side of his house slightly above the roof peak so
that he can receive television broadcast signals from all directions.15 The Association opposes the
Petitioner�s proposed antenna placement because, it asserts, this placement would put the antenna in an
area with high visibility
ssion to find that he is entitled to install the digital
television antenna that he has already purchased on the side of his house slightly above the roof peak so
that he can receive television broadcast signals from all directions.15 The Association opposes the
Petitioner�s proposed antenna placement because, it asserts, this placement would put the antenna in an
area with high visibility. The Association has suggested alternative placements which would be less
visible. The Association claims that these alternatives would still allow the antenna to �achieve optimum
signal strength.�16
8. Petitioner argues that complying with the Association�s request to place his antenna
behind the center of his home, below his roof ridge, as instructed by the Association, would prevent him
from receiving signals from all directions using the antenna he has already purchased.17 The Petitioner
asserts that his antenna must be above the roof peak to have the proper �line of sight� needed to receive
all over-the-air signals.18 Petitioner also argues that it would be cheaper and easier to install the antenna
on the side of his house while also insuring the reception of a good signal.19 Finally, Petitioner argues
that the Association�s restrictions do not specifically prohibit him from placing the antenna on the side of
his house.
9. In opposition, the Association argues that it conducted its own research and discovered
that the majority of high definition television broadcast transmitting antennas were within 25 miles of
Petitioner�s home, and Petitioner only needs a small antenna for good reception.20 Moreover, the
Association claims that a smaller antenna could be placed lower than the ridgeline of his roof.21
However, the only evidence that the Association presents to support its position is a hand drawn sketch
showing its preferred location and the Petitioner�s proposed location with the notation that the �same
reception� can be achieved
ly needs a small antenna for good reception.20 Moreover, the
Association claims that a smaller antenna could be placed lower than the ridgeline of his roof.21
However, the only evidence that the Association presents to support its position is a hand drawn sketch
showing its preferred location and the Petitioner�s proposed location with the notation that the �same
reception� can be achieved. It does not offer any technical or other information to support its claim.22
The Association points out that it provided the Petitioner with a list of antennas that could receive all of
14Amended Declaration of Restrictions for North Ridge Farms Homeowners� Association, pages 5-6 � 39.
15Petition at 1. The Petitioner requested permission from the Association for this placement despite the fact that the
Association�s restrictions do not appear to require prior approval to install television broadcast antennas. Petition at
1.
16Id. at 2.
17Id.
18Id.
19Id.
20Association Response (Letter dated September 15, 2007 from North Ridge Farms Homeowners Association Inc. to
William Culver) at 2.
21Id.
22Association Response to the Petition, attachment.

Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1674
4
the signals while being below the roof�s ridgeline.23 Finally, the Association argues that its Declaration
requires that antennas �be placed in a location least visible from the street.�24
10. We find that Petitioner�s television antenna to receive digital broadcast signals is covered
by the Rule. We also find that the proposed antenna location is an area within his exclusive use or control
where he has a direct ownership interest and is thus covered by our Rule. There is no dispute regarding
Petitioner�s right to place an antenna on his roof, however, the Association seeks to have the antenna
placed in a location that is �least visible from the street.�25 The second sentence of the Association�s
Declaration, quoted above, expresses the Association�s placement preference
trol
where he has a direct ownership interest and is thus covered by our Rule. There is no dispute regarding
Petitioner�s right to place an antenna on his roof, however, the Association seeks to have the antenna
placed in a location that is �least visible from the street.�25 The second sentence of the Association�s
Declaration, quoted above, expresses the Association�s placement preference. A placement preference
restriction is permitted provided it does not impair the antenna user�s right to install, maintain, or use an
antenna covered by the Rule.26 A placement restriction impairs if it (1) unreasonably delays or prevents
installation, maintenance, or use of the antenna, (2) unreasonably increases the cost of installation,
maintenance or use of the antenna, or (3) prevents the antenna from receiving an acceptable quality
signal.27
11. In considering placement preference issues, we must rely on the particular facts presented
by the parties. The Rule places the burden of demonstrating that a challenged restriction complies with
the Rule on the party seeking to impose the restriction.28 In this case, the Association has failed to meet
this burden. For instance, the Association does not offer any evidence to rebut the Petitioner�s claim that
placing the antenna in the Association�s preferred location, below the roof peak, will preclude reception
of an acceptable quality signal. The Association does offer a hand drawn sketch showing its preferred
location and the Petitioner�s proposed location with the notation that the �same reception� can be
achieved, but it does not offer any technical or other facts to support its claim. The Association asserts
that, based on its research and given Petitioner�s geographical location and the location of the majority of
the digital television transmitting antennas within twenty-five miles of Petitioner�s home, he only needs a
small antenna for good reception
on that the �same reception� can be
achieved, but it does not offer any technical or other facts to support its claim. The Association asserts
that, based on its research and given Petitioner�s geographical location and the location of the majority of
the digital television transmitting antennas within twenty-five miles of Petitioner�s home, he only needs a
small antenna for good reception. However, the Association does not offer any other technical
information, e.g., signal measurement test, to support its contention that if the Petitioner placed the
antenna where it suggests, he would be able to receive all of the local signals.29 Furthermore, the
Association failed to rebut Petitioner�s claim that installation of the antenna on the rear of the house
would be more costly, particularly given that the Association wants Petitioner to purchase a new
antenna.30 The Petitioner states that he would not be able to receive all the over-the-air signals if he
complies with the Association�s restrictions.31 The burden is on the Association and it has failed to carry
its burden and establish that its placement restriction complies with our Rule. We find the Association�s
placement preference is unenforceable with respect to Petitioner�s antenna installation.
23Association Response (Letter dated September 15, 2007 from North Ridge Farms Homeowners Association Inc. to
William Culver) at 2. .
24Association Response at 1.
25Id.
2647 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a).
27In the Matter of James Sadler, 13 FCC Rcd 12559, 12568 (MB 1998); 47 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a).
2847 C.F.R. � 1.4000(g).
29Association Response at 1.
30Petition at 1.
31A computer mapping of Petitioner�s address on the Commission�s DTV.gov website indicates that his location
should receive strong signals for WAVE (NBC), WMYO (MYTV), WDRB (FOX), WLKY (CBS), WHAS (ABC),
and WKMJ (PBS), while receiving moderate signals for WKPC (PBS), WBNA (ION), and WBKI (CW)
47 C.F.R. � 1.4000(a).
2847 C.F.R. � 1.4000(g).
29Association Response at 1.
30Petition at 1.
31A computer mapping of Petitioner�s address on the Commission�s DTV.gov website indicates that his location
should receive strong signals for WAVE (NBC), WMYO (MYTV), WDRB (FOX), WLKY (CBS), WHAS (ABC),
and WKMJ (PBS), while receiving moderate signals for WKPC (PBS), WBNA (ION), and WBKI (CW). However,
we do not have enough information to ascertain the signal strength at the locations proposed by either the Petitioner
or the Association. www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/maps/.

Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1674
5
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
12. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.4000(d) of the Over-the-Air
Reception Devices Rule, 47 C.F.R. � 1.4000(d), and Section 1.2 of the Commission�s rules, 47 C.F.R. �
1.2, that the Petition for Declaratory Ruling filed by William Culver IS GRANTED with respect to
preemption of Article 39 of the Amended Declaration for the North Ridge Farms Homeowners�
Association, Inc.
13. This action is taken by the Acting Chief, Media Bureau, pursuant to authority delegated
by Section 0.283 of the Commission�s rules.32
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Robert H. Ratcliffe
Acting Chief
Media Bureau
3247 C.F.R. � 0.283.

## Nearby sections

- [DA-00-1341: A&E Television Networks For Declaratory Ruling (06/20/00) A&E Television Networks For Declaratory Ruling](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_00_1341.md)
- [DA-01-2234: Request for Declaratory Ruling Removing the Commission's Minimum Carrier Tone Requirement for OFDM Modulation in the Multipoint Distribution and Instructional Television Fixed Services (09/26/01) Request for Declaratory Ruling Removing the Commission's Minimum Carrier Tone Requirement for OFDM Modulation in the Multipoint Distribution and Instructional Television Fixed Services](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_01_2234.md)
- [DA-01-2871: Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan (12/11/01) Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_01_2871.md)
- [DA-02-765: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS' EMERGENCY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OR CLARIFICATION OF BROADCAST CARRIAGE RULES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 76.66 (04/04/02) NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS' EMERGENCY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OR CLARIFICATION OF BROADCAST CARRIAGE RULES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 76.66](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_02_765.md)
- [DA-02-2078: Time-Telepictures Television (08/26/02) Time-Telepictures Television](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_02_2078.md)
- [DA-03-2865: INFINITY BROADCASTING OPERATIONS INC (09/09/03) INFINITY BROADCASTING OPERATIONS INC](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_03_2865.md)
- [DA-03-4108: Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Petition for Revocation of Certification Request for Expedited Consideration (01/06/04) Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Petition for Revocation of Certification Request for Expedited Consideration](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_03_4108.md)
- [DA-04-970: List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that Are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets (04/08/04) List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that Are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_970.md)
- [DA-04-3201: Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies (10/06/04) Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_3201.md)
- [DA-04-3576: Thrifty Call, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning BellSouth Tariff F.C.C. No. 1 (11/12/04) Thrifty Call, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning BellSouth Tariff F.C.C. No. 1](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_3576.md)
- [DA-05-140: Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities (01/26/05) Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_140.md)
- [DA-05-148: CLARIFICATION OF RECONSIDERATION PERIOD AND EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TERMINATIONS OF WIRELESS RADIO SERVICE AUTHORIZATIONS (01/21/05) CLARIFICATION OF RECONSIDERATION PERIOD AND EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TERMINATIONS OF WIRELESS RADIO SERVICE AUTHORIZATIONS](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_148.md)
- [DA-05-1618: Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (06/09/05) Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_1618.md)
- [DA-05-1667: Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (06/15/05) Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_1667.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_09_1674. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.