ARCHIVED -  Decision CRTC 99-48

This page has been archived on the Web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, 1 March 1999
Decision CRTC 99-48
Halton Cable Systems Inc.
Georgetown, Acton, Milton and surrounding area, Ontario - 199805454Part of Metropolitan Toronto, part of Mississauga, part of the Town of Milton, the City of Brampton and part of the Town of Caledon, Ontario - 199805462
Applications processed by
Public Notice CRTC 1998-101
dated 28 September 1998
The Commission approves the application by Halton Cable Systems Inc. (Halton) to change the authorized service area of the cable distribution undertaking serving Georgetown and area, by adding a small area to the south of the Town of Milton currently licensed to Rogers Cablesystems Limited (Rogers).
The Commission also approves Rogers' application to change the authorized service area of the cable distribution undertaking serving part of Metropolitan Toronto, part of Mississauga, part of the Town of Milton, the City of Brampton and part of the Town of Caledon (the Toronto-Peel cable system) by deleting a small area located south-west of the currently authorized service area.
The area being deleted by Rogers is the same as that being added by Halton.
Although the change in the authorized service area of Rogers' cable system could result in the deletion of CKCO-TV Kitchener, the Commission is satisfied that approval of the application will not have a significant impact on subscribers to this cable system or on CKCO-TV itself.
Discussion and interventions
1. Rogers currently carries CKCO-TV as a priority service as defined by the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations (the regulations). The applicant advised the Commission that, if approved, the proposed changes in the authorized service area of the Toronto-Peel cable undertaking would result in CKCO-TV's Grade A contour no longer falling within the boundaries of this system. CKCO-TV would, therefore, no longer have priority status as a priority signal as defined by the regulations. Accordingly, Rogers could delete CKCO-TV if it wishes to do so. At the same time, Rogers indicated that, except for local news inserts that originate in Kitchener, the programming offered on CKCO-TV is available on CFTO-TV Toronto, which is carried on the Toronto-Peel cable system.
2. Rogers further stated that, although the area in question has not yet been cabled, Halton already has a cable plant located immediately adjacent to this area as well as fibre optic feed running along the eastern boundary. Both Rogers and Halton claimed that households in this area have a close identity with the Town of Milton because they are situated close to the town centre. For these reasons, the applicants maintained that the area in question would be best served by Halton.
3. CTV Television Inc. (CTV), licensee of CKCO-TV, and three other interveners opposed Rogers' proposal because approval would result in the loss of CKCO-TV's signal on the Toronto-Peel cable system.
4. Rogers responded that it had advised its subscribers of its plans to delete CKCO-TV if this application were approved. The applicant stated that, while some customers expressed concern over losing the station, they were satisfied when they were informed that most of CKCO-TV's programming duplicates that carried by CFTO-TV Toronto, which they will continue to receive. Rogers further claimed that, based on its analyses of viewing patterns of its subscribers, CKCO-TV has a significantly lower share of audience viewing than does CFTO-TV.
5. Based on the evidence available to it, the Commission finds that 85% to 90% of the programming provided by CKCO-TV is the same as that offered by CFTO-TV. Moreover, the Commission finds that the level of viewing to CKCO-TV within the Toronto-Peel service area is a low percentage of the station's total viewing. Accordingly, the Commission is satisfied that approval of the application will have minimal impact on subscribers to the Toronto-Peel cable system or on CKCO-TV itself.
6. In its intervention, CTV also stated that, in September 1998, Rogers moved CKCO-TV from its longstanding location on channel 22 to channel 59. The intervener claimed that Rogers failed to provide 60 days prior notification of the channel alignment, as required by the regulations.
7. The Commission reminds Rogers of its obligation pursuant to section 26 of the regulations. Specifically, section 26 states:
If a licensee intends to change the channel on which a Canadian programming service is distributed, the licensee shall not implement the change unless, at least 60 days before the proposed effective date of the change, it sends a written notice indicating the intended date of the change and the channel number on which the programming service will be distributed, to each of the operators of the programming services whose channel placements will be affected by the proposed realignment.
Secretary General
This decision is to be appended to each licence.
This document is available in alternative format upon request, and may also be viewed at the following Internet site:

Date modified: