Digital Television: An Overview

Congressional research reportJan 11, 2008

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

/name redacted/

Specialist in Science and Technology Policy

January 11, 2008

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

RL31260

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Digital Television: An Overview

Summary

Digital television (DTV) is a new television service representing the most significant

development in television technology since the advent of color television. DTV can provide

movie theater quality pictures and sound, a wider screen, better color rendition, multiple video

programming or a single program of high definition television (HDTV), and other new services

currently being developed. The nationwide deployment of digital television is a complex and

multifaceted enterprise. A successful deployment requires the development by content providers

of compelling digital programming; the delivery of digital signals to consumers by broadcast

television stations, as well as cable and satellite television systems; and the widespread purchase

and adoption by consumers of digital television equipment.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104) provided that initial eligibility for any DTV

licenses issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should be limited to existing

broadcasters. Because DTV signals cannot be received through the existing analog television

broadcasting system, the FCC decided to phase in DTV over a period of years, so that consumers

would not have to immediately purchase new digital television sets or converters. Thus,

broadcasters were given new spectrum for digital signals, while retaining their existing spectrum

for analog transmission so that they can simultaneously transmit analog and digital signals to their

broadcasting market areas.

Congress and the FCC set a target date of December 31, 2006, for broadcasters to cease

broadcasting their analog signals and return their existing analog television spectrum to be

auctioned for commercial services (such as broadband) or used for public safety communications.

However, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) allowed a station to delay the return of

its analog spectrum if 15% or more of the television households in its market did not subscribe to

a multi-channel digital service and did not have digital television sets or converters. Given the

slower-than-expected pace at which digital televisions have been introduced into American

homes, and given the impetus to reclaim analog spectrum for commercial uses and public safety,

the 109th Congress enacted the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), which established a

“date certain” digital transition deadline of February 17, 2009.

A key issue in the Congressional debate over the digital transition continues to be addressing the

millions of American over-the-air households whose existing analog televisions will require

converter boxes in order to receive digital signals when the analog signal is turned off. P.L. 109171 established a digital-to-analog converter box program—administered by the National

Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the Department of Commerce—

that will partially subsidize consumer purchases of converter boxes. Specifically, Congress is

actively overseeing the activities of federal agencies responsible for the digital transition—the

FCC and the NTIA—while assessing whether additional federal efforts are necessary, particularly

with respect to public education and outreach.

This report will be updated as events warrant.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Contents

What Is Digital Television? .........................................................................................................1

Role of Congress and the FCC ....................................................................................................1

Status of the DTV Buildout .........................................................................................................3

Creation of Digital Programming ..........................................................................................4

Delivery of Digital Signals ....................................................................................................4

Broadcasting ...................................................................................................................4

Satellite...........................................................................................................................5

Cable ..............................................................................................................................5

Consumer Purchase of DTV Products ...................................................................................5

Policy Issues Surrounding the Digital Transition .........................................................................6

Activities in the 108th Congress ...................................................................................................6

Activities and Issues in the 109th Congress ..................................................................................9

House Activities.................................................................................................................. 10

Digital Television Transition Act of 2005 ...................................................................... 11

Senate Activities ................................................................................................................. 13

S. 1932: Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 ............................................. 13

Conference Report on S. 1932............................................................................................. 14

P.L. 109-171: Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 ....................................................................... 14

Activities and Issues in the 110th Congress ................................................................................ 16

NTIA Implementation of Converter Box Program ............................................................... 17

Consumer Education ........................................................................................................... 19

Digital Multicasts and Downconversion .............................................................................. 21

“Broadcast Flag” and the “Analog Hole”............................................................................. 23

Tables

Table 1. DTV Hearings Held in the 110th Congress .................................................................... 17

Table A-1. Federal Funding for Digital Conversion of Public Television Stations....................... 34

Appendixes

Appendix A. Background on Selected Policy Issues .................................................................. 25

Appendix B. Legislation in the 109th Congress Related to Digital Television ............................. 41

Appendix C. Legislation in the 110th Congress Related to Digital Television.............................. 43

Contacts

Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 44

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

What Is Digital Television?

Digital television (DTV) is a new television service representing the most significant

development in television technology since the advent of color television. DTV can provide

movie theater quality pictures and sound, a wider screen, better color rendition, multiple video

programming or a single program of high definition television (HDTV), and other new services

currently being developed. DTV can be HDTV, or the simultaneous transmission of multiple

programs of standard definition television (SDTV), which is a lesser quality picture than HDTV

but significantly better than today’s television.

The rationale often cited for the digital transition is that aside from offering superior broadcast

quality to consumers, DTV will allow over-the-air broadcasters to offer the same kinds of

digitally-based services (such as pay-per-view) currently offered by cable and satellite television

providers. Additionally, it is argued that digital television uses the radiofrequency spectrum more

efficiently than traditional analog television, thereby conserving a scarce resource (bandwidth)

that can be used for other wireless applications.

There are three major components of DTV service that must be present in order for consumers to

enjoy a fully realized “high definition” television viewing experience. First, digital programming

must be available. Digital programming is content produced with digital cameras and other digital

production equipment. Such equipment is distinct from what is currently used to produce

conventional analog programming. Second, digital programming must be delivered to the

consumer via a digital signal. Digital signals can be broadcast over the airwaves (requiring new

transmission towers or DTV antennas on existing towers), transmitted by cable or satellite

television technology, or delivered by a prerecorded source such as a digital video disc (DVD).

And third, consumers must have a digital television product capable of receiving the digital signal

and displaying digital programming on their television screens.

Role of Congress and the FCC

Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have played major roles in the

development of DTV. Starting in 1987, the FCC launched a decade-long series of proceedings

exploring the potential and feasibility of a transition from conventional analog televisions to

advanced television systems. While the original term used to describe the new television system

was high definition television (HDTV), the FCC used a broader term—advanced television

(ATV)—referring to any television technology that provides improved audio and video quality.

After it became clear that ATV would be using digital signal transmission, the FCC began (in

1995) to use the term DTV (synonymous with ATV) to describe the new service more accurately.

In December 1996, after lengthy debate between television manufacturers, broadcasters, and

computer firms, the FCC adopted a standard for DTV signal transmission based on

recommendations of the Advanced Television System Committee (ATSC).1 The ATSC standard

FCC Fourth Report and Order In the Matter of Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact on Existing Television

Service, MM Docket No. 87-268, FCC 96-493, released December 27, 1996.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

allows for 18 different video formats, of which four have subsequently been adopted for

commercial use.2

Meanwhile, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104) provided that initial eligibility

for any DTV licenses issued by the FCC should be limited to existing broadcasters. Broadcasters

would be issued DTV licenses while at the same time retaining their existing analog licenses

during the transition from analog to digital television. The act provided that broadcasters must

eventually return either their existing analog channel or the new digital channel. Also in the 104th

Congress, a major debate took place over whether to direct the FCC to conduct auctions for the

spectrum allocated for DTV. The FCC estimated the commercial value of the DTV spectrum to be

between $11 billion to $70 billion. No legislation was enacted, however, and the FCC did not

obtain the authority to auction the DTV licenses.

In 1997, the FCC adopted rules3 to implement the Telecommunications Act, and granted DTV

licenses to some 1600 full power incumbent television broadcasters.4 The DTV licenses consist of

6 megahertz (MHZ) of unused spectrum within the VHF and UHF frequency bands. Because

DTV signals cannot be received through the existing analog television broadcasting system

(known as NTSC)5 the FCC decided to phase in DTV over a period of years, so that consumers

would not have to immediately purchase new digital television sets or converters. Thus,

broadcasters were given 6 MHZ of new spectrum for digital signals, while retaining their existing

6 MHZ for analog transmission so that they can simultaneously transmit NTSC and DTV signals

to their broadcasting market areas.6 The simultaneous broadcasting (“simulcasting”) of the same

programs in both digital and analog modes was intended to allow viewers who have not yet

purchased DTV sets or converters to continue to receive television programming during the

transition to DTV.

The ruling required television stations receiving the DTV licenses to build their DTV facilities

according to a schedule determined by the size of their markets. The FCC has granted extensions

Four video formats are being used commercially by U.S. television producers and manufacturers. These four formats

are described by the number of lines they produce per each picture frame, and whether they use interlaced (i) or

progressive (p) scanning techniques. These are: 480i and 480p (suitable for SDTV broadcasts), and 720p and 1080i

(HDTV). The progressive scan video format is more compatible with PC displays, while the interlaced scan is more

compatible with analog television receivers.

FCC Fifth Report and Order In the Matter of Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact on Existing Television

Service, MM Docket No. 87-268, FCC 97-116, released April 21, 1997.

A provision in the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-188,

H.R. 3448, H.Rept. 107-481) addresses the digital conversion of full power television stations that received their analog

licenses after the FCC allocated digital spectrum to existing analog stations in 1997. Section 531 requires the FCC to

allot a digital channel to any requesting full-power television station that had an application pending for an analog

television station construction permit as of October 24, 1991, and which had its application granted after April 3, 1997.

Any station receiving digital spectrum under this provision is required to complete construction of its digital facility

within 18 months, without the possibility of an extension. Stations are also prohibited from operating an analog signal

on its designated digital channel. The bill’s conference report states that this provision will allow recent broadcast

licensees to foster a digital audience during the transition period to digital television without having to terminate analog

service, and that without this change, those stations would be denied the flexibility to operate an analog and a digital

facility simultaneously in the near term, especially in major markets.

The National Television Systems Committee (NTSC) was the industry group that developed the currently used U.S.

television standards.

Using digital technology, the DTV frequencies can be placed in the vacant portion of the same spectrum band

currently allocated for analog (NTSC) television without interfering with analog television broadcasts.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

to licensees unable to meet the schedule due to unforeseeable or uncontrollable circumstances,

such as an inability to secure tower locations for new antennas.

The FCC set a target date of 2006 for broadcasters to cease broadcasting the analog signal and

return their existing analog television spectrum licenses to be auctioned for other commercial

purposes. During the 105th Congress, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) made the

2006 reversion date statutory, providing that a “broadcast license that authorizes analog television

service may not be renewed to authorize such service for a period that extends beyond December

31, 2006.” However, the act required the FCC to grant extensions for reclaiming the analog

television licenses in the year 2006 from stations in television markets where any one of the

following three conditions exist:

•

if one or more of the television stations affiliated with the four national networks

are not broadcasting a digital television signal;

•

if digital-to-analog converter technology is not generally available in the market

of the licensee; or

•

if at least 15% of the television households in the market served by the station do

not subscribe to a digital “multi-channel video programming distributor”

(including cable or satellite services) and do not have digital TV sets or

converters.

In the 109th Congress, the 2006 deadline for the digital transition was extended. The Deficit

Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), signed by the President on February 8, 2006, sets a “hard”

digital transition deadline of February 17, 2009. Meanwhile, since the beginning of the digital

transition, the FCC has continued to monitor the status of the DTV conversion of both

commercial and noncommercial broadcast stations.7 On August 6, 2007, the FCC released the

final assignment of digital television channels—to be used post DTV transition—for over 1,800

stations.8 On December 31, 2007, the FCC released the Third Periodic Review of the

Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television. In this Report

and Order, the FCC adopted procedures and rule changes necessary to ensure that broadcasters

meet the statutory transition deadline and complete construction of their final, post-transition

facilities while maintaining the best possible television service to their viewers.”9 Full-power

television stations are required to file status reports with the FCC detailing their transition status,

additional steps necessary, and a time line for making those steps in order to meet the February

17, 2009 deadline.

Status of the DTV Buildout

The nationwide buildout of digital television is a complex and multifaceted enterprise. A

successful buildout requires: the development by content providers of compelling digital

For a comprehensive listing of FCC regulatory activities with respect to the digital transition, see http://www.fcc.gov/

dtv/.

FCC, Press Release, “FCC Announced Final Assignment of Digital Television Channels,” August 6, 2007.

FCC, Report and Order, In the Matter of: Third Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting

the Conversion to Digital Television, MB Docket No. 07-91, FCC 07-228, adopted December 22, 2007, released

December 31, 2007, p 4.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

programming; the delivery of digital signals to consumers by broadcast television stations, as well

as cable and satellite television systems; and the widespread purchase and adoption by consumers

of digital television equipment.

Creation of Digital Programming

Digital programming is created with digital cameras and other digital production equipment.

Digital content tends to favor more “visual” types of programming—such as sports events or

movies—which take full advantage of the high-definition viewing experience. The amount of

available digital programming is gradually becoming widespread among broadcast and cable

networks.

Delivery of Digital Signals

Currently, there are three ways digital programming is being delivered to consumers. Digital

signals are: (1) broadcast over the airwaves; (2) transmitted over channels provided by satellite

television systems; and (3) provided via digital cable service in a growing number of markets.

Broadcasting

According to the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), as of January 10, 2008, there were

1,626 stations (both commercial and public) broadcasting digital signals in 211 markets.10 This

represents about 95% of the nation’s approximately 1,700 full-power television stations. The 211

markets currently receiving digital transmissions cover over 99% of U.S. TV households.

Television stations must construct new facilities and purchase new equipment in order to transmit

digital signals. According to NAB, costs range from $8-$10 million to fully convert a station to

digital operation.11 NAB has estimated that the total cost of the transition for broadcasters is $10

to $16 billion.12

As of October 10, 2007, the FCC has granted a construction permit or license to 1,706 stations,

about 99% of the total number of DTV allotments.13 Approximately three-quarters of the 1,240

full-power commercial stations did not meet the May 1, 2002 conversion deadline. A total of 843

commercial stations requested from the FCC an extension of the May 2002 deadline in order to

complete construction of their DTV facilities. So far, 772 have been granted and 71 have been

admonished. Of those stations granted extensions, 602 filed requests for second extensions. Of

this number, 535 extension requests have been granted, 67 have been dismissed, and the rest

remain pending. A third extension was requested by 141 stations; 104 extensions were granted,

action was deferred for 30 satellite stations, and 7 stations were admonished. Meanwhile, 214

For latest statistics, see http://www.nab.org/AM/ASPCode/DTVStations/DTVStations.asp

Testimony of Ben Tucker, Chairman of NAB Television Board, in: U.S. Congress, House, “Digital Television: A

Private Sector Perspective on the Transition,” Hearing Before the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee

on Telecommunications and the Internet, March 15, 2001, 107th Cong., 1st sess., p. 72.

Testimony of Edward O. Fritts, NAB President and Chief Executive Officer, before the House Committee on Energy

and Commerce, Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, June 2, 2004. Some critics dispute the validity

of these cost estimates. See Snider, J.H., Speak Softly and Carry A Big Stick: How Local TV Broadcasters Exert

Political Power, iUniverse, Inc., New York, pp. 331-345.

See http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/files/dtvsum.html.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

noncommercial educational stations requested extension of the May 1, 2003 buildout deadline.

The FCC has granted all of those extension requests; 134 stations filed for second extensions with

129 granted.14

Satellite

Satellite television is currently provided to over 22 million American households. Two major

companies offer direct broadcast satellite (DBS) television service in the United States:

Echostar’s DISH Network and Hughes’ DirecTV. Satellite TV customers need added equipment

(a slightly bigger satellite dish and either a set-top box or built-in satellite HDTV reception

capability) in order to receive high-definition programming on their digital televisions.

Cable

Initially, cable companies had been reluctant to carry channels of digital and high definition

programming (thereby displacing some existing channel offerings) until more consumers had the

digital television equipment necessary to view digital programming. 15 The reluctance of cable

companies to carry digital programming has changed, however, as cable providers in most

markets have begun to carry digital or high-definition channels. According to the National Cable

& Telecommunications Association (NCTA), as of March 2007, consumers in 209 (out of 210)

local TV markets are served by at least one cable provider that offers high definition

programming. Cable systems providing HDTV pass 100 million U.S. television households (out

of a total 110 million) and reach all 100 of the biggest TV markets.16

Consumer Purchase of DTV Products

DTV products are now available from multiple manufacturers offering varying features and

technical characteristics. Over the past several years, prices for DTV monitors and receivers have

dropped markedly. As the market for DTVs expands, prices are expected to decrease further.

According to the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), approximately 50% of U.S.

households owned a digital television by the end of 2007.17 The average retail price of DTVs was

projected to be $819 in 2007, a $224 drop from 2006.18

Ibid.

Many cable (and both DBS commercial services) are “digital.” However, “digital cable”generally refers to

technology which converts analog programming to a digital signal which is transmitted to the consumer and then

converted back to analog form for television viewing. “Digital cable” allows cable companies to provide more

channels, as well as high speed (broadband) Internet service. However, the “digital” signals transmitted over cable

systems use different digital standards than the DTV standard used by broadcasters and current DTV sets; therefore

current digital cable services currently cannot be directly received by DTV sets.

National Cable & Telecommunications Association, “Digital Transition Statistics,” available at

http://www.ncta.com/IssueBrief.aspx?contentId=2688&view=4.

Consumer Electronics Association, “More than Half of U.S. Households Own a Digital Television,” Press Release,

December 28, 2007, available at http://www.ce.org/shared_files/pr_attachments/PR_MoreThanHalf_MP_122807.doc.

Consumer Electronics Association, “30 Percent of U.S. Households Own an HDTV, CEA Research Finds,” Press

Release, June 26, 2007, available at http://www.ce.org/Press/CurrentNews/press_release_detail.asp?id=11309.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Policy Issues Surrounding the Digital Transition

The goal of the FCC and Congress is to complete the transition to DTV as quickly as possible, so

that NTSC (analog) spectrum can be reclaimed and reallocated for other purposes. Some of the

NTSC spectrum will be auctioned for commercial wireless services, and some of it will be used

for new public safety services (the FCC has already designated some of the analog TV spectrum

for public safety use).

The key issue for Congress and the FCC has been: what steps, if any, should be taken by

government to further facilitate a timely, efficient, and equitable transition to digital television?

To address this question, Congress and the FCC have confronted a highly complex policy

landscape, involving different industries, technologies, and interests, including content providers,

commercial and noncommercial television broadcasters, cable and satellite television providers,

consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers, and consumers.

The following sections in this report—on activities and issues in the 108th, 109th, and 110th

Congresses—discuss issues that have been primary considerations in the Congressional debate on

the digital television transition.19 Additionally, Appendix A provides background information on

a complex array of policy issues related to the digital television transition. These include digital

“must carry,” mandating digital tuners, copyright protection technology, cable/DTV

interoperability, digital conversion of public broadcasting stations, digital conversion of low

power television stations, public interest obligations of DTV broadcasters, and others.

Activities in the 108th Congress

A number of bills were introduced into the 108th Congress, relating in some way to digital

television. Some urged Congress to require broadcasters to return the analog spectrum on “a date

certain.” Under this approach, spectrum would be freed up for other uses. Among legislation in

the 108th Congress, the HERO Act (H.R. 1425 and within 9/11 Commission omnibus bills H.R.

5024, H.R. 5040, and S. 2774) would have prohibited any delay in reassigning the 24 MHZ for

public safety purposes, and required those frequencies to be operational by January 1, 2007.

During March and April 2004, another digital transition proposal was informally circulated by the

Media Bureau of the FCC. Under this proposal, the transition deadline would be moved from

2006 to 2009. Cable and satellite providers would be required to carry a broadcaster’s digital

signal only, but could—if the broadcaster so chooses—down-convert the digital signal to an

analog signal that cable or satellite customers could watch on their analog televisions. Under this

scenario, according to the Media Bureau proposal, cable and satellite TV households watching

down-converted digital signals on their analog sets would be counted toward the 85% statutory

threshold required in order for broadcasters to return to the government their valuable analog

spectrum, which can then be auctioned and/or assigned for other purposes.

For up-to-date information on the current policy debate in the 110th Congress, see CRS Report RL34165, The

Transition to Digital Television: Is America Ready?, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

The commercial broadcasting industry expressed strong opposition to the Media Bureau’s

proposal.20 According to the commercial broadcasters, the proposal would discourage the

development of digital television services (such as HDTV and multicasting) and remove the

incentive for consumers to purchase DTVs. Additionally, they argue, if analog spectrum is

reclaimed under the Media Bureau proposal, TV households that are exclusively “over-the-air”—

many of whom are economically disadvantaged—would lose their television service altogether

unless they purchased DTVs, converter boxes, or cable or satellite television subscriptions. In

response to these criticisms, Kenneth Ferree, former head of the Media Bureau, argues that the

development of digital services will not be adversely impacted because market forces will ensure

that popular stations will likely be carried by cable and satellite TV providers in both digital and

analog form by 2009. Additionally, suggests Ferree, economically disadvantaged over-the-air

households could receive federal subsidies (derived from reclaimed spectrum auction proceeds,

for example) for purchasing converter boxes, thereby ensuring that these households will

continue to receive television service. 21

During the summer of 2004, Congress held three hearings on the digital television transition. On

June 2, 2004, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and the Internet, held a hearing on the Ferree proposal—“Advancing the

DTV Transition: An Examination of the FCC Media Bureau Proposal.” A June 9, 2004 hearing

held by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation—entitled, “Completing

the Digital Television Transition,”—also examined the Ferree proposal and other digital transition

issues including the possibility of consumer subsidies for converter boxes.

Finally, the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held another hearing

on July 21, 2004, looking specifically at lessons learned from Berlin, Germany, which

successfully underwent a transition to digital television in 2003. The hearing, entitled, “The

Digital Television Transition: What We Can Learn from Berlin,” featured the release of a General

Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled, German DTV Transition Differs From U.S.

Transition in Many Respects, but Certain Key Challenges Are Similar. The GAO identified three

elements responsible for Berlin’s successful digital transition: implementing extensive consumer

education, providing subsidies to low-income households for converter boxes, and setting a nearterm, widely recognized shut-off date for analog TV service. 22

On July 22, 2004, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/11

Commission) released its final report. The Commission recommended that Congress support

legislation “which provides for the expedited and increased assignment of radio spectrum for

public safety purposes.” In response to this recommendation, on September 21, 2004, Senator

John McCain introduced S. 2820, the SAVE LIVES Act. S. 2820 would change the digital

transition deadline from December 31, 2006 to December 31, 2008. Spectrum for public safety

would be freed for use by first responders, and other spectrum would be available for commercial

uses. Proceeds from the auctioning of commercial spectrum would be credited to a Digital

Transition Consumer Assistance Fund. The Fund would be used to establish a $1 billion digital

transition program, administered by the Secretary of Commerce, which would subsidize

Written Ex Parte Submission in MB Docket Nos. 03-15 & 98-120, April 15, 2004, Available at http://www.nab.org/

AM/AMTemplate.cfm?template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=3772.

Boliek, Brooks, “Feds: No analog TV by ‘09,” Hollywood Reporter, April 15, 2004.

See U.S. General Accountability Office, German DTV Transition Differs From U.S. Transition in Many Respects,

but Certain Key Challenges Are Similar, GAO-04-926T, July 21, 2004. 22 p.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

consumers who continue to rely exclusively on over-the-air broadcasts with analog televisions.

The program would give priority to low-income households, and would provide assistance for

purchasing digital-to-analog converter boxes or other technologies which would allow consumers

to continue receiving television signals.

S. 2820 also required labeling of analog televisions (with the label stating it is unable to receive

digital signals without a converter box), directs the Department of Commerce (in consultation

with the FCC) to submit a report to Congress recommending a consumer education program on

the digital transition, and requires the FCC to issue final decisions on its proceedings regarding

DTV must-carry and public interest obligations.

During the September 22, 2004 markup of S. 2820 in the Senate Committee on Commerce,

Science and Transportation, an amendment was offered by Senator Conrad Burns which sets a

digital transition deadline (December 31, 2007) only for spectrum that has been designated for

public safety, and provides that the FCC may waive the deadline in a given market “to the extent

necessary to avoid consumer disruption while ensuring the ability of relevant public safety

entities to use such frequencies.” The Burns amendment was subsequently adopted by the

Committee.

On September 29, 2004, Senator McCain offered a modified version of S. 2820 as an amendment

to the National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (S. 2845). As in Committee, Senator Burns

offered a modifying amendment to the McCain amendment. At the request of Senator McCain,

the Senate approved by unanimous consent the McCain amendment as modified by the Burns

amendment. The final version adopted into S. 2845 sets the digital transition deadline of

December 31, 2007 only for spectrum that has been designated for public safety. Language

regarding the FCC’s authority to waive the deadline to avoid consumer disruption was modified

to read: “only if all relevant public safety entities are able to use such frequencies free of

interference by December 31, 2007, or are otherwise able to resolve interference issues with

relevant broadcast licensee by mutual agreement.”23 The Senate passed S. 2845 on October 6,

2004. Other provisions of S. 2820 relevant to digital television are retained within the Senatepassed version of S. 2845. However, the sections regarding the Digital Transition Consumer

Assistance fund and the $1 billion in consumer digital transition subsidies are moot, because the

legislation limits the digital transition deadline only to public safety spectrum and does not

authorize auctions of commercial spectrum currently used for analog television broadcasts. Also,

labeling requirements would only go into effect if the FCC acts to set a hard deadline for the

return of analog spectrum.

The House-passed version of S. 2845 (passed on October 16, 2004) contained a nonbinding

provision (Section 5011) expressing the “sense of the Congress” that the 85% penetration test

should be eliminated and that broadcasters should be required to cease analog transmissions by

December 31, 2006 in order that analog spectrum can be returned for public safety and

commercial uses. The conference report version of S. 2845 contained a digital television

provision similar to the House language. Section 7501 states that it is the sense of Congress that

“Congress must act to pass legislation in the first session of the 109th Congress that establishes a

comprehensive approach to the timely return of analog broadcast spectrum as early as December

31, 2006” and that any delay in the adoption of such legislation will “delay the ability of public

For more information on this issue, see CRS Report RL32408, Spectrum Policy: Public Safety and Wireless

Communications Interference, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

safety entities to begin planning to use this needed spectrum.” The Intelligence Reform and

Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) was signed into law on December 17, 2004.

Activities and Issues in the 109th Congress

During the first session of the 109th Congress, lawmakers debated when and how a “hard date”

for the DTV transition might be implemented, thereby freeing reclaimed analog spectrum. Policy

questions included should the then-existing statutory digital transition deadline of December 31,

2006, be implemented by modifying or removing the 85% digital penetration threshold

requirement, or would a later and redefined transition deadline be more appropriate? Should the

reclaiming of analog spectrum for public safety uses be singularly designated, or should it be

included as part of a comprehensive approach to returning all of the analog spectrum? Appendix

B in this report provides a listing of DTV-related legislation introduced into the 109th Congress.

Aside from ensuring that consumers enjoy the benefits of digital television, reclaiming the analog

spectrum was a prime motivation in the desire of Congress and the FCC to complete the digital

transition as soon as possible. A portion of reclaimed analog spectrum will be allocated for first

responder communications, while the rest will be auctioned to the private sector for development

and use of innovative telecommunications technologies such as wireless broadband.

Budgetary considerations were also an important factor. Auctioning the analog spectrum could

raise revenues in the billions of dollars. Estimates of possible auction revenues varied, from $10

billion24 to $28 billion25 to $50 billion.26 All or part of these auction proceeds could be used to

reduce the federal budget deficit.27

A key issue in the debate was addressing the millions of American over-the-air households whose

existing analog televisions will require converter boxes in order to receive digital signals when

the analog signal is turned off. Many policymakers asked whether should some form of financial

assistance (subsidies or tax credits, for example) should be provided by the federal government to

enable over-the-air households to purchase converter boxes or digital televisions. Should such

assistance be provided to low-income households exclusively or to all households? Should

subsidies, if warranted, be financed by proceeds garnered by auctioning the analog spectrum?

And finally, how much funding would a subsidy program require, and how much revenue is

likely to be raised by auctioning the commercial portion of the reclaimed analog spectrum?

At the request of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Government

Accountability Office (GAO) conducted a television characteristics survey involving 2,471

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate, Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, October 24, 2005.

CBO estimates revenue of $12.5 billion from auction of spectrum vacated by analog broadcasters over the period 20062010. However, CBO estimates that offering this new spectrum for auction will lower anticipated receipts by $2.5

billion for other spectrum already authorized for auction under current law. Thus, auctioning spectrum released by the

digital transition would increase net spectrum auction receipts by $10 billion.

The Brattle Group, “700 MHZ Band Spectrum Auction Could Yield $28 B, Analysis Says,” Press Release, May 18,

2005.

Snider, J.H. and Michael Calabrese, New America Foundation, Speeding the DTV Transition, Spectrum Series Issue

Brief #15, May 2004, p. 3.

For more information on this issue, see CRS Report RS22306, Spectrum Auctions and Deficit Reduction: FY2006

Budget Reconciliation, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

randomly selected American households. Based on the survey, GAO found that 19% or 21 million

households rely exclusively on over-the-air television; 57% or 64 million households rely on

cable; and 19% or 22 million have a subscription to DBS (satellite) television. Additionally, GAO

found that low-income, non-White, and Hispanic households are more likely to rely on over-theair television broadcasting.28

GAO estimated that if a subsidy were needed only for over-the-air households, the cost could

range from about $460 million to $2 billion, depending on the cost of the set-top box (from $50 to

$100 per box) and whether subsidy recipients are limited to low-income households. Under this

scenario, GAO is assuming that cable and satellite providers would convert broadcasters’ digital

signals to analog at the “head-end,” such that cable and satellite TV consumers with analog sets

would be able to receive the signal without a converter box.

Under a different scenario, GAO assumed that cable and satellite providers would deliver highdefinition signals to the home, thereby requiring consumers with analog sets to purchase

converter boxes. GAO estimated that if subsidies were available to cable and satellite subscribers

as well as to over-the-air households, the cost would range from $1.8 billion to over $10 billion,

again depending on the cost of the converter box and the use of means testing. The GAO estimate

assumes a subsidy for one converter box per household—it should be noted that the vast majority

of television households have more than one over-the-air analog television. Each analog

television set would need its own converter box to be able to receive a digital signal.

The GAO cost estimates also do not include the cost of implementing a subsidy program, nor do

they take into account what form a subsidy might take, be it a voucher, tax credit, rebate,

government supplied equipment, or other means. On May 26, 2005, GAO testified before the

House Energy and Commerce Committee on the administrative challenges that could arise in

implementing a subsidy for DTV equipment. 29

House Activities

On February 17, 2005, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and the Internet, held the first of a series of hearings on the digital transition.

At the February 17th hearing, entitled, “The Role of Technology in Achieving a Hard Deadline for

the DTV Transition,” witnesses discussed the need for a hard deadline and the possible costs of

subsidizing over-the-air analog viewers. Other issues discussed at the February 17th hearing

included whether labels warning of a possible analog signal shut-off should be required on new

analog televisions purchased by consumers. Another key issue discussed was whether digital

signals should be converted at the cable and satellite providers’ head-end, or—alternatively—at

the subscriber’s home.

See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the

Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Digital Broadcast Television Transition:

Estimated Cost of Supporting Set-Top Boxes to Help Advance the DTV Transition, February 17, 2005. Available at

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05258t.pdf.

See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the

Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Digital Broadcast Television Transition:

Several Challenges Could Arise in Administering a Subsidy Program for DTV Equipment, May 26, 2005. Available at

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05623t.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

A second hearing, entitled, “Preparing Consumers for the End of the Digital Transition,” was held

by the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet on March 10, 2005.

Witnesses spoke to the importance of educating retailers and consumers about the digital

transition, and argued that raising public awareness is difficult without a certain transition

deadline.

On May 26, 2005, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing on staff draft

DTV legislation. Committee Chairman Joe Barton cited the importance of meeting budget

reconciliation targets as a key factor in the Committee’s movement of legislation to hasten the

DTV transition and raise revenues from auctioning the analog spectrum. While most (but not all)

Committee Members and witnesses agreed with the setting of a hard 2008/2009 deadline for the

digital transition, there was disagreement over the need for—as well as the size, scope, and

mechanics of—a subsidy program for digital-to-analog converter boxes funded with a portion of

analog spectrum auction proceeds.

Digital Television Transition Act of 2005

On October 27, 2005, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the Digital

Television Transition Act of 2005 as part of its submission to the House FY2006 budget

reconciliation bill. The legislation sets a “hard” DTV transition deadline of December 31, 2008.

CBO estimated $10 billion in net receipts from auctioning vacated spectrum currently being used

by broadcasters.30 The legislation would allocate a portion of auction proceeds as follows: $990

million for a digital-to-analog converter box program, $500 million for public safety

interoperable communications grants, $30 million for a New York City 9/11 digital transition

fund, and $3 million to assist digital conversion of low-power television stations. Remaining

auction proceeds would be transferred to the Treasury for budget deficit reduction. The Digital

Television Transition Act of 2005 does not contain language addressing the multicast must-carry

issue, nor does it address other DTV issues such as the broadcast flag or DTV public interest

obligations.

On November 3, 2005, the House Budget Committee reported the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.

Subtitle D (sections 3401-3413) is the Digital Television Transition Act of 2005. On November

18, 2005, the House passed the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (H.R. 4241). The following is a

summary of major provisions.

DTV Transition Deadline

The legislation would shift the deadline for the DTV transition from December 31, 2006 to

December 31, 2008. As of January 1, 2009, analog spectrum in the range of channels 52 through

69 would be recovered, and analog television service that is broadcast over the air would cease.

The December 31, 2008 deadline would be a hard deadline—the legislation repeals the provision

in current law allowing broadcasters to retain their analog spectrum indefinitely if 15% or more

of television households are unable to receive digital signals. The legislation also directs the FCC

to release final digital channel assignments to all full-power broadcast television stations by

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate, Reconciliation Recommendations of the House Committee on Energy

and Commerce, October 31, 2005, p. 12.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

December 31, 2006, and to issue six month status reports on coordinating digital allotments with

Canada and Mexico.

Auction of Recovered Spectrum

The legislation directs the FCC to conduct auctions for the licenses of recovered analog spectrum

reclaimed from analog television service. Auctions will commence no later than January 7, 2008,

and the FCC shall deposit auction proceeds no later than June 30, 2008. Recovered analog

spectrum is defined as between channels 52 and 69 inclusive (698 through 806 MHZ). This

auction authority does not apply to analog spectrum to be made available for public safety

services, nor does it apply to spectrum auctioned prior to the date of enactment of the legislation.

Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program

The legislation directs that $990 million from auction proceeds be placed in a “Digital Television

Conversion Fund.” This Fund will be used by the National Telecommunications and Information

Administration (NTIA) of the Department of Commerce to establish a digital-to-analog converter

box program. Under this program, U.S. households may request up to two coupons worth $40

each to be applied toward the purchase of digital-to-analog converter boxes. Coupons may be

requested between January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2009. Retailers participating in the program

would be required to undergo a certification process in order to be reimbursed by the Department

of Commerce.

Other Expenditures of Auction Receipts

The legislation directs that $500 million be deposited in a “Public Safety Interoperable

Communications Fund,” which would be used by NTIA to establish a grant program to assist

public safety agencies in the acquisition of, deployment of, or training for use of interoperable

communications systems. The legislation directs that $30 million be deposited in a “NYC 9/11

Digital Transition Fund,” which will reimburse New York City television broadcasters for costs

incurred in the design and deployment of a temporary DTV broadcast system which will provide

DTV service until a permanent facility is constructed. Finally, the legislation directs $3 million

into a “Low-Power Digital-to-Analog Conversion Fund” which will be used to compensate low

power television stations (including Class A, translator, or booster television stations) for the cost

of a digital-to-analog conversion device.

Consumer Education

The legislation would require manufacturers to put warning labels on analog televisions that

inform consumers that such televisions will not be able to receive broadcast programming after

the digital transition unless connected to a digital tuner, a digital-to-analog converter box, or

cable, satellite or other multichannel video services. Similar warnings are required to be posted in

stores by retailers, and run as public service announcements by broadcasters and cable and

satellite providers. Finally, the FCC and the NTIA are required to engage in a public outreach

program to educate consumers about the deadline for termination of analog television

broadcasting and the options consumers have after such termination to continue to receive

broadcast programming.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Preserving and Expediting Tuner Mandates

The legislation would move up the deadline by which all televisions with screens of 13 to 24

inches must contain built-in digital tuners. The FCC’s current deadline is July 1, 2007; the draft

legislation would set an earlier deadline of March 1, 2007. Additionally, the draft legislation

prohibits the FCC from further revising its existing schedule for mandatory DTV reception

capability.

Digital-to-Analog Conversion and “Must Carry”

The legislation requires cable operators (with capacities over 550 MHZ) and satellite television

providers to offer to their customers broadcaster signals in both digital and analog formats for

five years after the transition. The legislation, which allows cable and satellite providers to

convert broadcaster signals at the “head-end,” would permit these providers to convert digital

broadcasts to a standard definition format (which occupies less bandwidth than a high definition

signal) if they so choose.

Senate Activities

On July 12, 2005, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee held a hearing

on the DTV transition. While consensus emerged on the need for a “hard” deadline for digital

conversion, there was considerable disagreement among witnesses over the issue of cable and

satellite carriage of multicast broadcast programming and whether Congress should mandate

which local broadcast stations might receive “dual carriage” (both digital and analog signals) by

cable providers.

S. 1932: Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005

On October 20, 2005, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved

DTV legislative language intended for the Senate’s budget reconciliation bill. Entitled the Digital

Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, the legislation would set a “hard” deadline of April 7,

2009 for the digital conversion.

The legislation extends the FCC’s auction authority to September 30, 2009, and directs the FCC

to commence auctions of the licenses for recovered analog spectrum on January 28, 2008.

Auction proceeds would be deposited into a “Digital Transition and Public Safety Fund.” The

Secretary of Commerce is directed to transfer $5 billion from the Fund to the general fund of the

Treasury on October 2, 2009. Remaining money in the Fund would be distributed by the

Department of Commerce for a number of purposes, including $3 billion for a program to assist

consumers in the purchase of converter boxes, $200 million for a program to assist the digital

conversion of low-power and translator television stations, $1.25 billion for a program to

facilitate emergency communications, $250 million for a program to implement the ENHANCE

911 Act of 2004, $200 million for a program to provide assistance to coastal States and Indian

tribes affected by hurricanes and other natural disasters, and $15 million to be made available

under certain conditions to the Department of Transportation’s essential air service program.

Because the legislation was designed specifically for the budget reconciliation process, no

specifics are included on how the converter box subsidy program would be framed or

administered. The legislation also does not contain language on the issues of cable carriage of

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

multicasted digital signals and downconverted analog signals. It is anticipated that a separate

DTV bill (not attached to the budget reconciliation) may be introduced in the future to address

those and other issues not directly related to the budget reconciliation process.

On October 26, 2005, the Senate Budget Committee reported S. 1932, the Deficit Reduction

Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005. Title III of S. 1932 is the Digital Transition and Public

Safety Act of 2005 as approved by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

During Senate consideration of S. 1932 on November 2, 2005, amendments were introduced by

Senator Ensign to reduce funding for converter boxes from $3 billion to $1 billion, and by

Senator McCain to move forward the transition deadline from April 7, 2009 to April 7, 2008. The

Ensign amendment was withdrawn and the McCain amendment was defeated. The Senate passed

S. 1932 on November 4, 2005.

Conference Report on S. 1932

The budget reconciliation conference report on S. 1932 (H.Rept. 109-362) was approved by the

House on December 19, 2005, and approved by the Senate on December 21, 2005. However,

because the Senate removed three provisions from the conference report (provisions not related to

digital television), S. 1932 was returned to the House for final approval. On February 1, 2006, the

House again approved S. 1932, thereby clearing the measure for the President’s signature.

P.L. 109-171: Deficit Reduction Act of 2005

On February 8, 2006, the President signed S. 1932 into law (P.L. 109-171). Title III (the Digital

Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005) sets the digital transition deadline at

February 17, 2009, and allocates up to $1.5 billion for a digital-to-analog converter box program.

The act directs that after the digital transition deadline of February 17, 2009, full-power television

stations will cease analog broadcasts and operate only on channels 2 through 51. Beginning on

January 28, 2008, and ending on June 30, 2008, the FCC (with auction authority extended to

2011) will auction recovered analog spectrum between channels 52 and 69 (except for channels

63, 64, 68, and 69 which are already designated for public safety). Auction proceeds—most

recently estimated at $12.5 billion by the Congressional Budget Office31—will be deposited in a

fund in the U.S. Treasury called the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Fund.

On September 30, 2009, $7.363 billion will be transferred from the Digital Television Transition

and Public Safety Fund to the general fund of the Treasury. Of the funds remaining, $990 million

will be made available to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration

(NTIA) to administer a digital-to-analog converter box program. The $990 million includes up to

$100 million for administrative costs, including up to $5 million for consumer education.

Between January 1, 2008, and March 31, 2009, the program will supply up to two coupons per

requesting household worth $40 each towards the purchase of converter boxes (which are

expected to cost $50 to $60 each). The act defines “converter box” to mean a stand-alone device

used solely for digital-to-analog conversion. The program may receive additional funding

Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate for H.R. 2863, DOD Appropriations Act, 2006, December 20, 2005, p.

3, available at http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/69xx/doc6990/hr2863.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

bringing the total up to $1.5 billion (including up to $160 million for administrative costs) if

NTIA notifies Congress that additional funding is needed.

Other designated uses of auction proceeds are as follows:

•

not to exceed $1 billion through FY2010 to establish a grant program to assist

public safety agencies in the acquisition of, deployment of, or training for use of

interoperable communications systems.

•

not to exceed $30 million for FY2007-FY2008 to reimburse New York City

television broadcasters for costs incurred in the design and deployment of a

temporary DTV broadcast system, which will provide DTV service until a

permanent facility is constructed.

•

not to exceed $10 million during FY2008-FY2009 to compensate low-power

television stations (including Class A, translator, or booster television stations)

for the cost of a digital-to-analog conversion device in order to convert the digital

signals received from their corresponding full-power television stations and

provide analog signals to their customers.

•

not to exceed $65 million during FY2009 to reimburse low-power television

stations for equipment to upgrade stations from analog to digital in rural

communities.

•

not to exceed $156 million during FY2007-FY2012 for a national alert and

tsunami warning program.

•

not to exceed $43.5 million to implement the ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004.

•

not to exceed $30 million for the essential air service program administered by

the Department of Transportation.

The act provides for additional supplemental license fees to be assessed by the FCC in the

aggregate amount of $10 million during FY2006. Additionally, the conferees instruct the FCC to

issue a report and order on the digital television table of channel allotments, and to coordinate

those allotments with Canada and Mexico to resolve any international interference issues.

The Conference Agreement for P.L. 109-171 did not retain the provisions in the House bill on

“digital-to-analog conversion and must carry” (the “downconversion” issue, which addresses

cable and satellite provision of broadcast signals to analog televisions), nor were the House

provisions on a comprehensive consumer outreach program retained. Also, like the previous

House and Senate versions, P.L. 109-171did not contain language addressing the multicast mustcarry issue or other DTV issues such as the broadcast flag or DTV public interest obligations.

On May 1, 2006, Senator Stevens introduced S. 2686, the “Communications, Consumer’s Choice,

and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006.” Title VII of S. 2686 (“Digital Television”) contains a

number of provisions related to the digital television transition. On June 28, 2006, the Senate

Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation completed its markup of the

communications reform bill, H.R. 5252. Title VII of the Senate Commerce Committee version of

H.R. 5252 similarly contains a number of provisions related to the digital television transition, as

follows:

•

mandates consumer education requirements for manufacturers, retailers,

broadcasters, and the FCC (Sec. 701a);

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

•

establishes a DTV Working Group on consumer education, outreach, and

technical assistance (Sec. 701b);

•

requires all television sets imported or shipped in interstate commerce for sale or

resale to the public after March 1, 2007 to be capable of receiving digital signals

(Sec. 701c);

•

requires the Department of Commerce, in consultation with the Department of

Energy, to set energy standards for digital-to-analog converter boxes (Sec. 701c);

•

requires large cable operators to provide to their customers their local

broadcasters’ digital signals in both digital and “downconverted” analog formats

through February 17, 2014 (Sec. 701d);

•

affirms the authority of the FCC to implement a digital stream requirement for

the blind (Sec. 702);

•

requires the FCC to submit a semi-annual report on international coordination

with Canada and Mexico of the DTV table of allotments (Sec. 703);

•

permits Spanish-language analog television stations broadcasting within 50 miles

of the U.S.-Mexican border to continue analog operation (between channels 2

and 51, and subject to certain conditions) until February 17, 2011 (Sec. 704);

•

gives the FCC statutory authority to proceed with its broadcast flag rule, with

certain limitations (Sec.452).

H.R. 5252 was reported on September 29, 2006 (S.Rept. 109-355). The bill was placed on the

Senate Legislative Calendar, but was ultimately not considered by the full Senate.

Activities and Issues in the 110th Congress

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) set a February 17, 2009 deadline for the digital

transition and established a digital converter box coupon program to mitigate the switch-over

costs to consumers with analog televisions. The preeminent issue for Congress is ensuring that

American households are prepared for the February 17, 2009 DTV transition deadline, thereby

minimizing a scenario whereby television sets across the nation “go dark.” Specifically, Congress

is actively overseeing the activities of federal agencies responsible for the digital transition—

principally the FCC and the NTIA—while assessing whether additional federal efforts (including

enhanced coordination and leadership) are necessary, particularly with respect to public education

and outreach. 32 The Congress is also monitoring the extent to which private sector stakeholders

take appropriate and sufficient steps to educate the public and ensure that all Americans are

prepared for the digital transition. Table 1 shows a listing of hearings held in the 110th Congress

on the DTV transition. Appendix C in this report provides a listing of DTV-related legislation

introduced into the 110th Congress.

Other DTV issues—some of which were considered by the 109th Congress, but remain

unresolved—include digital multicast must-carry, downconversion, and the broadcast flag.

For more information, see CRS Report RL34165, The Transition to Digital Television: Is America Ready?, by

(name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Additionally, there remain issues related to the auctioning and use of spectrum made available by

the digital transition. 33

Table 1. DTV Hearings Held in the 110th Congress

Date

Committee

Topic

March 28, 2007

House Committee on Energy and

Commerce, Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and the Internet

“The Status of the Digital Television

Transition”

July 26, 2007

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,

and Transportation

“Preparing Consumers for the Digital

Television Transition”

September 10, 2007

Senate Special Committee on Aging

“Preparing for the Digital Television

Transition: Will Seniors Be Left in the

Dark?”

October 17, 2007

House Committee on Energy and

Commerce, Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and the Internet

“Status of the DTV Transition—Part 2”

October 17, 2007

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science

and Transportation

“The Digital Television Transition:

Government and Industry Perspectives”

October 31, 2007

House Committee on Energy and

Commerce, Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and the Internet

“Status of the DTV Transition—Part 3”

NTIA Implementation of Converter Box Program

On July 25, 2006 the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)

released a Request for Comment and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to implement and

administer a coupon program for digital-to-analog converter boxes. In the NPRM, NTIA

proposed that up to two $40 coupons will be available to households with analog televisions that

exclusively rely on over-the-air broadcast signals. Cable or satellite television households would

not be eligible, even if they also happened to contain over-the-air analog televisions not

connected to cable or satellite systems. NTIA proposed that applying households would selfcertify that they only receive over-the-air signals using an analog television. NTIA also asked for

comments on whether economic need should determine whether a household is eligible for the

program, and if so, how economic need should be determined (i.e. “means testing”). 34

In the NPRM, NTIA also asked for comments on consumer education. Given that the Deficit

Reduction Act allocates no more than $5 million for consumer education concerning the digital

transition and the converter box program, NTIA noted that considering “the costs of media

production and paid advertising time, the $5,000,000 limit necessitates that NTIA carefully

leverage the program’s consumer education spending by collaborating with and complementing

For information on spectrum issues related to the digital transition, see CRS Report RS22218, Spectrum Use and the

Transition to Digital TV, by (name redacted).

National Telecommunications and Information Administration, “Implementation and Administration of a Coupon

Program for Digital-to-Analog Converter Boxes,” Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment, Federal

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

the consumer education efforts of broadcasters, equipment manufacturers, retailers, consumer

groups and others with a stake in a successful and timely transition to digital television

broadcasting.”35 Acknowledging the difficulty in reaching households most likely to rely solely

on over-the-air television, NTIA asked for ideas and comments on how best to reach those

households.

On November 16, 2006, Representative John Dingell and nineteen other Democrats on the House

Committee on Energy and Commerce sent a letter to NTIA expressing concerns regarding the

converter box program. Specifically, the letter urged NTIA not to restrict eligibility for converter

box coupons to exclusively over-the-air households, and instead to make coupons available also

to any cable or satellite television households which may contain an over-the-air analog

television. The letter also opposed “means testing,” arguing that determining economic eligibility

imposes too many administrative burdens on consumers; urged performance standards for

converter boxes which would ensure picture and audio quality and the ability of converter boxes

to be updated, modified or repaired; and stated that $5 million for consumer education was

inadequate, urging NTIA to target especially lower income households and other vulnerable

groups.36

On March 12, 2007, NTIA released its final rule implementing the converter box program.37 The

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) initially allocates $990 million for the converter

box program, and may subsequently allocate an additional $510 million (totaling $1.5 billion) if

NTIA notifies Congress that additional funding is needed. The final rule states that starting on

January 1, 2008, for the initial $990 million program (the “Initial Period”), up to two $40 coupons

will be available to any and all requesting U.S. households to be used towards the purchase of up

to two digital-to-analog converter boxes. In the event that NTIA determines that the additional

$510 million is needed, only exclusively over-the-air households will be eligible for coupons

during this “Contingent Period.”

Households will be required to self-certify that they are exclusively over-the-air and do not

subscribe to cable, satellite, or other pay television services. Cable and satellite households that

contain extra over-the-air televisions will be eligible for coupons during the “Initial Period” of the

program (the first $990 million), but will not be eligible for coupons if there is a second phase or

“Contingent Period” of the program (the additional $510 million).

The rule also sets forth procedures and requirements for manufacturers and retailers who wish to

participate in the converter box program. Manufacturers must submit test results and sample

converter boxes to NTIA for approval. Approved devices must meet prescribed technical

specifications that are intended to ensure an affordable state-of-the-art converter box. Additional

permitted features include a smart antenna interface connector and program guide. Features that

would disqualify a converter box from being covered by the coupon program include video

Ibid., p. 42071.

Communications Daily, “Don’t Confine DTV Coupons to Over-the-Air Households, Democrats Urge NTIA,”

November 17, 2006.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, “Rules to Implement

and Administer a Coupon Program for Digital-to-Analog Converter Boxes,” 47 CFR 301, Federal Register, Vol. 72,

No. 51, March 15, 2007, pp. 12097-12121.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

recording, playback capability, or other capabilities which allow more than simply converting a

digital over-the-air signal.38

Meanwhile, retailers must receive a certification from NTIA in order to participate in the

converter box coupon program. Certified retailers must agree to have systems in place capable of

processing coupons electronically for redemption and payment, track every transaction and

provide reports to NTIA, train employees on the purpose and operation of the coupon program

with NTIA-provided training materials, use commercially reasonable methods to order and

manage inventory, and assist NTIA in minimizing incidents of waste, fraud, and abuse, including

reporting suspicious patterns of customer behavior. Retailers are not responsible for verifying

household eligibility. 39

On August 15, 2007, NTIA announced it had entered into a contract with IBM to run the Digitalto-Analog Converter Box Coupon program. The total award is $119,968,468, which breaks down

to $84,990,343 for the initial period and $34,978,125 for the contingent period. The contract

performance began immediately and is to close out on September 30, 2009. The IBM-led team

will provide services in three areas: consumer education, coupon distribution to consumers and

retail store participation, and financial processing to reimburse retailers, to maintain records, and

to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.

As of January 1, 2008, consumers may apply to NTIA for up to two converter box coupons, either

by logging onto www.dtv2009.gov, or by calling the toll-free number: 1-888-DTV-2009 (1-888388-2009). NTIA will begin sending out coupons by late February or early March of 2008. Given

that coupons are required by statute to expire after 90 days, NTIA has stated its intention not to

mail coupons to consumers until converter boxes are available in local retail outlets.

Consumer Education

With the February 17, 2009 deadline for the digital transition approaching, and with the public

launching of the converter box program in January 2008, Congressional concern is focusing on

the adequacy of efforts to inform the public of the digital transition. A primary goal is preventing

analog over-the-air households from losing television service in the event that these households

do not purchase a converter box or take other measures to ensure the ability to receive digital

broadcasts after February 17, 2009.

A survey conducted by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) found that 56% of overthe-air viewers have never seen, heard, or read anything about the digital transition, that only 10%

were able to guess the right year when analog broadcasts will cease, and that only 1% to 3%

knew that the transition would be complete by February 2009.40

National Telecommunications and Information Administration, DTV Converter Box Program Information Sheet for

Manufacturers, March 2007, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/DTVmanufacturers.pdf.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration, DTV Converter Box Program Information Sheet for

Retailers, March 2007, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/DTVretailers.pdf.

Testimony of K. James Yager on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters and the Association for

Maximum Service Television, hearing before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on

Telecommunications and the Internet, March 28, 2007, p. 14. Available at http://energycommerce.house.gov/

cmte_mtgs/110-ti-hrg.032807.Yager-testimony.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

A subsequent survey conducted by the Association of Public Television Stations (APTS) in

August 2007 found that 51.3% of Americans were unaware of the DTV transition. A previous

APTS survey in November 2006 found the percentage of Americans unaware of the DTV

transition at 61.2%.41

Two federal agencies—the NTIA and the FCC—are directly engaged in consumer education

efforts regarding the digital transition. Currently, the NTIA is statutorily funded (by P.L. 109-171,

the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005) at “not more than $5,000,000 for consumer education

concerning the digital television transition and the availability of the digital-to-analog converter

box program.” The NTIA’s DTV consumer education efforts are focused on raising awareness of

the coupon program, particularly with five target groups most likely to be affected by the digital

transition: senior citizens, the economically disadvantaged, rural residents, people with

disabilities, and minorities. To reach those groups and the American public in general, the NTIA

is pursuing a strategy of leveraging its resources by partnering with private sector stakeholder

groups representing those constituencies most at risk. NTIA is also working with the DTV

Transition Coalition, a broad-based coalition of business, trade, and industry groups as well as

grass roots and membership organizations. In addition to working with private sector groups,

NTIA is working with federal government agencies that target economically disadvantaged

Americans.42

Meanwhile, the Administration has requested $1.5 million for the FCC in FY2008 for DTV

consumer education; the FY2008 House Financial Services and General Government

Appropriations bill (H.R. 2829; H.Rept. 110-207), passed by the House on June 28, 2007, would

provide $2 million. Similar to the NTIA, the FCC is pursuing collaborative partnerships with

private and public sector entities to target outreach to vulnerable populations and to raise the

general awareness of the American public about the DTV transition. The FCC has become a

member of the DTV Transition Coalition, prepared and issued consumer publications and web

materials, and is promoting DTV awareness by attending and holding events and conferences. 43

The significant reliance of the FCC and the NTIA on the private sector for DTV public education

has led some to question whether the federal government should assume a more proactive role in

promoting DTV public education activities. On July 30, 2007, in response to criticisms and

suggestions on DTV consumer education raised by a May 24, 2007 letter 44 from the House

Energy and Commerce Committee, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM)

on a DTV Consumer Education Initiative. 45 The NPRM requests public comments on a number of

proposals to raise awareness among the public of the DTV transition, including broadcaster

Association of Public Television Stations, Press Release, “Government Gets Failing Grade on DTV Transition,”

September 24, 2007. Available at http://www.apts.org/news/govfailinggrade.cfm.

For information on NTIA DTV consumer education efforts, see Testimony of John Kneuer, Assistant Secretary for

Communications and Information, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, hearings held by the

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, “Preparing Consumers for the Digital Television

Transition,” July 26, 2007. Available at http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/JohnMRKneuerTestimonyv2.pdf.

Testimony of Catherine Seidel, Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Federal Communications

Commission, hearings held by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, “Preparing

Consumers for the Digital Television Transition,” July 26, 2007. Available at http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/

WrittenStatementofCathySeidel7262007Hearing.pdf.

Available at http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_110/FCC.052407.Martin.ltr.DTV.pdf.

FCC, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of DTV Consumer Education Initiative, MB Docket No. 07-148,

FCC 07-128, 22 p.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

public service announcements, broadcaster consumer education reporting, multichannel video

programming distributor (MVPD) customer bill notices, consumer electronics manufacturer

notices, consumer electronics retailer reporting on its staff training, and other proposals.

Meanwhile, in testimony before the Senate Special Committee on Aging, the Government

Accountability Office (GAO) stated that difficulties remain in implementing consumer education

programs. GAO testified that because private sector DTV outreach efforts are voluntary,

government cannot be assured of their extent and that “given the different interests represented by

industry stakeholders, messages directed at consumers vary and might lead to confusion.”46 As

requested by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, GAO is performing an ongoing

assessment of public and private sector DTV consumer education programs and is planning a

series of consumer surveys leading up to the transition date.

A major component of any DTV public education campaign is likely to be the airing of public

service announcements (PSAs). The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is preparing

PSAs to be delivered to local broadcasters by December 2007. It will be up to local broadcasters

to decide when and how often to air the PSAs. On October 15, 2007, the NAB announced a $697

million consumer education campaign, including DTV spots, crawls, and 30 minute educational

programs. 47 Meanwhile, in September 2007, the National Cable & Telecommunications

Association (NCTA) began running on cable channels a $200 million English and Spanish

language advertising campaign on the digital transition; NCTA will continue the advertising spots

through February 2009.48 In its NPRM, the FCC states its belief that PSAs are the most effective

and efficient way to reach over-the-air television viewers about the digital transition. The FCC is

proposing to require television broadcast licensees to conduct on-air consumer education efforts

and is asking for comments on the content of such PSAs, when and how often they should be run,

whether similar requirements should be imposed on all broadcasters, and other related

questions. 49

Digital Multicasts and Downconversion

Digital multicasting refers to the ability of broadcasters to divide their 6 MHZ of digital spectrum

into separate and discrete streams of content. Thus, for example, a broadcaster could transmit

alternate channels of programming—such as weather, news, or foreign language, for example—in

addition to its primary digital video broadcast. On February 10, 2005, the FCC affirmed its prior

decision that cable operators are not required to carry more than a single digital programming

stream from any particular broadcaster. At issue is whether “must carry” requirements should be

expanded such that cable operators would be required to carry any or all additional multicasted

channels transmitted by commercial broadcasters. Commercial broadcasters argue that their

incentive to develop additional digital programming streams is diminished if they have no

guarantee that cable systems will carry that programming. Cable providers counter that their

Government Accountability Office, Testimony Before the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Digital Television

Transition: Preliminary Information on Initial Consumer Education Efforts, GAO-07-1248T, September 19, 2007, p. 9.

Available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071248t.pdf.

Associated Press, “Broadcasters unveil $697 million digital TV campaign,” October 15, 2007.

National Cable & Telecommunications Association, Press Release, “Cable Launches $200 Million Digital TV

Transition Consumer Education Campaign,” September 6, 2007.

Ibid., p. 3.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

decision whether or not to carry additional programming streams from a broadcaster should be

dictated by the market, rather than mandated.

In the 109th Congress, H.R. 5252, as reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science

and Transportation, did not explicitly address multicast must-carry, and to date, no multicast

must-carry legislation has been introduced. However, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has publicly

stated his support for requiring multicast must-carry, and suggested the possibility of

reconsidering the FCC’s 2005 decision (which was issued under the previous FCC Chairman,

Michael Powell). 50 Two of the FCC Commissioners who voted against multicast must-carry,

Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, stated that they may be willing to reexamine the issue if

public interest obligations of broadcasting multicast signals are also addressed.51 An attempt to

require multicast must-carry at the FCC’s June 2006 meeting was withdrawn by Chairman Martin

when it became clear that the order lacked votes necessary for passage. 52

A related issue is the extent to which cable providers may be permitted or required to carry

downconverted analog signals after the digital transition takes place. Many cable households will

likely continue to use analog televisions which cannot receive a digital signal. Cable companies

might offer or lease converter boxes to these customers, or customers may be required to

purchase their own converter box. As an alternative, it is possible that cable providers might seek

authority from Congress to “downconvert” the digital signal of selected local broadcast stations to

analog format. To serve customers with digital televisions, cable providers would continue to

provide digital signals as well (in other words, “dual carriage”). Under this scenario, a key issue

is whether (and if so, how) Congress should mandate which local broadcast stations would

receive the benefit of “dual carriage” to cable customers.

In the 109th Congress, H.R. 5252, as reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science

and Transportation, contained language that would require satellite carriers and cable operators

with capacities of greater than 550 megahertz to offer, through February 17, 2014, must-carry

locally broadcast digital signals in formats viewable on both analog and digital televisions. Cable

operators with capacities of 550 megahertz or less would be required only to offer those signals in

analog format through February 17, 2014, while maintaining the option of offering digital signals

as well. Cable operators and satellite carriers would have the option of providing standard

definition digital signals in lieu of high definition signals, and would be allowed to perform

conversions at any location, from the cable head-end or local receive facility, to the customer

premises.

The provision in H.R. 5252 allowing cable operators and satellite carriers to provide digital

signals in a standard definition format was opposed by broadcasters and the consumer electronics

industry. They argued that permitting conversions of broadcasters’ signals to a standard definition

format removes the incentive for consumers to purchase high definition television sets, while also

giving cable and satellite providers the opportunity to offer their own programming in a higher

quality format (i.e. high definition) than what they might offer for broadcasters’ digital

programming. Cable companies asserted that the legislation provides a seamless digital transition

for the majority of consumers who have not yet purchased high definition sets.53

“Martin Backs Broadcasters on Multicast Must-Carry at NAB,” Communications Daily, April 26, 2006.

“Adelstein, Copps Say Multicast Must-Carry Can be Rethought,”Communications Daily, April 27, 2006.

“McDowell Rejection Jilts Multicast Must-Carry,” Communications Daily, June 20, 2006.

“Networks Object to ‘Down Conversion’ of TV Signals,” Technology Daily, August 15, 2006.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

On April 25, 2007, the FCC adopted a Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)54

asking for comment on proposals to ensure all cable subscribers, including those with analog TV

sets, can view must-carry television stations on cable systems after the transition to digital

television occurs on February 17, 2009. In the NPRM, the FCC pointed out that about 50% of all

cable subscribers (approximately 32 million households) are analog cable subscribers.

Additionally, many digital cable subscribers have one or more television sets that only receive

analog cable service. 55

By statute, cable operators must ensure that all subscribers are able to view all must-carry local

broadcast stations. In the NPRM, the FCC proposes that cable operators must either: (1) carry the

signals of all must-carry stations in an analog format to all analog cable subscribers, or (2) for alldigital systems, carry those signals only in digital format, provided all subscribers have the

necessary equipment to view the broadcast. The FCC also reaffirmed that cable systems must

carry high definition broadcast signals in HD format, and asked for comment on whether the

Commission should move from a subjective to an objective measure of what constitutes “material

degradation.”56

On September 11, 2007, the FCC adopted rules57 intended to ensure that cable customers continue

to receive local TV stations after the transition. Specifically, the FCC will require cable operators

to comply with a “viewability requirement” by choosing to either (1) carry the signal in analog as

well as digital formats (dual carriage), or (2) carry the signal in a digital only format, provided

that all subscribers have set-top boxes which will enable them to view digital broadcasts on their

analog TVs. The viewability requirement extends to February 2012, at which time the FCC will

reassess the need for the requirement. Small cable companies—which had sought an exemption—

may request a waiver of the viewability requirement.

“Broadcast Flag” and the “Analog Hole”

Many content providers (e.g., movie studios and broadcast networks) may be reluctant to provide

high quality digital content to households until they are assured that technologies are in place to

prevent consumers from making unauthorized copies and Internet transmissions of copyrighted

digital content. Two of these technologies currently under consideration are the “broadcast flag”58

and technology to “plug” what is commonly referred to as the “analog hole.” The “broadcast

flag” applies only to content that is broadcast over-the-air. The “analog hole”problem applies to

all digital content, whether it is transmitted over-the-air, by cable, or by satellite. For further

explanations of these technologies, see the section, “Copyright Protection Technologies” in

Appendix A of this report.

FCC, Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of: Carriage of Digital Television Broadcast

Signals: Amendment to Part 76 of the Commission’s Rules, CS Docket No. 98-120, FCC 07-71, adopted April 25,

2007, released May 4, 2007, 26 p.

FCC, News Release, “FCC Seeks Comment to Ensure All Cable Customers Receive Programming After the Digital

Television Transition,” April 25, 2007.

Ibid.

FCC, Third Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of: Carriage of

Digital Television Broadcast Signals: Amendment to Part 76 of the Commission’s Rules, CS Docket No. 98-120, FCC

07-170, adopted September 11, 2007, released November 30, 2007, 68 p.

For more information on the broadcast flag, see CRS Report RL33797, Copyright Protection of Digital Television:

The Broadcast Video Flag, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

On November 4, 2003, the FCC adopted a rule which gives broadcasters the option of inserting a

“broadcast flag” into their over-the-air broadcast transmissions. By July 1, 2005, all consumer

electronics devices capable of receiving an over-the-air DTV signal would have been required to

be manufactured to incorporate content protection technologies that would limit the redistribution

of digital television content when the broadcast flag is recognized. However, on May 6, 2005, the

U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia struck down the FCC’s broadcast flag

rules. The Court ruled that the FCC has no authority to regulate consumers’ use of televisions and

other devices which receive broadcast transmissions. With the FCC’s broadcast flag rule negated

by the Court, Congressional policymakers are considering whether to introduce legislation

mandating a broadcast flag.

In the 109th Congress, discussion draft legislation released by the House Committee on the

Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, the Broadcast Flag

Authorization Act, would give the FCC authority to proceed with the broadcast flag rule. On

November 3, 2005, the Committee heard witnesses in support and opposition to the draft

legislation. On January 24, 2006, broadcast flag draft legislation (which would also give the FCC

authority to proceed with the broadcast flag rule) was discussed at a hearing held by the Senate

Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Another hearing addressing the broadcast

flag issue was held by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on June 27, 2006.

H.R. 5252, as reported by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, would

give the FCC statutory authority to proceed with its broadcast flag rule. The legislation provided

that within 30 days after enactment, the FCC shall initiate a further proceeding for the approval of

digital output protection technologies and recording methods for use in distance learning

activities. The FCC’s authority is not limited with respect to approving technologies that allow for

the redistribution of digital broadcast content within the home or similar environment. Finally, a

broadcast flag could not be used to restrict the distribution of news and public affairs

programming of which the primary commercial value depends on “timeliness.” The FCC would

allow broadcasters to determine whether that “timeliness” criteria is met. Such determination by

broadcasters would be subject to FCC review under certain conditions.

Meanwhile, on November 3, 2005, the House Committee on the Judiciary heard witnesses in

support and opposition to draft legislation that would require consumer electronics devices (such

as digital video recorders) to incorporate technology designed to prevent unauthorized copying

and distribution of digital content obtained through the analog hole. The draft legislation was the

basis for the Digital Transition Content Security Act of 2005 (H.R. 4569), introduced by House

Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member John Conyers on

December 16, 2005.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Appendix A. Background on Selected Policy Issues

Digital “Must Carry”

Under the “must carry” provisions of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition

Act of 1992, cable TV providers are required to transmit local analog programs to their

customers. This decision was based on the reasoning that since cable TV has a predominant

position in the market, “without mandatory carriage provisions, the economic viability of local

broadcast television and its ability to produce quality local programming would be jeopardized.”59

The commercial broadcasters (primarily the smaller networks and independent stations,

represented by the Association of Local Television Stations, but also the National Association of

Broadcasters) believe that the same principles and conclusions of the 1992 Act should apply to

DTV services, leading to mandatory carriage of the DTV programming by cable operators.

Broadcasters argue that because most Americans receive their TV via cable, the carriage of DTV

programming by cable providers is essential for consumers to purchase DTV receivers.

The cable companies (led by the National Cable Television Association, NCTA) oppose any

“must carry” requirements for cable operator carriage of DTV programming, arguing that it

would be an unlawful taking of their property, and that they should be able to decide what content

they provide on their own networks. NCTA points out that, unlike the commercial broadcasters

who were given free spectrum licenses for DTV, cable operators must build their own

infrastructure to be able to transmit DTV signals. Cable operators say they will carry commercial

broadcasters’ DTV programming as soon as consumer demand warrants it. Cable television

services provide a finite number of channels to consumers, and any mandate to provide DTV

programming would require cable companies to remove other non-broadcast channels. Many

cable operators are investing in the upgrades needed to provide DTV, although the video

transmission standards adopted by cable operators may not be the same as those used by the

broadcasters. This could mean that different home equipment may be necessary for cable services

than for over-the-air TV reception. In addition, HDTV programming will require cable operators

to build a more robust transmission (i.e., greater bandwidth) capability than is required by SDTV,

and some cable operators may want to offer SDTV but not HDTV services. The cable industry

also contends that mandating carriage of all DTV broadcast transmissions will financially

devastate many smaller cable operators.

Responding to the debate between the broadcast and cable industries over whether cable TV

providers should be required to transmit DTV programming, in July 1998 the FCC initiated a

proceeding on the matter.60 On January 22, 2001, the FCC announced its adoption of rules for

cable carriage of digital TV signals. Most notably, the FCC ruling did not require cable systems

to simultaneously carry both the analog and digital signals (“dual carriage”) of local TV stations.

The FCC tentatively concluded that “such a requirement appears to burden cable operators’ First

Amendment interests more than is necessary to further a substantial governmental interest.”61

Ibid., p. 5. Satellite television is also subject to must carry requirements. See CRS Report RS20425, Satellite

Television: Historical Information on SHVIA and LOCAL, by (name redacted).

FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making on Carriage of Transmissions of Digital Television Broadcast Stations, CS

Docket No. 98-120, released July 10, 1998.

See http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/2001/nrcb0103.html.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

While not approving a dual carriage mandate, the FCC did rule that a digital-only TV station,

whether commercial or non-commercial, can immediately assert its right to carriage on a local

cable system. Additionally, a TV station that returns its analog spectrum and converts to digital

operations must be carried by local cable systems. Cable systems must carry “primary video,”

defined as a “single programming stream and other program-related content.”

The FCC continued to examine the must-carry issue through 2004. Of particular interest was how

must-carry rules would ultimately apply to “digital multicasting,” which refers to the ability of

broadcasters to divide their 6 MHZ of digital spectrum into separate and discrete streams of

content. At issue is whether cable operators should be required to carry any or all additional

multicasted channels transmitted by commercial broadcasters as part of their 6 MHZ digital

allotment.

On January 31, 2005, the National Cable Television Association (NCTA) and the Association of

Public Television Stations (APTS) announced an agreement under which cable companies would

provide dual-carriage (both analog and digital) of at least one public television station in a market

during the transition, as well as carrying up to four multicasts of public stations after the

transition. Under the agreement, APTS will no longer lobby the FCC or Congress for government

must-carry mandates.

On February 10, 2005, the FCC affirmed its prior decision that cable operators are not required to

carry more than a single digital programming stream from any particular broadcaster. The FCC

also affirmed the previous tentative conclusion not to impose a dual carriage requirement on cable

operators.

Mandating Digital Tuners

After the digital transition, existing analog television sets will not be able to receive digital

signals unless they are attached to a converter box. However, it is possible to manufacture analog

televisions with a digital tuning capability already built in. Such televisions would not require a

separate converter box in order to receive over-the-air broadcasted digital signals. On August 8,

2002, the FCC adopted a phase-in plan requiring most new television sets to contain digital tuners

by 2007. Specifically, the FCC’s Second Report and Order and Second Memorandum Opinion

and Order (FCC 02-230) requires all television sets with screen sizes of at least 13 inches, and all

television receiving equipment (such as video cassette recorders and DVD players/recorders to

include DTV reception capability according to the following schedule:

Receivers with screen sizes 36 inches and above—50% of a responsible party’s units must

include DTV tuners effective July 1, 2004; 100% of such units must include DTV tuners

effective July 1, 2005.

Receivers with screen sizes 25 to 35 inches—50% of a responsible party’s units must

include DTV tuners effective July 1, 2005; 100% of such units must include DTV tuners

effective July 1, 2006.

Receivers with screen sizes 13 to 24 inches—100% of all such units must include DTV

tuners effective July 1, 2007.

TV Interface Devices VCRs and DVD players/recorders, etc. that receive broadcast

television signals—100% of all such units must include DTV tuners effective July 1, 2007.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

The FCC’s phase-in plan was opposed by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA),

consumer groups, and antitax groups. The CEA, citing the “scant percentage of households

relying on over-the-air television reception” argued that the mandate is a “multi-billion dollar TV

tax on American consumers,” and called instead for an FCC mandate on cable-DTV compatibility

standards.62 This position was countered by the National Association of Broadcasters, who argued

that the mandate is necessary to hasten the DTV transition and ensure the survival of free overthe-air broadcasting, which NAB says is currently received by roughly one third of all TV sets in

use. 63

Subsequently, the agreement between the consumer electronics and cable industries on a cableDTV interoperability standard dampened CEA’s opposition to the digital tuner mandate, because

the circuitry enabling “plug and play” compatibility between digital televisions and cable systems

could be modified to receive digital over-the-air signals at an incremental cost.64 However, in

November 2004, the CEA, along with the Consumer Electronics Retailers Coalition (CERC),

petitioned the FCC to eliminate the deadline of July 1, 2005 for digital tuners in 50% of

televisions in the 25 to 36 inch (mid-sized) screen size range. Alternatively, CEA and CERC

proposed that the digital tuner deadline for all (100%) of televisions in that size range be moved

up from July 1 to March 1, 2006. On February 14, 2005, the FCC announced a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking to consider whether to adjust the schedule by which televisions with screen

sizes of 25 to 36 inches are required to contain digital tuners.

On June 9, 2005, the FCC denied the CEA and CERC petition to eliminate the deadline of July 1,

2005 for 50% of televisions in the 25 to 36 inch screen size range to have digital tuners. At the

same time, the FCC did agree to move up the digital tuner deadline for mid-size televisions from

July 1 to March 1, 2006. The FCC also proposed to move up the date by which all televisions

with screen sizes over 13 inches must have digital tuners, from July 1, 2007 to December 31,

2006; and asked for comments on whether digital tuner requirements should be extended to

televisions with screen sizes smaller than 13 inches.

On November 3, 2005, the FCC announced its decision to require all sets shipped in interstate

commerce or imported into the United States (including sets with screen sizes smaller than 13

inches) to contain digital tuners by March 1, 2007.65 While newly manufactured or imported sets

must have a digital tuner, retailers are permitted to sell analog-only television sets from existing

inventory. On April 25, 2007, the FCC adopted a rule66 requiring retailers to put a label on all

analog-only televisions which informs the consumer that the television will require a converter

box after February 17, 2009. The FCC is monitoring compliance with the labeling rule, and has

Consumer Electronics Association, Americans Should Not Be Forced to Buy DTV Over-the-Air Tuners Says CEA,

Press release, August 8, 2002, available at http://www.ce.org/Press/CurrentNews/press_release_detail.asp?id=10012.

National Association of Broadcasters, Fact Vs. Myth: The DTV Tuner Integration Debate, available at

http://www.dtvprofessional.com/2002/08_aug/editorials/nab_dvttuners.htm.

Clark, Drew, “Electronics Group Shows Flexibility on Digital TV Issue,” National Journal’s Technology Daily,

January 27, 2003.

FCC News Release, “FCC Modifies Digital Tuner Requirements to Advance Digital Transition,” November 3, 2005,

available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262013A1.pdf.

FCC Second Report and Order, In the Matter of Second Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies

Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, MB Docket No. 03-15, FCC 07-69, 30 p.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

levied over $3 million in fines, in the aggregate, against retailers who fail to display required

labels.67

Many content providers (e.g., movie studios and broadcast networks) are reluctant to provide high

quality digital content to DTV owners until they are assured that interoperability standards and

technology licensing agreements are in place to prevent consumers from making unauthorized

copies and Internet transmissions of digital content. In 1998, five consumer electronics

manufacturing companies—Hitachi, Intel, Matsushita, Sony, and Toshiba—formed an entity

called the Digital Transmission Licensing Administrator (DTLA, also known as “5C”) to license a

jointly developed Digital Transmission Content Protection (DTCP) technology. DTCP is designed

to protect audiovisual and audio content against unauthorized interception or retransmission in the

digital home environment.

On July 17, 2001, two major studios—Warner Bros. and Sony Pictures Entertainment—

announced a licensing agreement to adopt DTCP. The agreement is designed to permit the studios

to protect prerecorded media, pay-per-view, and video-on-demand transmissions against

unauthorized copying, and to protect all content against unauthorized Internet retransmission,

while assuring consumers’ ability to continue customary home recording of broadcast and

subscription programming.68

Broadcast Flag 69

While DTCP protects content delivered to the home via cable or satellite, the technology does not

protect over-the-air broadcast content. Other major studios have been reluctant to sign licensing

agreements with DTLA until broadcast content can also be protected. Additionally, broadcast

networks (ABC, CBS, and Fox) have opposed the 5C standard, arguing that the technology’s

inability to encrypt over-the -air broadcasts will cause high quality content to migrate toward

cable and satellite exclusively. A week after the 5C agreement with Sony Pictures and Warner

Bros. was announced, the five other major studios (Disney, Paramount, Fox, Universal, and

MGM) submitted a proposal to DTLA which would require digital broadcast content to be

encrypted with a “broadcast flag” preventing Internet distribution or retransmission of digital

content broadcast over-the-air. On June 3, 2002, a group of engineers from the motion picture and

technology industries70 released a detailed “broadcast flag” proposal. While the proposal is

strongly supported by the content industry, the technology industry remains divided, with some

companies supporting and others opposing this particular proposal. Some consumer groups have

also expressed opposition.

Testimony of Catherine Seidel, Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Federal Communications

Commission, hearings held by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, “Preparing

Consumers for the Digital Television Transition,” July 26, 2007.

DTLA Press Release, “DTLA, Sony Pictures Entertainment and Warner Bros. Announce First Studio Licenses for

Digital Home Network Technology,” July 17, 2001, see http://www.dtcp.com/data/press/DTCP_PRESS_010717.pdf.

For more information on the broadcast flag, see CRS Report RL33797, Copyright Protection of Digital Television:

The Broadcast Video Flag, by (name redacted).

The Broadcast Protection Discussion Group (BPDG), a subgroup of the Copy Protection Technical Working Group

(CPTWG).

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Those supporting a broadcast flag (such as the Motion Picture Association of America and other

content providers) argue that the protections against piracy offered by a broadcast flag are crucial

to ensure that content providers make high-value programming available over the digital

airwaves. Supporters also argue that a broadcast flag will not prevent consumers from making

physical copies of DTV programs, or from distributing such copies within a person’s home digital

network. Opponents of a broadcast flag (many consumer electronics and high tech companies, as

well as consumer groups) assert that because electronic devices will have to be meet certain

specifications in order to process the broadcast flag, the innovation and functionality of consumer

electronics equipment will be adversely affected. Additionally, they argue, because the broadcast

flag would effectively ban any retransmission not approved by content providers, legitimate

consumer rights (e.g. “Fair Use”) would be compromised.

On August 9, 2002, the FCC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (FCC 02-231, MB Docket

02-230) in the matter of digital broadcast copy protection. Noting that the lack of digital

broadcast copy protection is a significant impediment to the DTV transition, the FCC solicited

public comment on whether the FCC can and should mandate the use of a copy protection

mechanism for digital broadcast television. The comment period closed on February 18, 2003;

over 6000 comments were received, most from individual citizens.

On November 4, 2003, the FCC adopted a rule which gives broadcasters the option of inserting a

“broadcast flag” into their over-the-air broadcast transmissions. By July 1, 2005, all consumer

electronics devices capable of receiving an over-the-air DTV signal would have been required to

be manufactured to incorporate content protection technologies that will limit the redistribution of

digital television content when the broadcast flag is recognized. Before DTV devices can be

manufactured, however, content protection technologies must be approved. The FCC set forth an

“interim procedure” whereby parties would certify that their content protection technology meets

FCC criteria. After a period of public comment, the FCC would determine whether or not to

approve that particular technology. The FCC issued a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in

order to formulate a permanent approval procedure for content protection technology. 71 On

August 4, 2004, the FCC adopted a Report and Order approving thirteen digital output protection

technologies and recording methods.72

On February 22, 2005, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia heard an

appeal filed in March 2004 by library and consumer groups objecting to the FCC rule mandating

that copy protection technology be included in digital televisions and related electronics by July

1, 2005. On May 6, 2005, the Court struck down the FCC’s broadcast flag rules. The Court ruled

that the FCC has no authority to regulate consumers’ use of televisions and other devices which

receive broadcast transmissions. With the FCC’s broadcast flag rule negated by the Court, the

109th Congress considered legislation mandating a broadcast flag.

In the 109th Congress, H.R. 5252, as reported by the Senate Commerce, Science and

Transportation Committee, would have given the FCC statutory authority to proceed with its

broadcast flag rule. The legislation provided that within 30 days after enactment, the FCC shall

initiate a further proceeding for the approval of digital output protection technologies and

FCC Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Matter of Digital Broadcast Content

Protection, MB Docket No. 02-230, FCC 03-273, released November 4, 2003.

FCC Order in the Matter of Digital Output Protection Technology and Recording Method Certifications, FCC 04193, released August 12, 2004.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

recording methods for use in distance learning activities. The FCC’s authority is not limited with

respect to approving technologies that allow for the redistribution of digital broadcast content

within the home or similar environment. Finally, a broadcast flag could not be used to restrict the

distribution of news and public affairs programming of which the primary commercial value

depends on “timeliness.” The FCC would allow broadcasters to determine whether that

“timeliness” criteria is met. Such determination by broadcasters would be subject to FCC review

under certain conditions. H.R. 5252 was not enacted by the 109th Congress.

Analog Hole

Another copyright protection issue of concern to content providers is what is commonly referred

to as the “analog hole.” In the foreseeable future, many consumers will continue to use analog

televisions. In order to display the content carried by digital signals, analog televisions will be

equipped with a digital tuner (a set-top box) which converts the signal from digital to analog. At

this point, the digital signal, even if content protected, is converted into an unprotected analog

form which could then be easily converted into a similarly unprotected digital form subject to the

unauthorized copying and Internet transmission the content providers are seeking to prevent.

During the 109th Congress, discussion draft legislation released by the House Committee on the

Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, the Analog Content

Protection Act, would require devices (such as digital video recorders or PC-based tuners) to

recognize an analog rights signaling mechanism called “CGMS-A plus Veil” (Analog Copy

Generation Management System coupled with the Veil Technologies Rights Assertion Mark). On

November 3, 2005, the Committee heard witnesses in support and opposition to the draft

legislation.73 The draft legislation was the basis for the Digital Transition Content Security Act of

2005 (H.R. 4569), introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner and

Ranking Member John Conyers on December 16, 2005.

Cable/DTV Interoperability Standards

Interoperability standards between digital televisions and cable systems are necessary in order for

consumers to be able to watch digital programming over their cable systems. Traditionally,

interoperability has been achieved via the proprietary set-top box leased to the subscriber by the

local cable company. Given the absence of a national interoperability standard, consumers had

been unable to purchase DTV products from consumer electronics stores which can be directly

connected to cable systems without the use of a set-top box. Two separate entities—the consumer

electronics industry (including manufacturers and retailers) and the cable system operators—have

embarked on an often contentious process of determining the specific technical details of how

DTV devices might achieve nation-wide compatibility and interoperability with cable systems.

Section 304 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 directed the FCC to adopt regulations to

assure the commercial consumer availability of “navigation devices” (i.e. set-top boxes, remote

control units) without jeopardizing the rights of a cable provider to protect its signal from theft.

Currently, proprietary set-top boxes are “integrated” with two overall functions: security and

navigation (i.e. allowing the subscriber to flip from channel to channel). A 1998 order adopted by

the FCC (FCC 98-116) required the cable operators to separate the security functions from non73

See http://judiciary.house.gov/Oversight.aspx?ID=202.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

security functions and to make available (by July 1, 2000) modular security components to the

consumer electronics industry.74 Allowing time for transition, the FCC order permitted cable

operators to continue to provide integrated set-top boxes through January 1, 2005. After that date,

the sale or lease of new integrated boxes would be prohibited. This deadline was subsequently

extended to July 1, 2006, and again extended to July 1, 2007.

On February 22, 2000, the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the National Cable

Television Association (NCTA) announced a voluntary agreement on a set of technical

requirements that permit the direct connection of digital television receivers to cable television

systems. In January 2002, CableLabs (a research organization of the cable industry) published

specifications for the OpenCable Applications Platform (OCAP), which would serve as a uniform

interoperability cable/DTV standard. However, consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers

and the cable industry continued to disagree over the pace and specific technical details

(including copy protection requirements) of how interoperability should be implemented.

On December 19, 2002, the cable and consumer electronics industries announced they had

reached an agreement on a cable compatibility standard for an integrated, unidirectional digital

cable television receiver. The two industry groups filed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

with the FCC, outlining the agreement. According to the MOU, the industries will continue to

negotiate a “bidirectional” standard that would enable consumers to receive advanced services

(such as video on demand) without the need for an external navigation device. On January 7,

2003, the FCC issued a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 03-3) seeking comment on

the MOU and proposing FCC rules necessary to implement the industry agreement. Opposition to

the agreement’s “encoding rules” was expressed by several organizations, including the Motion

Picture Association of America, makers of personal video recording technology (TiVo), and

consumer groups.

On September 10, 2003, the FCC adopted a Second Report and Order which adopted, with certain

modifications, the MOU agreement between the cable and consumer electronics industries. The

new rules allowed for the manufacture of “plug and play” television sets that would receive oneway digital signals (from the cable company to the consumer) without the need for a set-top box.

However, consumers would have to obtain from their cable operator a security card (a “POD” or

“CableCARD”) that must be inserted into the TV set. A set-top box would still be required for

two-way services such as video on demand or pay-per-view. Finally, the Order initiated a

subsequent proposed rulemaking (Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) to examine

remaining issues.75

Under the current FCC rule, after July 1, 2007, the security of the unidirectional digital signal

must be protected by a CableCARD (supplied by the cable provider) which can be inserted into

the “plug and play” television set, and allow consumers to view scrambled programming. New

set-top boxes provided by cable operators to their customers can no longer be “integrated,” that

is, they must operate in conjunction with a CableCARD. In its ruling setting the July 1, 2007

Also referred to as a Point of Deployment or “POD” module, this would consist of a smart card (subsequently

referred to as a “CABLEcard”) that could be inserted into the consumer electronics device to provide the security

required by the cable operator. A “national security interface” is required to ensure that POD modules from all the

different local cable operators would satisfactorily operate in every device. To manufacture a “POD reliant” device, the

manufacturer must sign a POD-Host Interface License Agreement (“PHILA”).

FCC Press Release, FCC Eases Digital Transition for Consumers, September 10, 2003, available at

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238850A1.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

deadline for integrated set-top boxes, the FCC stated that it would entertain requests for waivers

of the prohibition. As the July 1, 2007 deadline approached, many cable providers sought waivers

from the FCC, urging that the July 1, 2007 deadline be extended by two years. Cable providers

argued that imposing the ban would raise the costs to consumers of leasing the new CableCARD

enabled boxes (without adding any new functionality) and divert industry resources from

developing low-cost digital set-top boxes needed for the digital transition. Cable companies also

argued that next-generation network architect security (“downloadable security”) will likely be

available in 2008 or 2009, rendering CableCARD technology obsolete. The consumer electronics

industry, on the other hand, argued that if the July 1, 2007 deadline was extended, the value of

CableCARD technology to consumers would be further diminished, thereby making it more

likely that consumers would not purchase “plug and play” digital sets with integrated tuners, and

continue to opt for sets which rely on the set-top boxes supplied by cable providers. Ultimately,

the FCC granted some waivers for small cable operators experiencing difficulty obtaining new

equipment, as well as for operators pledging an all-digital conversion by February 17, 2009.76

Large cable operators—such as Comcast and Time Warner—have not been granted waivers, and

must comply with the July 1, 2007 deadline.

Meanwhile, because CableCARDs do not provide signal security for two-way bidirectional

signals (used for pay-per-view or video-on-demand, for example), the cable and consumer

electronics industry continue to negotiate on a standard for bidirectional navigation devices. On

June 29, 2007, the FCC released a Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking

comment on industry-proposed standards to ensure bidirectional compatibility of cable television

systems and consumer electronics equipment. The FCC is also seeking comment on whether such

a proposed rule should apply to other non-cable providers such as direct broadcast satellite (DBS)

or Internet protocol (IP)-based video services.

Digital Conversion of Public Broadcasting Stations

The FCC set a deadline of May 1, 2003 for public television stations to convert to digital. Unlike

commercial broadcasters, public television broadcasters were not opposed to an early deadline for

returning analog spectrum, provided that a mechanism was put in place which would ensure that

converter boxes are made available to exclusively over-the-air households. Public broadcasting

stations view digital television as an opportunity to enhance and expand services to their local

communities. For example, public television stations are using multicast channels to provide

programming streams dedicated to formal and children’s education, workforce development,

public affairs and local issues, and addressing underserved communities. Stations are also

conducting pilot programs, whereby datacasts are used to establish Homeland Security public

safety networks, including public alert systems and closed networks used by public safety and

emergency management agencies.

According to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), as of January 2007, 340 public

television stations (out of a total of 349) were on the air with a digital signal. Stations are

currently at different stages of the digital transition, some with high definition production

capacity and/or multicasting, while others struggle to maintain a single digital broadcast service

that meets FCC requirements. CPB estimates that public television stations need $400 million to

FCC Press Release, Media Bureau Acts on Requests for Waiver of Rules on Integrated Set-Top Boxes, June 29, 2007.

Available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274776A1.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

fully complete the digital transition.77 Raising money for the digital conversion is a challenge for

many public television stations, especially those in small markets. In 1997, the Corporation for

Public Broadcasting and other public television stakeholders estimated the cost of digital

conversion for public television stations at $1.7 billion. 78 In 2002, GAO reported that digital

conversion would cost each station approximately $3 million.79

Public broadcasters have sought a substantial federal contribution for digital conversion. There

are three federal programs which provide funding to public television stations for digital

conversion. Those programs are: 1) the Public Telecommunications Facilities Program (PTFP), a

grant program administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration

(NTIA) at the Department of Commerce; 2) the Digital Distribution Fund at the CPB, and 3) the

Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program at the Rural Utilities Service (RUS),

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Table A-1 shows funding histories for each of these programs.

PTFP funding is used to help public television stations pay for the new equipment and physical

infrastructure required for digital conversion (e.g. transmitters, translators, and production

equipment). The PTFP, which has provided matching grants for public broadcasting equipment

for over 40 years, began to fund digital conversion in FY1998. For FY2008, as in previous years,

the Administration requested no funding for PTFP in FY2008. On June 29, 2007, the Senate

Appropriations Committee approved a bill (S. 1745; S.Rept. 110-124) providing $20 million to

PTFP in FY2008. On July 12, 2007, the House Appropriations Committee approved a bill (H.R.

3093; H.Rept. 110-240) providing $21.728 million. The House passed H.R. 3093 on July 26,

2007. The Senate passed H.R. 3093 on October 16, 2007. The Consolidated Appropriations Act,

2008 (P.L. 110-161) provided $18.8 million for PTFP.

The Digital Distribution Fund at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) provides

matching grants to public television stations for the purchase of digital transmission equipment.

The Administration requested $30.6 million for CPB’s digital conversion program in FY2008. As

in previous Administration budget proposals, the $30.6 million would be taken from advance

appropriations previously enacted. On June 7, 2007, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on

Labor-HHS-Education approved $29.7 million in “new money” for digital conversion (H.R.

3043; H.Rept. 110-231). The House passed H.R. 3043 on July 19, 2007. On June 20, 2007, the

Senate Appropriations Committee approved a bill (S. 1710; S.Rept. 110-107) that would also

provide $29.7 million. The Senate passed H.R. 3043 on October 23, 2007. The Conference

Report (H.Rept. 110-424), agreed to by the House on November 6, 2007, would provide $29.7

million. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161) also provided $29.7 million

for digital conversion.

Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Appropriation Request and Justification FY2008 and FY2010, February 2007,

p. 11-13. Available at http://www.cpb.org/aboutcpb/financials/appropriation/justification_08-10.pdf.

U.S. Government Accountability Office, Issues Related to Federal Funding for Public Television by the Corporation

for Public Broadcasting, GAO-04-284, April 2004, p. 51.

U.S. Government Accountability Office, Many Broadcasters Will Not Meet May 2002 Digital Deadline, GAO-02466, April 23, 2002, p. 16.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Table A-1. Federal Funding for Digital Conversion of Public Television Stations

($millions)

PTFP

(announced grant funding

awarded for digital

conversion)

CPB

(appropriated funding for

digital conversion)

RUS

(appropriated funding for

digital conversion)

FY1998

12.5

—

FY1999

15.7

—

FY2000

18.0

—

FY2001

35.0

20.0

—

FY2002

36.0

25.0

—

FY2003

25.0

48.7

—

FY2004

9.8

50.0

14.0

FY2005

11.7

39.7

10.0

FY2006

12.3

30.0

5.0

FY2007

15.0

30.0

5.0

FY2008

not yet announced

29.7

5.0

The Public Television Station Digital Transition Grant Program at the Rural Utilities Service

(RUS) provides funding to public televison stations serving rural areas for the purchase or lease

of digital broadcasting equipment. The Administration requested no funding for the RUS digital

conversion program in FY2008. On July 19, 2007, the Senate Appropriations Committee

approved a bill (S. 1859; S.Rept. 110-134) providing $10 million for public broadcasting digital

conversion in rural areas. The Committee noted that FY2008 is the last appropriation that can

effectively make funding available before the transition deadline and that “future funding is not

anticipated.” The House Agriculture Appropriations Act (H.R. 3161; H.Rept. 110-258), approved

by the House Appropriations Committee on July 19, 2007, included no funding for digital

conversion. The House passed H.R. 3161 on August 2, 2007. The Consolidated Appropriations

Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161) provided $5 million for public broadcasting digital conversion in rural

areas.

Meanwhile, the Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007 (H.R. 2419), passed by the House on

July 27, 2007, contains a provision (section 6028, “Assistance for Rural Public Television

Stations”) which gives the Secretary of Agriculture the authority to provide grants to

“noncommercial education television broadcast stations that serve rural areas for the purposes of

developing digital facilities, equipment, and infrastructure to enhance digital services to rural

areas.” The Senate farm bill, passed by the Senate on December 14, 2007, contains a provision

(section 6302, “Telemedicine, Library Connectivity, Public Television, and Distance Learning

Services in Rural Areas,”) which would authorize grants to rural public television stations for

digital conversion.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Satellite Television and “Digital White Areas”

Under current law, satellite television providers are permitted to provide distant network signals

(from “out of market” network affiliates) only to subscribers living in “white areas”—meaning

they receive inadequate analog television broadcast signals from their local broadcasters.

Legislation was introduced into the 108th Congress (H.R. 4501/H.R. 4518/S. 2644) which would

explore the possibility of creating “digital white areas” such that some subscribers may be eligible

for distant network digital signals via their satellite dish if they cannot receive local digital TV

signals. In November 2004, Congress passed the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and

Reauthorization Act (SHVERA) as part of the FY2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L.

108-447). SHVERA provides limited authority for satellite companies to offer “distant digital

signals” if certain conditions are met. For more information on this issue, see CRS Report

RS21990, Satellite Television and “Digital White Areas”: Provisions of the 2004 Satellite Home

Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act, by (name redacted).

Low Power TV

Low Power Television (LPTV) was created by the FCC in 1982 to serve rural areas and

individual communities within larger urban areas. LPTV stations may not exceed 3 kilowatts for

VHF channels or 150 kilowatts for UHF channels, and must not cause interference in the

reception of full service television stations. Concerns have arisen that many LPTV stations will

lose their licenses in the transition to DTV. While the FCC’s February 1998 modification to its

table of allotments for DTV licensees did provide for some LPTV licensees to be relocated to

new frequencies, many would still lose their licenses under FCC digital transition plans.

To provide some relief for LPTV licensees, the Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999

was enacted as part of the Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of

1999 (P.L. 106-113). This law established a “class A” status to qualifying LPTV licensees, giving

them a measure of protection from full-power TV stations in the transition to DTV. The act

directs that class A licensees be accorded primary status as television broadcasters, prescribes the

criteria LPTV stations must meet to be eligible for class A status, and outlines the interference

protection class A stations must provide to other television stations. To implement the act, in April

2000, the FCC established rules for class A LPTV licensees, to facilitate the acquisition of capital

for LPTV stations to continue to provide free, over-the-air programming to their communities.80

In accordance with the 1992 Cable Act (47 USC 534), cable television providers are required to

transmit to their audiences the locally-generated programming of all full-power TV broadcasters

that request carriage, a provision known as “must-carry.” Under the 1992 act, some LPTV

stations are entitled to “must-carry”status if they meet certain criteria.81 The FCC’s April 2000

ruling did not address the question of whether class A licensees should be entitled to the “mustcarry” provision, as are full-power broadcast TV stations. A petition filed with the FCC argued

that class A licenses should be granted the same “must-carry” status as full-power broadcasters.

FCC Report and Order in the Matter of Establishment of Class A Television Service, MM Docket No. 00-10, FCC

00-115, released April 4, 2000.

Those criteria (47 USC 534) include (among other requirements) that the community of license of the LPTV station

has a population not exceeding 35,000, that there is no full-power TV station licensed to any community within the

county or other political subdivision (of a state) served by the cable system, and that the LPTV station provides the

only news coverage in its community of license.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

The FCC subsequently ruled that class A stations do not have the same must carry rights as full

service television stations.82

On August 6, 2003 the FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking83 to seek comment on

rules for digital low power television and digital television translator stations. On September 9,

2004, the FCC adopted rules to allow for the digital conversion of LPTV and translator stations.

While requiring the conversion to digital operation, the FCC did not set a digital transition

deadline for LPTV and translator stations. The final transition date—on which analog operations

will cease—will be considered in the FCC’s Third DTV periodic review proceeding.84

The Conference Report accompanying the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171; H.Rept.

109-362) clarified that “only full-power stations, not low-power stations must cease analog

broadcasting by February 18, 2009.” Low-power stations may continue analog broadcasts after

that date, subject to future decisions by the FCC on how to complete the digital transition for lowpower stations. The conference report stated that low-power stations (other than Class A stations)

may continue broadcasting above channel 51 subject to FCC decisions “so long as those stations’

use of those channels is secondary to the use of those channels by the auction winners and public

safety officials.”

P.L. 109-171 also provides funding not to exceed $10 million during FY2008-2009 (starting

October 1, 2007) to compensate low-power television stations (including Class A, translator, or

booster television stations) for the cost of a digital-to-analog conversion device in order to

convert the digital signals received from their corresponding full-power television stations and

provide analog signals to their customers. In no case shall the compensation for a single digitalto-analog converter device exceed $1000.

Additionally, funding not to exceed $65 million during FY2009 (starting October 1, 2008) will be

available to reimburse low-power television stations for equipment to upgrade stations from

analog to digital in rural communities. Both grant programs are administered by the National

Telecommunications and Information Administration of the Department of Commerce. 85

On October 29, 2007, NTIA announced the start of the LPTV Digital-to-Analog Conversion grant

program that will help low-power television stations continue analog broadcasts. The program

will provide funds to eligible low-power stations that must purchase a digital-to-analog

conversion device to convert the incoming digital signal of a full-power television station to

analog for transmission on the low-power station’s analog channel. Applications are being

accepted between October 29, 2007, and February 17, 2009. The Low-Power Television and

Translator Upgrade Program, which will reimburse the costs of upgrading LPTV and translator

analog stations to digital, will be announced at a future date. 86

FCC Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration in the Matter of Establishment of Class A Television

Service, MM Docket No. 00-10, FCC 01-123, released April 13, 2001.

FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Matter of Amendment of Parts 73 and 74 of the Commission’s Rules to

Establish Rules for Digital Low Power Television, Television Translator, and Television Booster Stations and to

Amend Rules for Digital Class A Television Stations, MB Docket No. 03-185, FCC 03-198, released August 29, 2003.

For further information, see http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251978A1.pdf.

For more information on these grant programs, see the NTIA website at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/

LPTVDigital_070622_files/frame.htm.

For further information on NTIA’s LPTV grant programs, see http://www.ntia.doc.gov/lptv/index.html.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

A growing issue of concern to LPTV and Class A stations is the capability of digital-to-analog

converter boxes to pass through broadcasted analog signals in addition to receiving and

converting digital signals. LPTV stations are not subject to the February 17, 2009 digital

conversion deadline, and will continue to broadcast analog signals. A household that receives

both full-power and LPTV broadcast signals, and that installs a converter box in order to receive

the full-power station’s digital signal, would not be able to receive the LPTV station’s analog

signal unless the converter box is equipped with an analog signal pass through capability. NTIA

permits but does not require manufacturers to install an analog signal pass through capability in

certified converter boxes, arguing that such a requirement could raise the cost of the boxes and

pose possible interference problems for the digital signal. The Community Broadcasters

Association (CBA), representing LPTV and Class A stations, has filed a complaint against the

FCC asserting that the NTIA-certified converter boxes violate the All-Channel Receiver Act if

they block reception of analog over-the-air television broadcast signals. 87

Fees for Ancillary or Supplemental Services

The Telecommunications Act (P.L. 104-104) states that if a DTV licensee offers ancillary or

supplemental services for which they receive a subscription fee or other compensation, the FCC

“shall establish a program to assess and collect from the licensee...an annual fee or other schedule

or method of payment...” The act further states that the collection of fees “shall be designed (I) to

recover for the public a portion of the value of the public spectrum resource made available for

such commercial use, and (ii) to avoid unjust enrichment through the method employed to permit

such uses of that resource.”88 Congress is overseeing the FCC’s actions regarding implementation

of this law. Public interest groups have also maintained pressure on the FCC to establish a fee

program, arguing that commercial broadcasters should compensate the American people for the

use of the DTV spectrum, and that fees should be required out of fairness to those who paid for

spectrum at FCC auctions (such as licensees for personal communications services).

In November 1998, the FCC adopted rules to require broadcasters to pay 5% of their gross

revenues from ancillary or supplementary uses of DTV spectrum for which they charge

subscription fees or other specified compensation.89 These include subscription video, software

distribution, data transmissions, teletext, interactive materials, aural messages, paging services,

and audio signals. Home shopping channels and “infomercials” are not subject to fees because the

FCC did not consider them new services. The FCC has initiated a separate proceeding to

determine how much non-commercial stations can use the DTV spectrum for revenue-generating

services, and whether they should have to pay spectrum fees. Some consumer groups say that the

FCC’s spectrum fees are not heavy enough on commercial broadcasters, arguing that most

revenue will come from home shopping and infomercials. They also warn that public

broadcasters should not be over-regulated, arguing that too heavy a burden placed on public

broadcasters could impair their long-term viability.

Community Broadcasters Association, Petition for Declaratory Ruling, In the Matter of Compliance of Digital

Converter Boxes With the All Channel Receiver Act, filed before the Federal Communications Commission December

7, 2007, 11p. Available at: http://www.dtvnow.org/documents/dtvconv5.pdf.

