ARCHIVED -  Decision CRTC 85-90

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Decision

Ottawa, 13 February 1985
Decision CRTC 85-90
Western Approaches Limited, Vancouver, British Columbia - 840374300
At a public hearing in Victoria on 19 June 1984, the Commission considered an application by Western Approaches Limited (Western Approaches) to amend the broadcasting licence for CKVU-TV Vancouver by changing the transmitting channel from 21 to 10, and by decreasing the effective radiated power from 880,000 watts to 285,000 watts.
The Commission received an exceptionally large number of interventions, most of which were submitted by cable television subscribers in Vancouver, Victoria and the Sunshine Coast. They expressed concern regarding the use of channel 10, in particular its potential adverse impact on the technical ability of cable television undertakings in the region to continue to receive and distribute the programming of the U.S. Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) broadcast on channel 9 by KCTS-TV Seattle.
Due in large measure to the complexity of the technical issues raised at the hearing and the concerns expressed by the general public, a fact-finding meeting was held in Victoria in mid-October 1984 to assess the likely extent of the technical problems involved and the means available for their resolution. Participants at the meeting included representatives of the CRTC, Western Approaches, various area cable television licensees, the Department of Communications, the Canadian Satellite Communications Inc. (CANCOM) network, KCTS-TV, and four members of the public acting as observers. The minutes of this meeting, which were approved by all participants, were placed on the public file and a period of time was set aside to permit all parties to the original hearing to submit comments. A total of 27 comments and one petition were subsequently received by the Commission.
After careful consideration of all the factors related to the proposal by Western Approaches and the technical implications arising from the use of channel 10, the Commission has concluded that the important role played by the licensee as the broadcaster of a Canadian television service justifies the use of channel 10 by CKVU-TV and that approval of the proposal is in the public interest.
Accordingly, and for the reasons set out in more detail below, the Commission approves the application by Western Approaches to amend its broadcasting licence for CKVU-TV Vancouver by changing the transmitting channel from channel 21 to channel 10 and by decreasing the effective radiated power from 880,000 watts to 285,000 watts. Western Approaches' authority, however, may only be implemented at such time as the Commission notifies the licensee in writing that it is satisfied that (a) remedial measures have been taken to ensure no undue disruption of service to cable subscribers or (b) the cable television licensees concerned have had sufficient time to put such measures in place. The Commission calls on all parties to co-operate to ensure that appropriate remedial measures are implemented with minimum delay, well within a twenty-month period.
Based on the further information gathered at the October 1984 fact-finding meeting in Victoria, as published in the minutes of that meeting and as outlined in this decision, the Commission is satisfied that feasible and affordable solutions are available to overcome the technical problems arising from the use of channel 10, and that there will be no loss of either the KCTS-(channel 9) Seattle or KSTW (channel 11) Tacoma signals to cable subscribers in Vancouver, Victoria and Lower Mainland areas. In fact, under certain of the measures agreed upon, the quality of these signals could actually improve.
With respect to the cable system at Nanaimo, the Commission notes that the signal of KSTW is not receivable over-the-air, and the quality of KCTS-TV is poor. Both of these signals are receivable over-the-air on the Sunshine Coast but they are inconsistent in quality. Good quality signals of KCTS-TV and KSTW are readily receivable over-the-air by the cable system at Saltspring Island.
The Commission acknowledges that the CKVU-TV proposal would make continued over-the-air reception of the two U.S. signals impossible at each of these three locations. However, evidence given at the fact-finding meeting clearly indicated that affordable and effective technical measures are available to restore these signals as currently received at the head-ends of the cable system at Saltspring Island, Nanaimo and on the Sunshine Coast. Moreover, the Commission is satisfied that these measures would significantly improve the qualify of the signals, and could actually permit two of the affected cable television licensees to increase the range of services offered to their subscribers.
The Commission wishes to express its appreciation to the many residents of the area who intervened so effectively in the public hearing process, including those who acted as public observers at the Victoria fact finding meeting, for their interest in,and contribution to the proceedings. The volume of public interest generated by the CKVU-TV proposal was one of the largest to date. The extensive preparation undertaken prior to the October meeting and the cooperation shown, particularly by the cable television licensees concerned, were essential in identifying effective solutions to the expected technical problems. These solutions are dealt with in more detail below.
Background
Channel 10 was reserved for use in the Vancouver-Victoria area in 1952 and has remained in the Canadian Television Channel Allotment Plan since that time. It is the last remaining unlimited VHF channel available in this part of the country and is a scarce and valuable public resource. As such, the use of this frequency for the broadcast of a Canadian television service has never been in question. To a very great extent, the technical problems now expected to arise from its use were foreseeable, and would have occurred whenever the frequency was used.
The Commission first considered proposals for the use of channel 10 in 1973. Three applications were heard, each seeking to establish a third English-language television service in Vancouver. In Decision CRTC 73-398 these applications were denied on the grounds that none of the programming proposals had sufficiently recognized or developed the potential available in Vancouver to provide valuable cultural, educational and entertainment programming to that city.
Third English-language television service in Vancouver was subsequently approved in Decision CRTC 75-304. The Commission concluded that, of four competing applicants, the proposal by Western Approaches offered the best and most realistic possibilities for achieving the objectives realists outlined in the Commission's 1973 decision. Western Approaches had applied alternatively for channel 10, its first choice, or for channel 26. While Decision CRTC 75-304 authorized Western Approaches to transmit on channel 26, this was later changed to channel 21 in order to accommodate the technical requirements of the CBC for channel 26 to broadcast its French-language service in the Vancouver area.
In Decision CRTC 76-764, the Commission approved an application by the CBC for the use of channel 10 to broadcast its English-language television service in Victoria. The Corporation surrendered its licence in 1980, however, when it decided to rely on the combination of over-the-air reception and cable distribution of the signal of CBUT Vancouver to serve Victoria. As a consequence, channel 10 again became available for use in the area.
The Current Application
At the 19 June 1984 hearing, the licensee of CKVU-TV offered several arguments in support of its proposal to change the station's transmitting channel. It stressed the fact that channel 10 had been its preferred choice in 1975 because of the technical quality offered by that frequency and the advantages of VHF over UHF reception. It also stated that, while channel 10 had been available since 1980, it was only now in a sufficiently healthy financial position to make the $1.5 million expenditure necessary to effect the channel change.
According to the licensee's estimates, the change in the technical parameters associated with channel 10 will expand the station's contours and improve reception of the signal by an additional potential over-the-air audience of 180,000 viewers.
In the licensee's view the greater reach and improved quality of the CKVU-TV signal on channel 10 are essential in order to make CKVU-TV more competitive with local television stations, as well as with other new television services and forms of home entertainment such as video cassette recorders.
The licensee confirmed that it had examined possible alternatives to its proposal but had rejected these as being inferior. It noted specifically that, while an increased potential audience of approximately the same size could be reached by the construction of four additional UHF rebroadcasting transmitters, at a cost comparable to that of the proposed change to channel 10, the rebroadcasters would not provide the greater benefits associated with VHF reception. As a further consideration the licensee noted that, under its proposal, it would be able to continue to use its existing transmitter site on Saltspring Island, valued at approximately $2 million.
Interventions
The application by Western Approaches was the subject of some 19,440 letters of intervention, including petitions signed by approximately 3,230 individuals. Twenty-two of the interveners appeared at the hearing; among these were individual members of the public, elected municipal, provincial and federal representatives, consumer groups, local educational bodies, the licensees of cable systems serving Victoria, Nanaimo and the Sechelt Peninsula, and the Association of Lower Mainland Cable Operators representing several cable television licensees in the Vancouver area.
Virtually all of the interventions were directed to the technical implications of the CKVU-TV application, in particular, its potential impact on the continued ability of cable television licensees to receive and distribute the signals of two Washington State television stations which broadcast on channels adjacent to channel 10.
Greatest concern among the general public was expressed regarding the degree to which adjacent channel interference might affect the reception by cable television systems of KCTS-TV (PBS) Seattle which broadcasts on channel 9. A reliable channel 9 signal is not generally available over-the-air to the majority of television viewers in the Greater Vancouver area, who must rely on cable television to receive this distant signal. A good quality signal of KCTS-TV would normally be receivable over-the-air only within an eighty kilometer radius of Seattle, This recognised service area of KCTS-TV, as defined by its Grade B contour, lies some 100 kilemeters south of Vancouver, Nevertheless, the possibility that the popular, high-quality programming provided by this PBS station could be lost to cable television subscribers was the cause of great concern to area residents.
Interveners also questioned the costs that would have to be borne by cable television licensees, and ultimately their subscribers, to identify and implement the remedial measures necessary to overcome the expected technical interference. Some concern was also expressed with respect to the costs of moving the community programming service of many cable television systems from channel 10 to an unrestricted channel, and the possible degree of impairment that would be caused to any other broadcast service subsequently distributed on cable channel 10.
Following the Victoria hearing, the Commission reviewed the oral and written representations submitted in respect of the application by Western Approaches. Based on the evidence presented, it became apparent that the move by CKVU-TV from channel 21 to channel 10 would create significantly fewer potential problems for certain of the area's cable television licensees than for others. There was also indication that possible solutions to these problems were attainable. Given the relatively complex nature of the technical issues, however, the fact that they had not been fully discussed amongst the parties concerned prior to the public hearing, the willingness expressed at the hearing on the part of those involved to discuss the issues further, and the substantial concerns expressed by the general public, the Commission decided that additional information was required in order that it might render the best decision in the public interest, particularly for the television viewers and cable subscribers in the area.
Accordingly, in Public Notice CRTC 1984-236, the Commission announced plans for a fact-finding meeting in Victoria on 17 and 18 October 1984, involving participation by representatives of the CRTC, CKVU-TV, the Association of Lower Mainland Cable Operators, the Department of Communications, the CANCOM network, KCTS-TV (PBS) Seattle, and four members of the general public to act as observers. The Commission emphasized that the purpose of this fact-finding meeting was not to argue for or against the application by Western Approaches, but to consult further on the matters specified in the notice, all relating to the potential impact of the CKVU-TV proposal on television viewers and on the operations of cable systems in Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, the Victoria area, the Sechelt Peninsula, Saltspring Island and Vancouver Island north of Victoria.
Meeting to Discuss Technical Problems
At the two-day Victoria meeting, representatives of the cable television licensees serving Vancouver, the Lower Mainland and the Victoria area advised the Commission that effective remedial measures had been identified which would enable the continued over-the-air reception of good quality signals of KCTS-TV Seattle and KSTW Tacoma by all of the systems in those areas, with the exception of the system serving Saltspring Island,
The Commission was assured that the technical solutions, which essentially involve modifications to the head-end facilities of the cable undertakings, could be put in place well within a year's time and at reasonable cost. Representatives of the DOC confirmed that the solutions proposed by the cable licensees were practical and would allow continued and satisfactory reception of the two signals. It was also noted by representatives of Premier Cablesystems Ltd. (Rogers) that the Interior Cable Operators Association microwave signal would not be affected.
Western Approaches undertook to consult with the cable television licensees in developing the specifications for its channel 10 transmitter in order to ensure the maximum effectiveness of the modifications made to the cable television head-end facilities. In this regard, the Commission also expects the licensee to collaborate with the cable television operators on an ongoing basis with a view to minimizing any out-of-band radiation problems.
Representatives of the cable licensees serving Vancouver, the Lower Mainland and Victoria acknowledged that the use of channel 10 in the area would require a change in the channel used for the distribution of community programming, but expressed the view that, in many cases, channel 10 could still be used, with limited impairment, for the cable distribution of an optional service.
There was general agreement among these representatives to accommodate CKVU-TV's request that its signal continue to be distributed uniformly on cable channel 13. There was some discussion, however, that the channel 10 signal of CKVU-TV could be distributed on cable channel 10 with minimal impairment, as is currently the case with CHEK-TV Victoria which broadcasts on channel 6 and is also distributed on cable channel 6 in the area. The representative of the cable system serving Delta requested the option of distributing the signal of CKVU-TV on channel 10 if it were found to be preferable.
With regard to the foregoing, the Commission would expect cable licensees to ensure, in areas where channel 10 is impaired, that it be used for the distribution of an optional rather than a priority service, that the optional service so distributed be the one least popular with subscribers and that every effort be taken to minimize any impairment. In cases where impairment is severe, the Commission would be prepared to consider applications for the duplicate distribution of the impaired signal on the converter service as well.
While effective solutions to overcome the problems associated with the reception of KCTS-TV Seattle (channel 9) and KSTW Tacoma (channel 11) are readily available to the cable television systems in the Vancouver-Victoria area, it was clearly demonstrated that systems serving Saltspring Island, the Sechelt Peninsula and parts of Vancouver Island north of Victoria, which currently receive one or both of these signals over-the-air, would not be able to do so once CKVU-TV begins transmitting on channel 10. At the fact-finding meeting alternative means were explored whereby subscribers of the cable systems so affected could continue to receive PBS network service either via satellite or microwave.
The signal of the Detroit affiliate of the PBS network, currently distributed via satellite by the CANCOM network, was raised as one possible solution. CANCOM's representative stated that the Detroit-originated PBS programs would be attractive to viewers, particularly since the station provides a 24-hour service. CANCOM also offered to make the PBS Detroit signal available free of charge for two months to the smaller systems that would lose over-the-air reception of the KCTS-TV signal, provided the licensees of these systems conduct a market study acceptable to CANCOM to assess the level of subscriber satisfaction with the service.
This solution was generally viewed by the cable licensees as being unattractive to subscribers due to the time difference between Detroit and the West Coast. Several interveners had also opposed this alternative, noting that the Detroit PBS station did not offer the programming broadcast by KCTS-TV which is uniquely designed for the needs and interests of West Coast viewers.
The representative of the CANCOM network indicated that, as a second alternative, the KCTS-TV signal could be uplinked and made available to cable systems in British Columbia via satellite at a cost of approximately 17¢ per subscriber. This proposal, however, was contingent upon participation by all of the cable television systems in the province, and was rejected by spokesmen for the cable television licensees in Vancouver-Victoria as being much too expensive in comparison with the costs of providing the KCTS-TV signal to subscribers in the area by means of terrestrial microwave.
Rogers stated that its plans for a comprehensive microwave delivery system were already well advanced. These plans include the use of a recently-constructed head-end facility on Saltspring Island to receive a number of U.S. television signals, including KCTS-TV and KSTW, to be delivered via microwave to Vancouver and Victoria. Rogers estimated the cost of this project to be approximately $575,000, of which some $175,000 has already been spent to develop a head-end receiver facility on Saltspring Island, and noted that this expenditure had been a commitment it had assumed prior to the filing of the CKVU-TV application.
While Rogers agreed that approval of the CKVU-TV application would make it impossible to receive the signals of KCTS-TV and KSTW at the Saltspring Island head-end, it advised that additional microwave facilities to deliver these signals from the mainland to Saltspring Island, and then to Victoria, could be established at an estimated additional cost of $225,000. According to Rogers, the cost of this terrestrial microwave solution would be about one cent per Vancouver-Victoria subscriber per month.
In commenting on the Rogers proposal, representatives of the DOC indicated that it was acceptable in principle and foresaw no major licensing or policy problems which would preclude its implementation. While Rogers advised that it might require as much as 20 months to implement such a proposal, the Commission encourages Rogers to review this timetable in the interest of bringing the project to completion within the shortest feasible timeframe.
The commission views the Rogers proposal as offering the potential for the establishment of an excellent head-end and a microwave network, involving the participation of cable television licensees north of Victoria and on the Sechelt Peninsula on a shared-use, non-profit basis, whereby subscribers in these areas would have access to vastly improved services at reasonable cost.
In this regard, Shaw Cablesystems Ltd. of Nanaimo stated at the meeting that, while it does not currently have a contractual agreement with Rogers, it would be willing to consider participation in the microwave network once it is built. The Commission notes that Nanaimo subscribers currently receive a full complement of 3+1 U.S. signals over-the-air. According to the licensee, however, the quality of the KCTS-TV signal is marginal. Because of the distance involved, the KSTW Tacoma signal is not receivable over-the-air at Nanaimo. The Nanaimo licensee stated that Rogers' cost estimate of 40¢ per subscriber per month would be acceptable to Nanaimo subscribers to replace the 3+1 U.S. signals received over-the-air at Nanaimo by a reliable and high-quality package of microwave signals. Rogers confirmed that the microwave signals could also be made available to other cable television systems located north of Victoria on Vancouver Island.
The licensee of the cable system at Gibsons and Sechelt acknowledged at the meeting that the current over-the-air reception quality of KCTS-TV and KSTW was inconsistent and would be considerably improved through the use of microwave. It indicated that it was now examining a choice of two alternate technical methods for the microwave delivery of signals, but was currently uncertain which method would be used. These proposals would allow for the delivery of either two superior signals or a package of up to 36 signals of lesser quality. According to the licensee, either microwave method would cost approximately $1.10 per subscriber per month. The two-channel scheme, however, would allow superior technical quality and would permit the addition of further signals at a later date. It also stated that it would consider inviting the licensee of the cable system at Squamish to participate in the development of the system.
With respect to the small cable system serving the communities of Ganges and Fulford Harbour on Saltspring Island, it was agreed that substantial interference to over-the-air signal reception and distribution caused by the close proximity of the CKVU-TV transmitter would be unavoidable. Rogers stated at the Victoria meeting, however, that it would be prepared to make its package at U.S. television signals freely available to the Saltspring Island system. Rogers also stated that it will provide that system with the technical services at its disposal and will help with surplus equipment to improve the technical quality of the system.
For its part, Western Approaches made the following commitment:
 As the Saltspring Island cable head-end would sit very near our proposed new transmitter if our application is granted by the Commission, CKVU undertakes to contribute expertise and/or technical equipment and other material assistance to Rogers and the cable operator to help solve the cable problem on Saltspring.
The Commission expects the licensee of CKVU-TV to adhere fully to this important commitment, in co-operation with the Saltspring Island licensee, Rogers and the DOC, to ensure that Saltspring Island subscribers continue to receive an adequate quality of service. The Commission will monitor progress in this regard.
The Commission also underlines the importance it places on the collaboration operation of all parties concerned to ensure that the proposal by CKVU-TV, and the measures designed to overcome the technical difficulties it may create, are implemented with a minimum of delay and with the least possible inconvenience to cable television subscribers in the region.
Accordingly, Wastern Approaches' authority to change its transmitter channel form channel 21 to channel 10 and to decrease the effective radiated power from 880,00 watts to 285,000 watts may only be implemented at such time as the Commission notifies the licensee in writing that it is satisfied that (a) remedial measures have been taken to ensure no undue disruption of service to cable subscribers or (b) the cable television licensees concerned have had sufficient time to put such measures in place. The Commission calls on all parties to co-operate to ensure that appropriate remedial measures are implemented with minimum delay, well within a twenty-month period.
The Commission requests Western Approaches, Rogers and the Association Association of Lower Mainland Cable Operators to submit progress reports every four months from the date of this decision on the steps taken towards such implementation and will review developments made in this regard at the time of CKVU-TV's licence renewal. The Commission notes that this licence expires on 30 September 1985.
The Commission is aware that the financial cost of the technical solutions discussed at the Victoria meeting will inevitably be greater at some locations than at others. It is equally aware of the concerns of some viewers in the area who are not cable subscribers and receive the KCTS-TV signal over-the-air, but who may no longer be able to do so as a consequence of this decision.
In this regard, the Commission notes the statement by representatives of KCTS-TV at the meeting, that their responsibility is to provide a programming service only to those viewers inside the station's Grade B contour, which falls well within the State of Washington. KCTS-TV advised that, outside the Grade B contour, the quality of its signal would vary considerably depending on time and location, and is at present subject to interference from the adjacent channel 8 signal of CHAN-TV Vancouver.
KCTS-TV further advised that in 1980 it had considered the establishment of a rebroadcasting station at the Orcas Island transmission site of KVOS-TV Bellingham to serve Bellingham and northwest Washington State. The Commission notes that the signal of such a rebroadcasting station would have been receivable throughout the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, Victoria and the Georgia Strait with a high degree of reliability. KCTS-TV stated, however, that due to financial constraints, it was unable to go forward with the project.
After consideration of all of the foregoing, including the fact that the use of channel 10 in the Vancouver area for the broadcast of a Canadian service was foreseeable, and that the proposal by CKVU-TV constitutes an effective use of that frequency, the Commission is convinced that approval of this application is in the public interest, The Commission also considers that some of the technical solutions proposed, although involving some cost, present the opportunity through a cooperative approach of significantly improving the quality of signals enjoyed by many subscribers in the region.
The Commission wishes to thank all the participants for their cooperation throughout the proceedings on this application. The solutions proposed are evidence of all sectors of the broadcasting system working together to resolve difficult issues in the public interest. The Commission also acknowledges the briefs submitted to it following the Victoria fact-finding meeting.
Fernand Bélisle
Secretary General

Date modified: