Order Code RL32622
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Public Safety, Interoperability and the
Transition to Digital Television
Updated June 30, 2005
Linda K. Moore
Analyst in Telecommunications Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
Public Safety, Interoperability and the Transition to
Digital Television
Summary
Plans for the use of spectrum intended for wireless emergency communications
and interoperability are enmeshed in the technical requirements and complex
economic and policy issues that surround the planned transition to digital television
(DTV) in the United States. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 requires the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) to allocate 24 MHZ of spectrum at 700 MHZ
to public safety, without providing a hard deadline for the transfer. The channels
designated for public safety are among those currently held by TV broadcasters.
The 9/11 Commission Report recommended in 2004 that “Congress should
support pending legislation which provides for the expedited and increased
assignment of radio spectrum for public safety purposes.” This was a reference to
the Homeland Emergency Response Operations Act (HERO Act) — introduced by
Representative Jane Harman — that would have required the FCC to “take all actions
necessary to complete assignments” for these channels so that operations could begin
no later than January 1, 2007, in line with the deadline originally envisioned for the
completion of the transition to DTV for all affected channels. Plans to release the
spectrum were included in both the key House (H.R. 10) and Senate (S.2845)
versions of the bills proposed to respond to the 9/11 Commission. The Senate
version included language that would have released the needed channels by the end
of 2007. The House version and the final Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) expressed the preference that the transition
to digital television be considered in its entirety. Language in the act conveys the
sense of Congress that the first session of the 109th Congress must act to establish a
comprehensive approach to the timely return of spectrum and that any delay in doing
this will delay planning by the public safety sector. There are also provisions in the
Act for studies that could provide the foundation for achieving significant
improvements in public safety communications.
The scope of a bill to clear spectrum and facilitate the transition to digital
televison is under discussion in the House where draft legislation has been reviewed,
but not introduced. In the Senate, Senator Ted Stevens has announced his intention
of introducing a comprehensive bill that might mirror the House bill being
considered. In the interim, Senator John McCain has introduced the SAVE LIVES
Act (S. 1268, Spectrum Availability for Emergency-response and Law-enforcement
to Improve Vital Emergency Services). The bill appeared in a previous version as
S. 1237, which included a detailed plan for recycling televisions that has been
replaced in the newer version of the bill by a requirement for a study on the need for
a national electronic waste recycling program. Against this background of ongoing
debate about spectrum availability and the transition to DTV, the HERO Act has
been reintroduced (H.R. 1646, Representative Harman).
This report summarizes issues relevant to the clearing of the frequencies or
channels designated for public safety. It will be updated.
Contents
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Interoperability and the 9/11 Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Spectrum for Public Safety Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The Cost of Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Freeing Spectrum at 700 MHZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
TV Broadcasters Occupy Needed Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Expediting the Transition to Digital TV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Proposals for Increasing Spectrum for Public Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Legislation in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
The Scope of the Debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Provisions in the Intelligence Reform Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Related Actions by the Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Public Safety, Interoperability and the
Transition to Digital Television
Background
Public safety agencies include the nation’s first responders (such as firefighters,
police officers, and ambulance services) and a number of local, state, federal — and
sometimes regional — authorities. Communications, often wireless, are vital to these
agencies’ effectiveness and to the safety of their members and the public. Wireless
technology requires radio frequency capacity in order to function. Many public
safety wireless communications programs suffer from funding difficulties and
technical limitations due largely to the evolution of the market and technology for
public safety communications and to the constraints of spectrum allocation (radio
frequency assignments). There is a perceived need for timely resolution of problems
that the public safety sector finds increasingly critical, such as reducing commercial
transmission interference to emergency calls, implementing high-speed services,
using Wi-Fi1 technologies to deliver data, providing interoperability, increasing
standardization, and expanding spectrum capacity.
The key agencies for spectrum management are the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA). Among other responsibilities, the FCC supervises spectrum
for non-federal public safety agency communications. The NTIA — part of the
Department of Commerce — administers spectrum used by federal entities. The lead
program for fostering interoperability is SAFECOM, part of the Department of
Homeland Security. SAFECOM has absorbed the Public Safety Wireless Network
(PSWN) Program, previously operated jointly by the Departments of Justice and
Treasury. PSWN was created to respond to recommendations made by the Public
Safety Wireless Advisory Committee (PSWAC)2 regarding the improvement of
public safety communications over wireless networks. PSWN operated as an
advocate for spectrum management policies that would improve wireless network
capacity and capability for public safety. SAFECOM, however, has no authority over
spectrum management decisions.
