Technical Advisory
Committee on Broadcasting (B-TAC)
MINUTES OF THE THIRD MEETING OF 2001,
HELD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2001
ATTENDEES OF THE
SECOND MEETING OF 2001
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON BROADCASTING (B-TAC)
The third meeting of 2001, held on September 10, 2001, in Room 516D, 235, Queen=s Street, Ottawa.
Present were:
V. MimisBroadcast Planning and Technical
(A/Chairman)Policy
A. LamBroadcast Standards and Procedures (Secretary)
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
S. LamarreDelivery Technology
C. DemersDelivery Technology
Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission
A. LubienietzkyBroadcast Engineering Analysis
G. BerginBroadcast Technology
Broadcasters and Consultants
D. AllenD.E.M. Allen & Associates Ltd
F. HamelY.R. Hamel & Associates
M. BeausejourY.R. Hamel & Associates
P. LabarrePierre Labarre & Associates Ltd
D. MacaulayD. H. Macaulay Engineering
P. CahnConsultant
S. EdwardsRogers Broadcasting Ltd.
W. StaceyCAB / Wayne A .Stacey & Associates
B. DormerConsultant
J. FeltmateConsultant
B. SawyerAdvanced Transmission Solutions
E. BogdanowiczImagineering
Industry Canada
R.W. McCaughernDirector General
Spectrum Engineering Branch
G. ChouinardDBC/P
J. DadourianBroadcast Standards and Procedures
F. BouchardBroadcast Standards and Procedures
D. MacMillanBroadcast Planning and New Technology
P. VaccaniBroadcast Application Engineering
J. DexterBroadcast Application Engineering
K. MehtaBroadcast Application Engineering
M. DumasBroadcast Application Engineering
A LeducBroadcast Automated Systems
B. FarmerBroadcast Automated Systems
S. FaucherEngineering, Quebec Region
A. LeungEngineering, Ontario Region
P. VermaEngineering, Central Region
Transport Canada
Transport Canada
D. SimChief, CNS/ATM Systems
Standards (AARND)
NavCanada
B. WilkinsManager, Flight Inspection and
Radio Communication Engineering
S. VowlesEMC Specialist
H. Bertho Regional Manager,
Eastern Canada
- CHAIRMAN=S OPENING REMARKS
Mr. Mimis welcomed the members to the third meeting of 2001 and said that he would again be the acting-Chairman for this meeting.
- APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Allen proposed adding RSS 210’ as an item for discussion under Other Business=. The agenda was approved as suggested.
- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING OF 2001
The following changes were made to the draft minutes of the second meeting of 2001:
Section 3
Draft Minutes of the second meeting of 2001’
was changed to:
Draft Minutes of the first meeting of 2001’
Section 4
5th para:Mr. Vaccani reiterated that the Department would continue to use formsTC26 for broadcast applications.=
was changed to:
Mr. Vaccani reiterated that the Department would continue to use form TC26-0427 for broadcast applications.=
Section 6
1st para:He also indicated...... contour maps were now available...=
was changed to:
He also indicated....contour maps would be available...=
para 2 add:Mr. Labarre raised a number of questions regarding the contour maps, e.g.the frequency of updating the data, whether the interference zones would be included and in the case of AM, would the curves be compatible with the CRTC requirements, etc. In reply, Mr. Leduc said that the data would normally be updated every Tuesday and the data would include the interference zones when available. He further indicated that verification of the AM curves would be completed in the near future and the issue of CRTC compatibility would be addressed.=
The draft minutes were approved as amended.
- MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
The following items were addressed:
1)TSID
Mr. Dadourian explained the need and the use of TSID to identify a channel by TV receivers. He suggested that it would be jointly developed by the broadcasting industry and the Department. The broadcasting industry would develop a TSID allocation plan for all allotments and stations in Canada and the Department would apply the allocation for issuing licenses. He indicated that the ATSC had been asked to assign blocks of numbers for Canada before initiating discussion with the FCC on the subject. CDTV would be working with ATSC to assign a TSID block for Canada.
2)Electronic Form Transfer
Mr. Vaccani said that currently there were two broadcasting related forms available on the Department=s website. However, he indicated that twenty two (22) forms would still need to be completed to meet most broadcasting application needs. He proposed to pursue the matter through the government=s On-Line Initiative Program and to relate the importance of these forms for broadcast applications.
1)AM Switching
Mr. Mehta said that he had had discussions with his counterpart in the FCC on the subject. He was informed that the FCC was concerned that such a change may have an impact on small-time operators and may need a transition time for the changeover. Moreover, the FCC would like to formalize this change through an amendment to the US/Canada Agreement. Mr. Mimis suggested that the Department should review the content of the existing US/Canada Agreement in detail to see if an amendment was needed, otherwise the Department would simply inform the FCC that Canada intended to implement the change.
- STATUS REPORT
5.1Digital TV/DRB
Mr. Dadourian said that the ATSC planned to promote its digital TV standard as a panAmerican standard (North and South) at an upcoming PCC II meeting in November. Another item of interest was the publication of a policy paper on Ch. 60-69, entitled AProposal to introduce the mobile services on coprimary basis with the broadcasting services in the frequency band 746806 MHz”. He indicated that the RABC had set up a joint committee to address this issue and to present the views of the Broadcasting and Mobile industries to the Department. Mr. Mimis added that there would likely be further consultation with the affected industries before adopting a final policy decision on the subject. There was a brief discussion on the 2006 deadline for the all digital TV implementation plan. It was generally agreed that, based on current progress, it was doubtful that this deadline date could be met.
On the DRB front, Mr. Dadourian said that Germany recently announced that no analog radio license would be issued after 2015, even though authorities in many municipalities had already stopped issuing licenses for AM stations.
Mr. Dadourian also commented on the recent development regarding the Ibiquity System. He informed the members that Ibiquity System tests in 5U.S. cities were completed by the ATTC (Advanced Television Test Centre), and the results had been submitted to the NRSC for evaluation. He expected the NRSC to present its recommendations to the FCC in about 3month=s time and Canada would continue to monitor development in this regard.
5.2BPR Updates
Mr. Bouchard said that the Department had received some comments on the draft BPR3 and was currently reviewing them. He urged the members to forward any comments on the document to the Department as soon as possible before the publication of the final version.
5.3FM Interference Study Group
Mr. Lam reported to the members on the progress of the FM receiver tests. He said that after some difficulties in acquiring the necessary equipment for the tests, the measurement program finally started three weeks ago, and thus far, 4 of 15 receivers had been tested. He indicated that the results obtained to date were not encouraging with regard to the 2nd adjacent channel interference. He expected that the tests would be completed by the end of September 2001 for review by the sub-committee.
Mr. Mimis suggested that the study had two main objectives, firstly to address the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) capacity issue and secondly, a longer term goal of making changes to the BPR=s. He proposed that at the conclusion of the tests, a B-TAC ad-hoc group meeting should be called to deal with the GTA issue and at a later date, the sub-committee would continue to study for possible changes to the BPR=s.
5.4NavCanada Clearance Form
Mr. Sim said that since the last B-TAC meeting, a joint Transport Canada/NavCanada working group meeting was held to discuss the Land-use form issue, and it was agreed that a simplified procedure of a single input point contact to NavCanada and two separate feedback points from Transport Canada and NavCanada would be adopted in the future, subject to verification from Transport Canada=s Legal Services on matters of liabilities, etc. He indicated that until such time when this change in procedures could be implemented, existing procedures for form submissions, i.e. separate form submission to NavCanada and Transport Canada would remain. He further suggested that the eventual common form would likely be web-based, with paper versions available if requested and the submission of the forms through NavCanada regional offices. On a related issue, Mr. Sim informed the members that legislation was underway to require mandatory reporting of new installations to Transport Canada instead of the current practice of voluntary reporting.
Mr. Allen requested a clarification of the differences in responsibilities between Transport Canada and NavCanada regarding installations and obstructions. In response, Mr.Sim said that Transport Canada was responsible for all aviation safety matters, not only in and around aerodromes but also along flight paths. In the case of installations/obstructions, it may require the owners/operators to mark and/or light the structures. NavCanada too would be concerned with safety issues, e.g. by providing accurate information to pilots for navigation. However, it also had other business concerns including operational and procedural issues..