The Budget Resolution of 1997 (H.Con.Res. 84) included a provision requiring broadcasters to pay a spectrum usage

fee of $2 billion over five years. Broadcasters strongly opposed that provision, however, and it was not included in the

Budget Act of 1997.

FCC Report and Order on Fees for Ancillary or Supplementary Use of Digital Television Spectrum, MM Docket No.

97-247, released November 19, 1998.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

On October 11, 2002, the FCC ruled that noncommercial stations are required to use their entire

digital capacity primarily for nonprofit, noncommercial, educational broadcast services. However,

the FCC also ruled that the statutory prohibition against advertising on noncommercial broadcasts

does not apply to any ancillary or supplementary services presented on an excess DTV channels

that does not constitute broadcasting. The FCC further ruled that public stations must pay a fee of

five percent of gross revenues generated by ancillary or supplementary services provided on their

DTV service. 90

Public Interest Obligations of DTV Broadcasters

In March 1997, President Clinton established an Advisory Committee on Public Interest

Obligations of DTV Broadcasters, to make recommendations on how DTV licensees should

compensate the public for their licenses. Committee members were selected from government,

the broadcasting industry, academia, and consumer interest organizations. After a series of public

meetings in 1997 and 1998, the Committee submitted a set of recommendations to Vice President

Gore in December 1998. The recommendations consist of mostly voluntary actions by

broadcasters, including providing five minutes per night of air time for candidate-centered

discourse in the 30 days prior to an election. Some panel members wanted to recommend

mandating the free air time as well as other Committee proposals. The White House referred the

report to the FCC, which on December 15, 1999, opened a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) proceeding to

solicit public comment on public interest obligations of TV broadcasters as they transition to

DTV (MM Docket No. 99-360).

After reviewing public comment, the FCC, in September 2000, issued the DTV Public Interest

Form Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which sought to require television broadcasters

(both digital and analog) to disclose on a quarterly standardized form how they are serving the

public interest. Also in September 2000, the FCC issued the Children’s DTV Public Interest

NPRM (MM Docket No. 00-167), which focused on the obligation of broadcasters to provide

educational and informational programming for children, and the requirement that licensees limit

advertising in children’s programs. The FCC has not yet issued any decisions in those

proceedings. Given the significant amount of time that has passed, the Second Periodic Review of

FCC rules and policies affecting DTV conversion, issued on January 27, 2003, has asked for

further comment on the public interest obligation issue. 91 On August 4, 2004, the FCC adopted a

Report and Order (FCC-04-192) which implements several steps identified in the Second Periodic

Review. However, no action was taken regarding public interest obligations.

On September 9, 2004, the FCC adopted a Report and Order92 addressing children’s programming

obligations for digital television broadcasters. The FCC issued guidelines on the obligation to

provide educational programming for children and the requirement that children are protected

from excessive and inappropriate commercial messages. Specifically, the Order increases the

required amount of core educational programming proportionally to the amount of increased free

video programming offered by the broadcaster on multicast channels. Regarding commercial

FCC Report and Order in the Matter of Ancillary or Supplementary Use of Digital Television Capacity by

Noncommercial Licensees, MM Docket No. 98-203, FCC 01-306, released October 17, 2001.

NPRM, Second Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital

Television, pp. 39-42.

Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Matter of Children’s Television Obligations of

Digital Television Broadcasters, MM Docket No. 00-167, FCC 04-221, released November 23, 2004, 54 p.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

limitations, the Order concludes that commercial limits apply to all digital programming directed

at children 12 and under, whether the programming is provided on a free or pay multicast

channel. 93

Two bills introduced into the 109th Congress—but not enacted—addressed the issue of public

interest obligations of DTV broadcasters. H.R. 2359, introduced on May 12, 2005, by

Representative Watson, sought to establish minimum public interest requirements for multicast

digital television channels. S. 616, introduced on May 12, 2005 by Senator Rockefeller, sought to

require broadcasters providing digital television multicasts to increase educational and

informational programming for children.

Hearings held in the 110th Congress have addressed the issue of public interest obligations of

DTV broadcasters. On February 1, 2007, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and

Transportation held a hearing on the communications marketplace at which all five FCC

Commissioners testified. In response to questions on public interest obligations of broadcasters,

two opposing views emerged. According to Commissioner Michael Copps:

[W]e have to really get serious about determining what those public interest obligations are

going to be. We’re going into the Digital Age now. We’re giving the right to use that

spectrum to broadcast six—or, if you have a duopoly, 12—program streams in the

community. And we’ve done well on the mechanics of that, but the big question is, what do

the American people have a right to expect from them? Can’t they get more community

affairs, local affairs and the things you’re talking about?

. . . We ought to complete the proceedings that have already been begun. We’ve had, since

1999, pending a proceeding on the public interest obligations of DTV broadcasters. And

we’ve done the children’s programming out of that, but all the other things are lying fallow,

so we really need to tee that up and get done with that. So, I absolutely share your sense of

urgency. There’s no higher priority, I think, that the commission has.94

On the other hand, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin expressed reservations on placing certain

obligations on broadcasters:

Well, you know, I guess I would say I’m hesitant to actually put specific requirements on the

type of programming that they’ve got to put on. There have been a lot of proposals that have

been put forth—for example, that we should be requiring individual broadcasters to put free

air time—a specific amount of free air time available to political candidates. And there’ve

been those who have come forward with this repeatedly in the context of the digital

transition, saying we should make digital television broadcasters provide free air time to

political candidates. And I’m hesitant about saying that we’re going to require broadcasters

to provide that kind of free air time.95

Similarly, in response to questions from the House Energy and Commerce Committee, both

Commissioners Copps and Adelstein called on the FCC to move forward on the DTV public

interest obligation proceedings.96 However, at the FCC oversight hearings held by the House

For more information see http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251972A1.pdf.

Federal News Service Inc., transcript of hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee,

“The Communications Marketplace: A View from the FCC,” February 1, 2007.

Ibid.

Responses of FCC Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps to questions from the House Committee

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Energy and Commerce Committee on March 14, 2007, FCC Chairman Martin maintained that

many of the rules that were part of that proceeding (such as children’s programming) have

already been addressed by the FCC. Chairman Martin stated that the “one issue that’s remaining

is whether we’re going to require minimum quantities of certain kinds of broadcasting. I’m not

convinced that that’s necessary.”97

Tower Siting

One obstacle to the broadcasters’ ability to offer DTV services has been the opposition from state

and local communities over the building of new signal transmission towers.98 In most cases, DTV

antennas can be built on top of existing towers used for analog TV broadcasting. If new towers

are required, however, they must be constructed before the stations can transmit DTV signals. In

August 1997, the FCC released an NPRM (FCC 97-182) to consider the preemption of state and

local zoning restrictions on the siting, placement, and construction of DTV broadcasting facilities.

In its January 18, 2001 Report and Order, the FCC concluded that “while some stations are facing

problems with tower availability and/or local zoning issues, such problems do not seem to be

widespread at this time.”99

(...continued)

on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, February 7, 2007. Available at

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_110/110-resp.FCC.020707.Adelstein.pdf and

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_110/110-resp.FCC.020707.Copps.pdf.

Federal News Service Inc., transcript of hearing of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet of the

House Energy and Commerce Committee, “Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission,” March 14, 2007.

For more information on DTV tower siting, see http://www.fcc.gov/mb/policy/dtv/.

FCC Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking In the Matter of Review of the Commission’s

Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, MM Docket No. 00-39, FCC 01-24, p. 37.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Appendix B. Legislation in the 109th Congress

Related to Digital Television

H.R. 1646 (Harmon). Homeland Emergency Operations Response Act. Prohibits any delay in

reassigning 24 MHZ in the upper 700 MHZ band (currently occupied by television broadcasters)

for public safety purposes, and requires those frequencies to be operational by January 1, 2007.

Introduced April 14, 2005; referred to Committee on Energy & Commerce.

H.R. 2354 (Sensenbrenner). TV Consumer Choice Act. Prohibits the FCC from requiring digital

tuners in television receivers. Introduced May 12, 2005; referred to Committee on Energy and

Commerce.

H.R. 2359 (Watson). Digital Television Accountability and Governance Enhancement Act of

2005 (DTV-AGE Act). Establishes minimum public interest requirements for multicast digital

television channels. Introduced May 12, 2005; referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce.

H.R. 2512 (Regula). Digital Opportunity Investment Trust Act. Establishes a Digital Opportunity

Investment Trust fund, part of which would provide Public Television Digital Educational grants

to noncommercial educational television stations. Introduced May 19, 2005; referred to

Committee on Energy and Commerce and to Committee on Education and the Workforce.

H.R. 3032 (Gene Green). TV Truth Act of 2005. Requires manufacturers and retailers to provide

disclosure to consumers that analog televisions will no longer receive broadcast transmissions

after the public broadcast spectrum changes to digital. Introduced June 22, 2005; referred to

Committee on Energy and Commerce.

H.R. 4569 (Sensenbrenner). Digital Transition Content Security Act of 2005. Requires certain

analog conversion devices to preserve digital content security measures. Introduced December

16, 2005; referred to Committee on Judiciary.

H.R. 5252 (Barton). Communications Act of 2006. Senate Commerce Committee version

contains a number of provisions related to the digital television transition, including mandating

DTV consumer education, requiring large cable operators to provide to their customers their local

broadcasters’ digital signals in both digital and “downconverted” analog formats through

February 14, 2014, and giving the FCC statutory authority to proceed with its broadcast flag rule,

with certain limitations. Introduced May 1, 2006; passed by House June 8, 2006. Reported by

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, September 29, 2006 (S.Rept. 109355) and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar.

H.R. 5264 (Engel). Digital Television Consumer Education Act. Directs manufacturers, retailers,

and broadcasters to implement consumer education measures regarding the digital transition.

Establishes a DTV Transition Federal Advisory Committee to lead the effort to educate the public

about the digital television transition. Introduced May 2, 2006; referred to Committee on Energy

and Commerce.

S. 616 (Rockefeller). Indecent and Gratuitous and Excessively Violent Programming and Control

Act of 2005. Requires broadcasters providing digital television multicasts to increase educational

and informational programming for children. Introduced March 14, 2005; referred to Committee

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

S. 1023 (Dodd). Digital Opportunity Investment Trust Act. Establishes a Digital Opportunity

Investment Trust fund, part of which would provide Public Television Digital Educational grants

to noncommercial educational television stations. Introduced May 12, 2005; referred to

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

S. 1268 (McCain). Spectrum Availability for Emergency Response and Law Enforcement to

Improve Vital Emergency Services Act (SAVE LIVES Act). Designates digital transition date as

December 31, 2008, and authorize $468 million—drawn from spectrum auction proceeds—to

supply digital-to-analog converter boxes to over-the-air households with incomes not exceeding

200% of the poverty level. Introduced June 20, 2005; referred to Committee on Commerce,

Science and Transportation.

S. 1600 (Snowe). Digital Translator and Low Power Television Transition Act. Amends the

Communications Act of 1934 to ensure full access to digital television in areas served by lowpower television. Introduced July 29, 2005; referred to Committee on Commerce, Science and

Transportation.

S. 1932 (Gregg). Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005. Title III is the Digital

Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, which sets a digital transition deadline of February 17,

2009, and allocates up to $1.5 billion for a program to assist consumers in the purchase of

converter boxes. Passed Senate, November 3, 2005. House agreed to conference report (H.Rept.

109-362), December 19, 2005. Senate agreed to conference report with amendments, December

21, 2005. House agreed to amended conference report, February 1, 2006. P.L. 109-171 signed by

President, February 8, 2006.

S. 2686 (Stevens). Communications, Consumer’s Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of

2006. Contains a number of provisions related to the digital television transition, including

mandating DTV consumer education, requiring large cable operators to provide to their customers

their local broadcasters’ digital signals in both digital and “downconverted” analog formats

through February 14, 2014, and giving the FCC statutory authority to proceed with its broadcast

flag rule, with certain limitations. Introduced May 1, 2006; referred to Committee on Commerce,

Science and Transportation. See H.R. 5252 for further action.

Congressional Research Service

Digital Television: An Overview

Appendix C. Legislation in the 110th Congress

Related to Digital Television

H.R. 608 (Barton). Digital Television Consumer Education Act of 2007. Requires the FCC to

create a DTV public education program, to convene a DTV Advisory Group to coordinate

consumer outreach, and to report to Congress every six months on the progress of consumer

education efforts. Requires NTIA to report to Congress every 90 days on the progress of the

converter box coupon program. Requires retailers, cable and satellite operators, and broadcasters

to take various measures to inform the public about the digital transition. Introduced January 22,

2007; referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce.

H.R. 2566 (Engel). National Digital Television Consumer Education Act. Requires TV retailers

and distributors to place signs next to all analog TV displays with an advisory that a set-top box is

necessary after February 17, 2009, to continue using the TV. Also requires broadcasters to air

Public Service Announcements for more than a year before the transition to inform the public

about the change and the set-top box subsidy program. Introduced June 5, 2007; referred to

Committee on Energy and Commerce.

H.R. 2829 (Serrano). Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2008.

House Appropriations Committee report H.Rept. 110-207, passed by the House on June 28, 2007,

would provide $2 million to the FCC for DTV consumer education. Senate Appropriations

Committee report (S.Rept. 110-129) does not address DTV. Placed on Senate Legislative

Calendar, July 13, 2007.

H.R. 2917 (Butterfield). Transition Education Accountability Report Act of 2007. Requires the

FCC to submit a report to Congress describing the measures taken by the FCC, NTIA, and other

federal agencies to inform the public of the transition to digital television. Introduced June 28,

2007; referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce.

H.R. 3862 (Wynn). Preparing America’s Seniors for the Digital Transition Act of 2007.

Establishes an interagency federal taskforce to educate older Americans on the DTV transition.

Requires retailers, cable and satellite operators, and broadcasters to take various measures to

inform the public about the digital transition. Directs the FCC to award grants for DTV public

education. Requires modifications in the digital-to-analog converter box program. Requires the

NTIA and the FCC to provide 90-day progress reports to Congress. Introduced October 16, 2007;

referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce.

S. 2125 (Kohl). Preparing America’s Seniors for the Digital Television Transition Act of 2007.

Establishes an interagency federal taskforce to educate older Americans on the DTV transition.

Requires retailers, cable and satellite operators, and broadcasters to take various measures to

inform the public about the digital transition. Directs the FCC to award grants for DTV public

education. Requires modifications in the digital-to-analog converter box program. Requires the

NTIA and the FCC to provide 90-day progress reports to Congress. Introduced October 2, 2007;

referred to Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

S. 2507 (Hutchison). DTV Border Fix Act of 2007. Provides for television broadcast stations

along the Mexican border to continue analog broadcasts through 2014, subject to certain

conditions and limitations. Introduced December 18, 2007; referr

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.