Interoperability and the 9/11 Commission Report
Interoperability, also referred to as compatibility or connectivity, allows
different systems to readily contact each other and provides needed redundancy. A
significant barrier to achieving interoperability is the lack of sufficient spectrum on
1 Wi-Fi, for wireless fidelity, provides Internet access from web-enabled devices through
wireless local area networks, or “hotspots.”
2 “Final Report of the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee,” September 11, 1996.
CRS-2
similar radio frequencies. Spectrum allocations for public safety are fragmented at
many different frequencies. Existing wireless technology is designed to work within
specified frequency ranges. Communications equipment must be specially built to
handle multiple frequency ranges, thereby limiting interoperability, adding to the
cost, and affecting operations in various ways. Insufficient capability for
interoperable communications for first responders and for other public safety
response units has been identified by many, including the 9/11 Commission, as a
serious problem in any effective response to a terrorist attack or other major disaster.
The 9/11 Commission, in one of its recommendations, linked the need for spectrum
with the need to improve connectivity.3 The FCC has designated 2.5 MHZ of
spectrum in the public safety channels at 700 MHZ for interoperability. Most public
safety organizations recommend an increase in the amount of spectrum for public
safety use at 700 MHZ as a way to maximize interoperability and operating
efficiency.
Spectrum for Public Safety Use
Many public safety officials believe that additional spectrum needs to be
assigned for public safety use — and not exclusively for first responders.4 In addition
to providing spectrum for other types of users, the spectrum available for public
safety needs to support high-speed transmissions capable of quickly sending data
(such as photographs, floor plans and live video). This requires providing
frequencies with greater bandwidth to enable wireless broadband and new-generation
technologies. Most frequency assignments for first responders are narrowband and
most are located below 512 MHZ.5 Commonly-used frequencies are VHF or UHF.6
Problems for users in the lower frequencies are primarily congestion and a
dependency on out-dated, analog equipment. Many newer systems use frequencies
3 The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, The 9/11
Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States, Official Government Edition, Washington, D.C. 2004, p. 397. This
recommendation is discussed in CRS Report RL32594, Public Safety Communications:
Policy, Proposals, Legislation and Progress.
4 In 1997 amendments to the Communications Act of 1934 , Congress defined public safety
services as “services — (A) the sole or principal purpose of which is to protect the safety
of life, health or property; (B) that are provided (I) by State or local government entities; or
(ii) by nongovernmental organizations that are authorized by a governmental entity whose
primary mission is the provision of such services ; and (C) that are not made commercially
available to the public by the provider.” Some believe that critical infrastructure industry
workers should be specifically included in this definition. Utility company technicians, for
example, often arrive at a fire in tandem with fire fighters, to shut off electricity and gas.
5 Radio frequency spectrum is measured in hertz. Radio frequency is the portion of
electromagnetic spectrum that carries radio waves. The distance an energy wave takes to
complete one cycle is its wavelength. Frequency is the number of wavelengths measured
at a given point per unit of time, in cycles per second, or hertz (Hz). Typical designations
are: kHz — kilohertz or thousands of hertz; MHZ — megahertz, or millions of hertz; and
GHz — gigahertz, or billions of hertz.
6 Very High Frequency (VHF) and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) are transmitted in three
bands in the United States — low VHF, high VHF, and UHF.
CRS-3
in the 800 MHZ range. Problems in the 800 MHZ range are created by interference
from commercial wireless transmissions and insufficient bandwidth for advanced
applications such as image transfer. To reduce interference to public safety, the FCC
has developed a spectrum relocation plan that is to place public safety channels
together at the lower end of the 800 MHZ band and might increase the amount of
spectrum available to first responders.7 Radio frequencies have been designated for
state and local public safety use in the 700 MHZ range but there are no allocations
specifically for federal use at 700 MHZ. The FCC has coordinated with the NTIA
for federal access to public safety spectrum but additional spectrum would have to
be allocated by Congress for federal agencies to have comparable access and
interoperability at 700 MHZ. Also, the bandwidth assignments are judged by most
experts to be too narrow for broadband services.
Although, cumulatively, the amount of radio frequencies designated for non-
federal public safety totals over 90 MHZ,8 the characteristics of these frequencies are
dis-similar, requiring different technological solutions. The fragmentation of
spectrum assignments for public safety is a significant barrier to achieving
interoperability in the future and, in the past, has been the source of many of the
technical problems that plague public safety communications, such as out-of-date
equipment, proprietary solutions, congestion and interference. The immediate
barrier to achieving radio communications interoperability is — simply put — that
UHF and VHF frequencies cannot connect directly with each other; and older,
analog equipment widely used below 512 MHZ cannot connect with newer digital
equipment at 800 MHZ. None of the frequency assignments can, using current
technology, support wide-area communications relying on high-speed, data-rich
transmissions.
The Cost of Fragmentation. The number of radio frequencies available for
interoperable communications capability can significantly impact first responder
communications, and the range of these frequencies can significantly impact the cost
of equipment. Manufacturers cite short production runs for wireless handsets as one
of the causes for higher costs associated with public safety communications
equipment. An analog walkie-talkie might cost $300, a recent “typical” price. A
radio with limited interoperability that meets Project 25 standards9 might cost as
much as $3,000 in a limited production run. The greater the number of
communications devices using compatible frequencies, the greater are the
opportunities for economies of scale in production, which in turn typically lowers the
7 This plan is discussed in CRS Report RL32408, Spectrum Policy: Public Safety and
Wireless Communications Interference.
8 Estimated at approximately 97 MHz in Testimony of Michael K. Powell, Chairman,
Federal Communications Commission, at Hearing of Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science and Transportation, “Spectrum for Public Safety Users,” September 8, 2004. The
NTIA has apparently not supplied a similar estimate of frequencies assigned to federal
agencies that are or can be accessed for public safety purposes.
9 Project 25 refers to the suite of standards for public safety communications under
development by the Telecommunications Industry Association, a standards-setting body
authorized for this program. [http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/project_25/]. Viewed June
29, 2005.
CRS-4
cost and final price on equipment. Purchasing “cross-talk” equipment — to provide
interoperability by linking radio frequencies through a black box — can run into the
millions of dollars. Beyond issues such as risk-assessment, prioritizing, and equity
in funding programs, many within Congress and without are concerned about the
long-term implications of funding short-term communications solutions, such as
cross-talk equipment.10 Many believe that the unavailability of spectrum at 700 MHz
is stalling advances in technology and planning for new networks, thus adding to the
short-term costs of maintaining public safety communications. Therefore, many
argue that creating common, interoperable channels at 700 MHz is cost-effective as
well as organizationally and technologically desirable.11
Freeing Spectrum at 700 MHZ
In 1997, responding to the request from the public safety community for more
spectrum, Congress passed legislation12 that included providing some of the needed
frequencies. Congress mandated that channels used to broadcast analog television
were to be cleared and spectrum at 700 MHZ was to be reallocated for wireless
communications, including public safety. To meet the instructions of Congress, the
FCC assigned the frequencies 764-776 MHZ and 794-806 MHZ, in channels 63-64
and 68-69 respectively, for public safety use. At the behest of many public safety
organizations, the FCC designated 2.5 MHZ of this allocation specifically for
interoperability. Channels 60-62 and 65-6713 were identified for auction for
commercial wireless use. The FCC created the Public Safety National Coordinating
Committee to develop recommendations for standards to be used for equipment and
systems tuned to the designated channels in the upper 700 MHZ band. By 2003, the
bulk of standards work for voice communications was completed and public safety
agencies were able to test prototype equipment in areas where the designated
frequencies are not in use for analog television broadcasts.
TV Broadcasters Occupy Needed Spectrum. The general uncertainty about
700 MHZ spectrum availability is seen by many as an obstacle to implementation of
public safety communications on the frequencies for which advanced levels of standards,
systems interoperability, and performance can be expected.14 As noted by the FCC, “the
major urban areas where the need for additional public safety spectrum is most acute are
10 For example, statements at Hearing of the House of Representatives, Committee on
Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Science and Technology,
“The Need for Grant Reform and The Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act
of 2005,” April 13, 2005.
11 Speakers at a CRS-sponsored seminar provided equipment cost estimates and were among
those who have confirmed the need for access to spectrum at 700 MHz as part of the
solution for achieving interoperability. Public Safety Communications: Interoperability
Technology Workshop, November 17, 2003.
12 Balanced Budget Act of 1997, P.L.105-33, Title III.
13 746-764 MHz and 776-794 MHz, respectively.
14 For example, National Task Force on Interoperability, “Why Can’t We Talk,” February
2003.
CRS-5
some of the same areas in which this band is most encumbered by broadcast stations.”15
The FCC attempted to work with the broadcasting industry and wireless carriers on a
“market-driven” approach for voluntary clearing of the 700 MHZ channels designated
for auction or assigned to public safety agencies. The FCC showed a willingness to relax
some technical requirements in order to facilitate voluntary band clearing that relied on
channel swapping.16 Proposals that might lead to freeing television spectrum through
channel swapping for commercial wireless use could be similarly applied to freeing
spectrum for public safety wireless communications. Proposals regarding policy or
requests for action — for example by some broadcasting companies, Motorola, Inc. and
New York State — claim that, with some modification to the rules, the freeing of public
safety channels can be achieved by date certain with minimal loss of television reception
for over-the-air broadcasts.17 In testimony before Congress in September 2004,
representatives from Motorola, Inc. reaffirmed the conviction that a timely clearing of
public safety channels could be achieved, estimating that 75 television broadcasting
stations would be affected.18
Expediting the Transition to Digital TV.19 In the Balanced Budget Act of
1997, Congress established 85% as the threshold for the percentage of households,
by market, that must be able to receive digital signals in order for the FCC to end the
licenses for analog, over-the-air broadcasting. In this scenario, the 15% that lacked
digital equipment would, presumably, quickly lose access to all television programs.
Congress is seeking to protect those households without DTV sets, digital-to-analog
converters, or cable or satellite set-top boxes from the loss of over-the-air television
broadcasts. In the interim, the FCC is taking concrete steps to facilitate the eventual
move to DTV with a number of technical requirements.20
15 FCC, Report to Congress in the Matter of Auction Reform Act of 2002, released June 19,
2003 (FCC 03-138).
16 An outline of the band-vacating plan proposed by a coalition of broadcasters, the
Spectrum Clearing Alliance, was submitted to the FCC on March 16, 2001 (Comments,
Docket No. 99-168.) Comments can be found by going to the FCC Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) on the FCC website [http://www.fcc.gov]. In ECFS, click “Search
for Filed Comments,” insert the docket number in the box marked “Proceeding,” and search
the file.
17 Comments and petitions filed for Proceeding 03-15 by New York State, Office for
Technology, Statewide Wireless Network, April 21, 2003 and White Paper, “700 MHz TV
Clearing, Its Impact on TV Viewership and Options for Accelerating Public Safety Access,”
Motorola, Inc., February 2, 2004, [http://motorola.com/cgiss/docs/700mhz_whitepaper.pdf].
Viewed June 29, 2005.
18 Testimony of Gary Grube, Chief Technology Officer, Motorola, Inc. at Hearing of Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, “Spectrum for Public Safety Users,”
September 8, 2004.
19 This report focuses on spectrum issues. For more information on DTV, see CRS Report
RL31260, Digital Televison: An Overview, by Lennard G. Kruger.
20 For example, “FCC Modifies Digital Tuner Requirements to Advance DTV Transition,”
June 9, 2005 and “DTV Channel Election Information and Deadlines,” October 7, 2004,
FCC News at [http://www.fcc.gov].
