ARCHIVED -  Decision CRTC 93-647

This page has been archived on the Web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.


Ottawa, 19 October 1993
Decision CRTC 93-647
Okanagan Radio Limited
Oliver and Penticton, British Columbia - 920465200
Addition of a transmitter
Pursuant to Public Notice CRTC 1993-88 dated 17 June 1993, the Commission approves the application to amend the broadcasting licence for the radio programming undertaking CJMG-FM (the originating station), by authorizing the licensee to add a transmitter at Oliver, operating on frequency 99.9 MHz (channel 260B) with an effective radiated power of 58 watts.
The transmitter will have an effective radiated power of 58 watts rather than 180 watts, as had been indicated in CRTC Public Notice 1993-88.
An intervention in opposition to this application was submitted by County Cablevision Ltd. (County), expressing concern that since KXLY-FM Spokane, Washington carries a strong signal on channel 260, the possibility of providing CJMG-FM programming to its subscribers was eliminated. In its reply, Okanagan expressed regret that County could not be accommodated and indicated that, on reviewing the anticipated coverage contours on the maps included in the application, it is unlikely that a satisfactory signal would be available in the Grand Forks area served by County, irrespective of the frequency chosen. The Commission is satisfied with the licensee's reply. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation also submitted an intervention opposing the applicant's choice of FM frequency, pointing out that the frequency in question is identified in the CBC Revised Long Range Radio Plan (the Plan). In its intervention, the CBC suggested that the licensee would have other channel alternatives that would not have an impact on the Plan.
In its reply, the licensee indicated that the frequency chosen was carefully selected from a list of available frequencies provided by the Department of Communications (DOC) and that considerable time and funds have been invested in preparing technical briefs based on this frequency. Okanagan also stressed its intent to implement this service in the immediate future, as opposed to the implementation schedule of the Plan.
The Commission has thoroughly examined the intervener's concerns as well as the licensee's reply to the CBC. The Commission notes that channel 260A was originally allotted to Keremeos for a future CBC station. However, the applicant has indicated its proposal to amend the Canadian FM Allotment Plan by adding channel 280A in Keremeos, thus providing an alternate channel for the CBC's use in the future. The Commission considers channel 280A to be an adequate replacement, and the Plan may be amended accordingly.
The DOC has advised the Commission that this application is condi- tionally technically acceptable, and that a Broadcasting Certificate will only be issued once it has been determined that the proposed tech-nical parameters will not create any unacceptable interference with aeronautical NAV/COM services.
In accordance with subsection 22(1) of the Broadcasting Act, the Commission will only issue the licence amendment and the authority granted herein may only be implemented, at such time as written notification is received from the DOC that its technical requirements have been met, and that a Broadcasting Certificate will be issued. This approval is also subject to the requirement that construction of the transmitting facilities be completed and that they be in operation within twelve months of the date of receipt of the DOC notification referred to in the preceding paragraph or, where the licensee applies to the Commission within this period and satisfies the Commission that it cannot complete implementation before the expiry of this period and that an extension is in the public interest, within such further period of time as is approved in writing by the Commission.
Should the Commission refuse to approve an extension of time requested by the licensee, the authority granted shall lapse and become null and void upon the ter-mination of the last approved extension period.
Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

Date modified: