On Thu, 15 May 2003 17:11:21 -0700 "Timothy-Allen Albertson-KG6IRH"
> Such idiocy on the part of local
> authorities is one of the reasons I believe Congress saw fit to
> exclusive jurisdiction on this issue in the FCC. You can file a
> for declaratory relief on this matter with the FCC if you wish.
For non-lawyer readers of this reflector, it may be important to
elaborate on the above statement. While it is true that the FCC appears
to have exclusive federal jurisdiction, the FCC had not preempted local
regulations. An amateur could file a petition for declaratory relief on
this matter with the FCC, asking the FCC to preempt a particular local
regulation, or decision.
5. Preemption of State and Local RF Regulations
88. Decision. Based upon the current record in this
proceeding, we find that there is insufficient evidence at this time to
warrant our preempting state and local actions that are based on concerns
over RF emissions for services other than those defined by Congress as
"personal wireless services." We note that on May 30, 1997, the
National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) and the Association of Maximum
Service Television (MSTV) (jointly NAB/MSTV) filed a Petition for Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, urging preemption of certain state and
local government restrictions on the siting of broadcast transmission
facilities, based on petitioner's claims that unreasonable state and
local regulations have frustrated the siting of broadcast facilities and
could impede the Commission's scheduled conversion to the new digital
television service. The NAB/MSTV petition, which raises additional
preemption issues for broadcasting, will be addressed in a subsequent
 See 47 CFR 1.1307(e), as amended.
Source: FCC 97-303 [12 FCC Rcd 13494 (1997); 62 FR 47960 (Sept 12,
K1VR Note: The FCC has never acted upon the 1997 NAB/MSTV petition.
Fred Hopengarten K1VR firstname.lastname@example.org
Six Willarch Road * Lincoln, MA 01773-5105
781/259-0088 *eFax 419/858-2421