CRS-6
At the request of Congress, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is
preparing preliminary studies of the costs, under different scenarios, of providing
free set-top boxes to TV viewers who only receive analog television broadcasts.21 At
a hearing on February 17, 2005, Mark. L Goldstein, Director, Physical Infrastructure
Issues at GAO, and other panelists discussed various aspects of a conversion to DTV
and the possible use of converter boxes.22 According to an estimate by the GAO,
nearly 22 million households could lose their access to free television.23 Providing
affected households with converter boxes would enable them to continue to receive
broadcast television; the set-top converter boxes would receive the new, digital
signals and convert them to an analog format for viewing on older-model analog
TVs. The GAO estimated that the cost of providing converter boxes ranged from
$460 million to $10.6 billion, depending on the variables such as the cost of the box
and the number of households eligible to receive assistance.24 The cost of
administering the program, distributing boxes, and other ancillary costs are not
included in these estimates. At a hearing on May 26, 2005, GAO provided additional
testimony on the costs and technical obstacles associated with an expedited deadline
for ending analog television broadcasts.25
Proposals for Increasing Spectrum for Public Safety
The number of radio frequencies available for interoperable communications
capability can significantly impact first responder communications, and the range of
these frequencies can significantly impact the cost of equipment. Public safety
officials and planners are among those calling on Congress to allocate 30 MHZ of
additional spectrum at 700 MHZ to increase the efficiency of public safety
communications. The Spectrum Coalition for Public Safety is among those that has
asked for legislation that would allocate additional spectrum at 700 MHZ for use by
state and local first responders, critical infrastructure industries and federal public
safety agencies.26 Public safety communications equipment manufacturers are among
those that believe significant economies of scale might be achieved if similar
equipment on compatible spectrum is provided to a large block of like users. As
public safety users migrate to 700 MHZ, the need for costly equipment that patches
together incompatible systems and frequencies will be reduced. Consolidation of
public safety users at 800 MHZ might also increase economies of scale over time.
21 Already published are: Digital Broadcast Television Transition: Estimated Cost of
Supporting Set-Top Boxes to Help Advance the DTV Transition, GAO-05-258T, February
17, 2005; and Digital Broadcast Television Transition: Several Challenges Could Arise in
Administering a Subsidy Program for DTV Equipment, GAO-05-623T, May 26, 2005.
22 House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet, “The Role of Technology in Achieving a Hard
Deadline for the DTV Transition,” February 17, 2005.
23 GAO-05-258T, p. 3.
24 GAO-05-258T, pp. 14-15.
25 House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet, “Staff Discussion Draft of the DTV Transition Act
of 2005,” May 26, 2005.
26 Spectrum Coalition for Public Safety at [http://www.spectrumcoalition.org].
CRS-7
Funding public safety is a major concern of Congress. Appropriations bills are
not discussed in this report but are covered by other products from Congressional
Research Service.27 Beyond issues such as prioritizing and equity in grant
distributions, many within Congress and without are concerned about the long-term
implications of funding short-term communications solutions, such as cross-talk
equipment.28 As has been indicated in this report, decisions about spectrum
allocation and management influence choices about which wireless technologies to
use, and these decisions in turn impact the cost of communications equipment. Many
believe that the unavailability of spectrum at 700 MHZ is stalling advances in
technology and planning for new networks, thus adding to the short-term costs of
maintaining public safety communications.
New technologies that improve communications capacity are being introduced
almost continuously, but the need to provide suitable spectrum for a full range of
voice and data communications will persist. The need for greater spectral capacity
for public safety will grow with the number of participants in interoperable systems
and the amounts of information being shared on these systems. Bottlenecks in
communications are a problem that is already manifest among federal computer
networks and landline transmissions, and many believe it will worsen as more
information is pushed through. As emergency response units become more mobile,
demand for time-critical, wireless communications capacity will also increase.
Primary concerns of the proponents of providing additional spectrum for public
safety use are insufficient number of channels to support interoperability with federal
agencies and insufficient bandwidth for federal, state and local agencies to transmit
data at high speeds (broadband). Responding to these concerns, Congress included
in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act a requirement that the FCC
prepare a study on spectrum needs for public safety and homeland security.29
Legislation in the 109th Congress
Beginning with the 107th Congress, Representative Jane Harman has introduced
in each Congress legislation that would assure the timely release of radio channels
at 700 MHZ for public safety use. The Homeland Emergency Response Operations
Act, or HERO Act (H.R. 1646), reintroduced in April 2005, requires the FCC to
“take all actions necessary to complete assignments” for these channels so that
operations could begin no later than January 1, 2007, in line with the deadline
originally envisioned for the completion of the transition to DTV for all affected
channels.
27 For example, CRS Report RS21677, Office for Domestic Preparedness Grants for 2004:
State Allocation Fact Sheet; CRS Report RL32696, Fiscal Year 2005 Homeland Security
Grant Program: State Allocations and Issues for Congressional Oversight; and CRS Report
RS22050, FY2006 Appropriations for State and Local Homeland Security, all by Shawn
Reese.
28 For example, statements at Hearing of the House of Representatives, Committee on
Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Science and Technology,
“The Need for Grant Reform and The Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act
of 2005,” April 13, 2005.
29 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle E, Sec. 7502 (a). Due December 2005.
CRS-8
Other bills covering the release of spectrum and the transition to DTV have been
introduced or are planned. The Spectrum Availability for Emergency-response and
Law-enforcement to Improve Vital Emergency Services, or SAVE LIVES Act (S.
1268, Senator McCain) would specify a hard date of December 31, 200830 for the
release of spectrum held by broadcasters and would address issues of the transition
from analog to digital broadcast technology. Among the provisions of the bill are
several that respond to public safety communications needs. The bill would allow
spectrum auction proceeds from the sale of cleared analog spectrum to be allocated
directly to a grant program to improve communications interoperability for first
responders.31 Allowance is made for the possibility that Congress will ask the FCC
to allocate additional spectrum for public safety after it has considered the FCC
report on spectrum needs.32 To ensure that the FCC has the authority to conduct the
auction of the designated radio frequencies, the bill extends the auction authority of
the FCC until September 30, 2009;33 it is currently set to expire in September 2007.
The bill covers many aspects of concern in carrying out the transition to digital TV.
The bill, for example, establishes criteria for distributing set-top converter boxes34
and authorizes funds for the program.35 These funds will be paid out from revenue
generated by the auction of designated spectrum.36 Other provisions cover rules for
notifying consumers of the pending transition;37 provision of digital signals over
cable;38 and requirements for the FCC to complete certain pending proceedings that
impact the DTV transition.39
Senator McCain reportedly plans to work with Representative Joe Barton
(Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives) and
Senator Ted Stevens (Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, Senate) who are preparing, but have not introduced, bills covering
the release of spectrum and the transition to DTV.40 In the House, discussions of a
draft bill, have reportedly stalled over disagreement about subsidies for tuners,
among other issues.41 In the Senate, Senator Ted Stevens has announced his intention
30 S. 1268, Sec. 2 (a) (1).
31 S. 1268, Sec. 5 (f).
32 S. 1268, Sec. 3 (a) (2) “(II) (cc).”
33 S. 1268, Sec. 3 (b).
34 S. 1268, Sec. 4.
35 S. 1268, Sec. 4 (f).
36 S. 1268, Sec. 4 (f) (1).
37 S. 1268, Sec. 6.
38 S. 1268, Sec. 7.
39 S. 1268, Sec. 9.
40 “NAB Thwarting Return of Spectrum, McCain Says,” Communications Daily, June 15,
2005.
41 “House Leadership Concern over Subsidy Slows Barton DTV Bill,” Communications
Daily, June 16, 2005.
CRS-9
of introducing a comprehensive bill, possibly by the end of June 2005, that is
expected to resemble the bill that has been debated in the House.42
The Scope of the Debate. As Congress’s efforts to provide legislation that
will expedite the transition to digital television intensify, there seems to be a
concomitant increase in the number of stakeholders with an interest in the outcome.
The public safety community has long urged the timely release of spectrum at 700
MHZ that it needs for improved communications and interoperability.43 In April
2005 the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) drew a line in the sand by
refuting this assertion of need in a letter stating (inaccurately) that “... in the ten cities
most likely to be struck by a terrorist attack, the communications interoperability
issue has been resolved.”44 This uneven match between the broadcasting association
and a conglomerate of public safety associations and their supporters has been joined
by a third major contender, a recently formed coalition known as the High Tech DTV
Coalition.45 Coalition members have concluded that the release of spectrum at 700
MHZ will “spark growth in the U.S. high-tech sector,” especially the market for
advanced wireless services, a category that includes DTV broadcasting to next-
generation wireless phones and computers.46 They, too, have written to Congress to
press their point and urge the establishment of “an early date-certain” for the
transition.47 Other interested parties include the manufacturers of consumer
electronics — including companies that can gear up production of set-top converter
42 “Senate DTV Bill Closely Parallel To House Bill, Stevens Says,” Communications Daily,
June 7, 2005.
43 For example, letter to the Honorable Joe Barton, the Honorable John D. Dingell, the
Honorable Fred Upton and the Honorable Edward J. Markey from the Association of Public-
Safety Communications Officials-International; Congressional Fire Services Institute;
International Association of Chiefs of Police; International Association of Fire Chiefs;
Major Cities Chiefs Association; Major County Sheriffs’ Association; National Association
of Counties; National League of Cities; and National Sheriffs’ Association, May 5, 2005.
Also, comments made at panel discussion on first responder spectrum needs organized by
the Congressional Wireless Caucus, June 28, 2005.
44 Letter to the Honorable Joe Barton, the Honorable John D. Dingell, the Honorable Fred
Upton and the Honorable Edward J. Markey, from Edward O. Fritts, President and CEO,
National Association of Broadcasters, April 27, 2005. This statement was based on a
misinterpretation of a news story, as pointed out in a letter from public safety officials , May
5, 2005, noted above.
45 Members include Alcatel, Aloha Partners, AT&T, Dell, Cisco Systems, IBM, Intel,
Microsoft, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments and a number of associations. Source, Press Kit,
High Tech DTV Coalition, April 27, 2005.
46 “Analysis of an Accelerated Digital Television Transition,” prepared by the Analysis
Group, sponsored by Intel Corporation, May 31, 2005 at [http://www.itic.org/reports/DTV
%20Transition%20Report.pdf]. Viewed June 29, 2005. For a brief discussion of some of
the technologies, see CRS Report RS20993, Wireless Technology and Spectrum Demand:
Advanced Wireless Services.
47 For example, letters to the Honorable Joe Barton, the Honorable John D. Dingell, the
Honorable Fred Upton and the Honorable Edward J. Markey, and to Senators Ted Stevens
and Daniel K. Inouye, from the High Tech DTV Coalition, April 26, 2005.
CRS-10
boxes — and Congress, which reportedly is eyeing spectrum auction revenue48 as a
means of meeting its commitment to decrease the budget deficit.49 Spectrum
auctions of frequencies in the 700 MHZ band have typically been estimated at $20
billion to$30 billion;50 some estimates are higher, some lower. The revenue
potential is dependent on a number of factors, including timing of auctions and the
date at which spectrum will be cleared and available. In 2002, some frequencies at
700 MHZ that were (and still are) encumbered by broadcasters netted $88,651,630
for the U.S. Treasury.51
Provisions in the Intelligence Reform Act
Title VII, Subtitle E — Public Safety Spectrum, of the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, recognizes the merits of the arguments for
increasing the amount of spectrum at 700 MHZ available for public safety and
homeland security. It requires the FCC, in consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security and the NTIA, to conduct a study on the spectrum needs for
public safety, including the possibility of increasing the amount of spectrum at 700
MHZ.52 The same section of the act also instructs the Secretary of Homeland
Security to lead a study to “assess strategies that may be used to meet public safety
telecommunications needs.”53 The strategies study is to address the need for
nationwide interoperable communications networks, the capacity of public safety to
use wireless broadband applications, and the communications capabilities of “all
emergency response providers. . . .” The use of “commercial wireless technologies
to the greatest extent possible” is to be considered. Both the FCC and the Homeland
Security studies are to be submitted by year-end 2005.
Studies and other measures regarding interoperable communications are also
addressed in the act. Title VII, Subtitle C - National Preparedness, requires the
Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a program to enhance public safety
interoperable communications.54 Among the responsibilities of the program are the
development of a “comprehensive national approach to achieving public safety
interoperable communications.” Several of the specific requirements for the study
overlap those detailed in Subtitle E, Sec. 7502. Subtitle C requirements that are
closely connected to spectrum use include information on the life cycle and technical
48 Reportedly the House would use $4.7 billion of spectrum auction revenue to help meet
this goal, see, for example, “Spectrum.” by Drew Clark, National Journal’s Technology
Daily, PM Edition, June 28, 2005.
49 For the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, this represents $14,734,000,000 for
fiscal years 2006 through 2010; H. Con. Res 95, Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for
Fiscal Year 2006, Title II, Sec. 201 (a) (2) (C).
50 “Analysis of an Accelerated Digital Television Transition,” see footnote above, page 6.
51 “Lower 700 MHZ Band Auction Closes,” FCC Public Notice, DA 02-2323, September
20, 2002.
52 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle E, Sec. 7502 (a).
53 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle E, Sec. 7502 (b).
54 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle C, Sec. 7303 (a).
CRS-11
requirements of existing infrastructure;55 and the need for international, cross-border
interoperability.56 Another section in Subtitle C addresses communications support
for urban and other high risk areas specifically.57 There is also provision to establish
pilot projects in high threat urban areas or regions that might serve as a national
model for a strategic plan. Specifically the purpose of the pilots is to establish the
basis for a regional strategic plan that would foster interagency communications.58
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 conveys the
sense of Congress that the first session of the 109th Congress must act to establish a
comprehensive approach to the timely return of spectrum59 and that any delay in
doing this will delay planning by the public safety sector.60 The act, therefore,
proposes or requires a number of actions regarding public safety interoperability and
spectrum use within a specified time:
! Sense of Congress that it must pass legislation that resolves
spectrum release as part of the transition to digital television; first
session. (Sec. 7501.)
! Requirement for a study on spectrum for public safety and homeland
security; December 2005. (Sec. 7502.)
! Requirement for a study on strategies to meet interoperable
communications needs; December 2005. (Sec. 7502.)
! Requirement to establish a program to enhance public safety
interoperable communications; report on program, April 2005.
(Sec. 7303.)61
! Establishment by the President of a mechanism for coordinating
cross-border interoperability issues with Canada and Mexico; June
2006. (Sec. 7303.)
! Requirement to establish at least two pilot projects in high threat or
urban areas for interagency communications; March 2005. (Sec.
7303, Sec. 510.)62
55 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle C, Sec.7303 ( a) (1) (C) (i).
56 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle C, Sec.7303 ( a) (1) (D) (ii).
57 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle C, Sec.7303, ‘’Sec. 510.
58 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle C, Sec. 7304.
59 P.L. 108-458,Title VII, Subtitle E, Sec. 7501 (b) (1).
60 P.L. 108-458, Title VII, Subtitle E, Sec. 7501 (b) (2).
61 Responding to a CRS inquiry on status, DHS has indicated that the program is being
reviewed.
62 ibid
CRS-12
! Reports on interagency communications pilots; interim, June 2005;
final June 2006. (Sec. 7304.)
! Provision of funds for authorized program for interoperable
communications; fiscal years 2005 through 2009. (Sec. 7303.)
Related Actions by the Administration. On November 30, 2004,
President George W. Bush issued a memorandum to the heads of Executive
Departments and agencies regarding steps to be taken to improve the management
of spectrum assigned for federal use.63 Most of these steps are to implement
recommendations made by the Federal Government Spectrum Task Force in its
report to the President in June 2004.64 Among the deadlines provided in the
memorandum are two requirements related specifically to public safety. One
requirement is for the Secretary of Homeland Security to identify public safety
spectrum needs by June 2005. The Secretary is to work with the Secretary of
Commerce and, as needed, with the Chairman of the Federal Communications
Commission and representatives from the public safety community; state, local,
regional and tribal governments; and the private sector. Also, by year-end 2005, the
Secretary of Homeland Security is to lead the preparation of a Spectrum Needs Plan,
“to address issues related to communication spectrum used by the public safety
community, as well as the continuity of Government operations.” Concurrently, the
Secretary of Commerce is to develop a Federal Strategic Spectrum Plan.
63 “Presidential Determination: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and
Agencies,” November 30, 2004, Office of the Press Secretary, News & Policies, at
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/11/20041130-8.html]. (Viewed January
4, 2005.)
64 Spectrum Policy for the 21st Century: The President’s Spectrum Policy Initiative.