Extrapolate as you will.
A while back I was building a house for myself. I did the plumbing and electrical (as well as built most of it but that's not part of this)
Of course, I needed inspections from the city.
I had a plumbing inspector come out and he failed me before walking in the building. I specified what the law said and he said it still didn't meet code. I showed him proof and he said "Fine, lets look at the rest".
He failed me and told me why.
I made the corrections and he came out to inspect again. He failed me on the same thing as before and I had done it the way he said. I asked him to clarify the correct way to do this aspect and as he was explaining it, I wrote it on a 2X6 stud right next to the "problem" area.
I redid it according to the diagram he approved.
He came out the third time and failed me again, on the same spot. I reminded him I wrote the diagram and he approved it. He, then, said "We can get another city inspector (his boss) out here if you think I'm wrong". I said I wanted that. He immediately said "Well, let's look at the rest of it".
We went through the rest and, interestingly enough, he said he was going to pass me.
(FWIW, the electrical inspector came in and passed me first time)
Moral of the story is you need to take an "opinion" of the rules/regulations with a grain of salt. Two officials might have different interpretations.
That's why I said the only actual person who could tell us what the law actually is, is a judge. And since it's a federal regulation, it would have to be a federal judge to make the final call.
And, if one were to really get fussy, it could be taken Supreme where one could remind people that the Constitution says NOWHERE that the sky can be regulated for use.