There was a brief discussion on the format of the common form and its submission procedures, e.g. e-filing or mail-in with attached maps, etc. Mr.Wilkins indicated that all submissions must be signed with all relevant information including mapping of the proposed installations. Mr. Vowles added that in time, there would be a standard procedure for both the Eastern and Western regions of Canada.
Mr. Allen raised a concern that NavCanada did not fully appreciate the economical impact on broadcasters when an application was delayed for reasons of implementing flight tests and/or equipment changes, etc. Mr. Wilkins commented that such delays are often related to regional engineering operations and sometimes lack of appreciation of the economic consequences to the applicants caused by the delay. Mr. Edwards stressed that it would be helpful for broadcasters and NavCanada to work together with clear links of communication to coordinate the work required.
Mr. Hamel raised the issue of site co-ordinates accuracy. He cited examples of towers with different co-ordinates from different sources. He suggested that either the Department or NavCanada should conduct an audit of the database for accuracy.
One suggestion put forward by Mr. Stacey was to require all tower owners to re-submit the coordinates to the Department for verification. It was agreed that the issue warranted further study and the Department would first conduct an internal review of the subject before proposing possible solutions for further discussion.
Mr. Vaccani took the occasion to inform the members that the FM/NavCom analysis software would be distributed to the members after the completion of tests on the latest Window= version. He also commented on the issue of FM/NavCom data differences between the Department and NavCanada. He said that an initial audit revealed some differences in a number of sites and the Department and NavCanada were cooperating to resolve this issue.
Mr. Edwards suggested that flexible approach and cooperation between broadcasters and NavCanada were keys in resolving application problems caused by such data differences.
Mr. Wilkins indicated that a NavCanada representative would attend future B-TAC meetings to help resolve broadcast application issues.
When Mr. Stacey inquired on the latest developing with regard to the ICAO recommendations for aeronautical receivers, Mr. Sim indicated that Transport Canada would implement the new standard on January1,2007.
5.5 Safety Code 6 Issues
Mr. Lam reported that the subcommittee met in the summer to discuss a standard Safety Code6 enforcement approach and decided that a legal opinion should be sought to clarify a number of issues. As a result, a number of questions were composed and sent to the Department=s Legal Services for interpretation. He indicated that the subcommittee would meet again when these interpretations were available in order to proceed further with its work.
Mr. Allen inquired if Labour Canada was involved in relation to Labour Safety. Dr. McCaughern commented that Safety Code6 enforcement was the responsibility of the provincial governments and the Department=s main concern was the Canadian general public. Mr. Mimis added that the purpose of the subcommittee was to harmonize Safety Code6 enforcement practices in all regions of Canada.
- RADIO BROADCASTING AND RELATED QUESTIONS
- Infomatics
Mr. Leduc elaborated on the issue of NavCom data differences. He said that the Department conducted a check on the NavCom data from NavCanada and identified some 100sites where the differences exceeded acceptable margins. He indicated that the Department and NavCanada would be cooperating to resolve this problem. On the subject of NavCom analysis software, Mr. Leduc suggested that testing of the Window version should last for about 4weeks, expected to be completed sometime in October. He further suggested that a training session to use the program may be beneficial to members and he proposed that a half-day training session be included in the schedule of the next BTAC meeting.
Mr. Allen raised the issue of data differences between the Department and the FCC, in that station information in the two databases sometimes did not match. Mr. Dumas said that the Department was usually notified by the FCC of new station applications and/or changes, but would have no information on their status should circumstances change. Moreover, the updating of the databases between the Department and the FCC was normally done once a year and therefore delay in updating the information could be as much as one year.
Ms. Lamarre inquired on the status of the digitized curves for DTV/NTSC analysis and the timing on the release of the official versions from the Department. Mr. Vaccani replied that the curves were available but awaiting coordination with the FCC before releasing them.
Mr. Leduc referred to the tabled document TAC-01-03, a proposed format for electronic submission of broadcasting contours. He asked for members= comments and suggestions on the proposed format for improvement.
- OTHER BUSINESS
- RSS-210
Mr. Allen referred to the section on payment for measurement. He was concerned that wordings in the document could be misinterpreted to suggest that the Department could impose payments for conducting spurious and other measurements before a station was allowed to go onair.
Mr. Mimis clarified that RSS-210 was only applicable to low power devices but not telecommunication equipment.
- DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The date of the next meeting will be on Tuesday, February 5, 2001.