SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This is a summary of the Commission's Closed Captioning of Video Programming; Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc.; Delete, Delete, Delete, Report and Order ( Order) in CG Docket No. 05-231 and GN Docket No. 25-133, document FCC 26-57, adopted on August 21, 2026, and released on August 25, 2026. The full text of this document is available online at www.fcc.gov/​document/​fcc-amends-closed-captioning-rules-video-programmers.

Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis: The Order contains modified information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, will invite the general public to comment on the information collection requirements contained in the Order, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. The Commission will publish a separate document in the Federal Register announcing approval of the information collection requirements. In addition, the Commission notes that pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002 (SBA), Public Law 107-198, it previously sought specific comment on how the Commission might further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. 89 FR 63135, August 2, 2024.

Congressional Review Act: The Commission has determined, and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), concurs, that this rule is “non-major” under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission sent a copy of the Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Synopsis

1. Section 713 of the Communications Act (the Act) directs the Commission to ensure that video programming is fully accessible through the provision of closed captioning. 47 U.S.C. 613(b). All new, non-exempt English- and Spanish-language video programming, and 75 percent of non-exempt pre-rule video programming, must be captioned. Video programming or a video programming provider is exempt from the Commission's captioning rules if it (1) falls into one of twelve categorical, i.e., self-implementing, exemptions, or (2) the provider has been granted an individual exemption from the closed captioning obligations after showing that providing captions would be economically burdensome. Captioning exemptions may apply on a channel-wide or program-by-program basis.

2. The Commission initially assigned primary responsibility for the provision of closed captioning on television programming to video programming distributors (VPDs). In 2014, the Commission amended its television captioning rules to add requirements governing the quality of captions. The Commission allows a VPD to satisfy in part its obligations under the captioning quality rules by ensuring that each video programmer whose programming it carries has certified its compliance with the Commission's closed captioning rules. Pending the implementation of caption quality certifications by video programmers, VPDs are required to use “best efforts” to obtain certifications of caption quality compliance from their programming suppliers.

3. In 2016, the Commission took further steps of: placing captioning obligations on video programmers, as well as VPDs; and apportioning responsibility for caption quality between VPDs and video programmers. In addition, to ensure that video programmers can be held accountable for satisfying their captioning obligations, the Commission adopted requirements for each video programmer to register with the Commission and certify compliance with the captioning rules. Video programmers are required to register and submit certifications of compliance to the Commission once a compliance date is published in the Federal Register .

4. A petition filed in August 2016, requested that the closed captioning registration and certification requirements be waived for program producers that provide programs exclusively to PEG channels. PEG channels are authorized by section 611 of the Act, which permits cable franchising authorities to “establish requirements in a franchise with respect to designation or use of channel capacity for public, educational, or governmental use.” PEG programming is provided by more than 1.2 million volunteers and more than 250,000 community groups across the United States, including “ordinary citizens and organizations—Cub Scouts, gospel choirs, political candidates, and community groups of every possible type,” and the vast majority of PEG channels are exempt from the Commission's captioning rules.

5. In comments on the Petition, a commenter raised related concerns as to the need for owners of programs included in linear program networks distributed by MVPDs to register and certify compliance with the captioning rules. The programmer certification requirement was intended to address a potential gap in captioning responsibility in cases where owners of video programming may distribute programming to third parties; and no such gap arises when the non-broadcast network itself certifies compliance with the captioning rules.

6. In July 2024, the Commission released a Further Notice of Proposed ( printed page 67221) Rulemaking ( PEG FNPRM), published at 89 FR 63135, August 2, 2024, proposing that the filing requirements under the closed captioning and certification rules would not apply to video programmers that provide video programming exclusively to a PEG channel for which the channel administrator certifies that the channel is exempt from the closed captioning requirements. In addition, the Commission proposed that captioning registration and certifications shall not apply to programming carried on nonbroadcast networks for distribution by a cable operator or other MVPD, if the network itself certifies that it is exempt or that all programming comprising the network's linear line-up is either exempt from or compliant with the closed caption rules.

7. Registration and Certification—PEG Channels. The Commission amends its rules to provide that video programmers providing programming exclusively to PEG channels are not required to register with the Commission and file certifications of compliance if the PEG channel administrators certify that the entire channels are exempt. Requiring each of thousands of individual video programmers to certify to the same exemptions claimed by their channel administrators imposes duplicative and needlessly burdensome paperwork. Where the PEG channel administrator files the required contact information and a certification attesting to the channel's exemption from the captioning rules, consumers will have access to the information intended by the certification requirement, and the Commission will have sufficient documentation to ensure accountability for compliance with its rules.

8. The record indicates that it is reasonable to expect that the administrators of most exempt PEG channels can certify that the channel is exempt. In instances where a channel administrator does not register and certify, individual video programmers are obligated to comply with the registration and certification requirements.

9. The Commission further amends the captioning rule to provide that, if a PEG channel is not entirely exempt, video programmers on that channel are not required to register and certify compliance if the channel administrator certifies that all programming carried on the channel is either compliant or exempt. Although it seems that there are few, if any, non-exempt PEG channels, the Commission concludes that the same rationale for allowing administrators to certify for exempt PEG channels is applicable to non-exempt channels— i.e., to the extent that the administrator can certify on behalf of the entire channel, such certification will avoid imposing needless, duplicative paperwork on video programmers. In instances where a channel administrator does not register and certify, individual video programmers retain their obligations to comply with the registration and certification requirements.

10. These rule changes do not alter any video programmer's substantive captioning obligations. Programming that is exempt from captioning will continue to be exempt, and providers of non-exempt programming will continue to be required to provide captioning. The amended rules also do not change the requirement that certifications of compliance or exemption be filed for all programming carried on PEG channels. They merely minimize unnecessary and duplicative paperwork. By ensuring that neither PEG programmers nor agency staff are burdened with unnecessary paperwork, the Commission makes implementation of the rules more efficient, and thereby advance the Commission's overarching goal of ensuring that all non-exempt programming is captioned in compliance with the Commission's standards. Therefore, the Commission finds today's action to be fully consistent with the Commission's longstanding commitment to ensure the accessibility of video programming through the provision of closed captioning.

11. Nonbroadcast Network Programming. Under the Commission's captioning rules, nonbroadcast networks are “video programmers” and must register with the Commission and annually certify either that the network itself is exempt or that each of the programs comprising its channel line-up is compliant with (or exempt from) the captioning rules. In light of these existing registration and certification requirements for nonbroadcast networks, the Commission concludes that it would be unnecessarily duplicative for potentially thousands of program owners that supply programming exclusively to nonbroadcast networks to also register and file annual certifications with the Commission for the same programming addressed in the networks' filings.

12. To alleviate this burden, the Commission amends its rules to provide that closed captioning registration and certification requirements will not apply to video programmers that provide or license video programming exclusively to a nonbroadcast network for distribution by a cable operator or other MVPD, if the network has registered and filed a certification with the Commission confirming that either the network itself is exempt or all programming comprising its linear line-up is compliant with or exempt from captioning obligations. However, if a nonbroadcast network does not file a certification, each video programmer that provides programming on such network will remain subject to the registration and certification requirements. Nonbroadcast networks “often employ contractual provisions or other mechanisms to hold their suppliers ( i.e., program owners) accountable for working with the network to ensure captioning compliance.” The Commission clarifies that the rules adopted in the Order are not intended to disturb or interfere with any agreements between programming owners and nonbroadcast networks to ensure captioning compliance.

13. The Commission directs the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB or Bureau), pursuant to its delegated authority to oversee the development of a certification and registration form and database, to consider ways to minimize the burden for providers, including providers that control multiple program networks, to submit their registration and certification information in accordance with its obligations under the PRA and the SBA.

A commenter asks the Commission to declare that any procedural matters affecting MVPDs should equally apply to virtual MVPDs (vMVPDs). This is beyond the scope of this proceeding, which concerns the Commission's registration and certification requirements related to closed captioning of televised video programming. In the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, Congress established separate guidelines for traditional television distribution and IP-delivered video programming. The Commission therefore declines to consider this request here.

14. Costs and Benefits. Thousands of video programmers provide programming to PEG channels and nonbroadcast networks. Under current rules, once the Commission sets up its database to accept their filings, these programmers must provide contact information and certify that their programming is compliant with the closed captioning rules or exempt from them each year. The Order amends the closed captioning rules so that such programmers need not file this information if the PEG channel administrator or nonbroadcast network itself registers its contact information ( printed page 67222) and certifies channel-wide exemption from or compliance with the closed captioning rules. Because nonbroadcast networks are already required to file this information and certification, the Commission expects they will do so and individual nonbroadcast network programmers will not need to file with the Commission.

15. Further, following this rule change, the Commission expects that PEG channel administrators will provide the information and certification for the entire channel so that individual PEG video programmers will not need to file with the Commission. Making these assumptions, the Commission estimates that about 290,000 programmers would save about 30 minutes of time per year. Using a value of time of about $17 per hour, the Commission estimates that this would save $2.43 million annually. PEG channel administrators, however, would incur the cost of filing contact information and certifying compliance with, or exemption from, the closed captioning rules.

16. The Commission estimates that about 1,700 channel administrators would be required to file contact information and make a certification. Because the Commission expects nearly all PEG channels are exempt from the closed captioning requirements, the Commission expects this will take about 30 minutes annually and will therefore cost about $14,238. Therefore, the net cost savings from this rule change are expected to be $2.41 million. This change is not expected to affect the quality of closed captioning because providers of non-exempt programming would be relieved only from filing requirements, not the underlying obligation to provide captioning in accordance with quality standards.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

17. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, the Commission incorporated an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) in its PEG FNPRM, released in July 2024. The Commission sought written public comment on the proposals on the IRFA. No comments were filed addressing the IRFA.

Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules

18. In the Order, the Commission modifies the video programmer registration and certification requirements, exempting video programmers that provide video programming exclusively to PEG channels that are exempt from the provision of closed captioning pursuant to § 79.1(d) or (f) of the Commission's rules or certify compliance with, or exemption from, the closed captioning obligations for all programming shown over the PEG channel itself; or provide or license video programming to nonbroadcast networks for distribution by a cable operator or other MVPD, to the extent that such networks certify that the network itself is exempt or certify compliance with, or exemption from, the closed captioning obligations for all programming comprising the network's linear line-up. The Order also ensures that captioning registration and certification requirements do not apply to video programmers with programs carried on non-exempt PEG channels to the extent the channel administrator has the ability to certify that all programming carried on the channel is either compliant or exempt. The revised rules will relieve providers of video programming to cable or other multichannel systems from the obligation to register with the Commission and to certify captioning compliance if the relevant certification has been filed by another competent entity.

Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to the IRFA

19. No comments were filed addressing the impact of the proposed rules on small entities.

Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for the Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy

20. The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rules Will Apply

21. The rules adopted in the Order will apply to small entities in the industries identified in the chart below by their six-digit North American Industry Classification System codes and corresponding SBA size standard. Where available, the Commission also provides additional information regarding the number of potentially affected entities in the identified industries below.

Description of Economic Impact and Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

22. The rule changes in the Order will alleviate registration and certification administrative burdens for the likely thousands of operators of PEG channels run by small organizations that are exempt from the Commission's close captioning rules. The Commission expects that small entities will experience cost-savings as a result of these changes. The Commission estimates that about 290,000 programmers will save about 30 minutes of time per year. Using a value of time of about $17 per hour, the Commission estimates that this would save $2.43 million annually. PEG channel administrators, however, would incur ( printed page 67223) the cost of filing contact information and certifying compliance with or exemption from the closed captioning rules. The Commission estimates that about 1,700 channel administrators would be required to file contact information and make a certification. Because the Commission expects nearly all PEG channels are exempt from the closed captioning requirements, the Commission expects this will take about 30 minutes annually and will therefore cost about $14,238. Therefore, the net cost savings from this rule change are expected to be $2.41 million.

Discussion of Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

23. In amending the Commission's closed captioning rules, the Commission believes that the rule changes associated with the Order will not unduly burden, and will in fact reduce regulatory burdens for small entities. By amending the rules to not apply the registration and certification requirements to those video programmers that provide video programming exclusively to PEG access channels that are exempt from the provision of closed captioning or certify compliance with, or exemption from, the closed captioning obligations for all programming shown over the PEG channel itself; provide video programming to non-exempt PEG access channels to the extent the channel administrator has the ability to certify that all programming carried on the channel is either compliant or exempt; or provide or license video programming to nonbroadcast networks for distribution by a cable operator or other MVPD, to the extent that such networks certify compliance with, or exemption from, the closed captioning obligations for all programming comprising the network's linear line-up, or certify that the network itself is exempt, the Commission relieves many entities, including small entities, from this reporting requirement.

24. The Commission considered comments expressing concern that the certification and registration reforms may require more stringent oversight mechanisms, but concluded that, so long as the PEG channel administrator files the required contact information and a certification attesting to the channel's exemption from the captioning rules, consumers will have access to the information intended by the certification requirement, and that the Commission will have sufficient documentation to ensure accountability for compliance with its rules, with no undue burdens imposed on small entities in the process.

25. The Commission sought comment on the feasibility of channel administrators for non-exempt PEG channels to certify that their channels programming is either compliant or exempt. While there was no directly apposite response in the record, the Commission concluded that it was appropriate to allow such channels to certify as described above, because, to the extent such scenarios do exist, allowing this option poses the prospect of reducing burdens on small entities, and does not in any other respect appear to impose burdens on small entities.

26. The Commission will ensure that companies offering multiple program networks can register once and then certify those networks as a group, provided the certification lists each program network to which the certification applies. It will be more efficient and less administratively burdensome to create an avenue for such bulk processing in the registration and certification process, eliminating unnecessary paperwork in the process. To the extent that there are small non-profits that run multiple PEG program networks or related scenarios, this may stand to reduce burdens on small entities, and does not in any other respect appear to impose burdens on small entities.

Ordering Clauses

27. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r) and 713 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), 613, the Order is adopted, and the Commission's rules are amended.

28. The Order shall be effective November 25, 2026, except for amendments to § 79.1(i)(4) and (m)(6) which contains modified information collection requirements, and will not become effective until OMB completes review of any information collections that CGB determines is required under PRA.

29. The Commission will announce the effective date for § 79.1(i)(4), and (m)(6) by notice in the Federal Register and by subsequent Public Notice.

30. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r) and 713 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), 613, the Petition for Waiver of Registration and Certification Requirement filed by ACM on August 26, 2016, in CG Docket No. 05-231 is dismissed as moot.

31. The Commission's Office of the Secretary, shall send a copy of the Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for the SBA Office of Advocacy.

32. The Office of the Managing Director, Performance Program Management, SENT a copy of the Order in a report to Congress and to the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Final Rules

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 79 as follows:

91 FR 67220