1. The problem of providing for the future of Television in Canada resulted, as the first definitive action, in a meeting held in February 1948 in Washington. The purpose of this meeting was the drafting of an allocation plan for the assignment of television channels along the Canada-United States border. This first provisional plan was predicated on the best technical information available at that time but the engineers who were responsible for the negotiations were not altogether satisfied with the geographical separations provided by the plan. The Federal Communications Commission decided to investigate these technical aspects at greater length and initiated a series of television hearings. In the meantime the draft plan served to establish Canada's position with regard to future television allocations.

2. In the latter part of June 1949 a further meeting was held in Washington to discuss television channel allocations and the original draft plan was reviewed in the light of current technical knowledge. Consideration was given at that time to the possible use of ultra-high frequencies to augment the very limited number of very high frequency television channels. Although this meeting produced a revised plan, it was generally felt that this plan was merely an interim document subject to review when the status of the art had been better established.

3. In March 1951 a meeting was held in Ottawa and a plan drafted for both VHF and UHF which appeared to be consistent with the best technical information available and the known requirements of industry for television facilities. The United States procedure for handling these matters required, however, that the plan drafted by this meeting pass through what is known as the F.C.C. rule making procedure in which industry has an opportunity to comment. The hearings under the F.C.C. rule making procedure were closely followed by Canadian engineers so as to get the best possible information on the status of the art.

4. Upon conclusion of the F.C.C. hearings on television a further meeting was held in Chicago March 31st and April 1st, 1952, for the purpose of correlating the conclusions reached by the F.C.C. as a result of their hearings and the requirements of Canada for television service. In attendance at this meeting were Mr. P. Walker, Chairman F.C.C., Mr. R. Hyde, Commissioner, F.C.C., Mr. C. Plummer and Mr. H. Copperthwaite, F.C.C., Mr. Browne and Mr. Smith of the Department of Transport and Mr. Santo of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

5. The March 1951 allocation plan was found to be basically quite satisfactory with the exception of one or two minor changes affecting Canada. One of these changes involved the assignment of channel 12, formerly assigned to Chilliwack, B.C. to Bellingham, Washington, and the assignment of Channel 3 to Chilliwack. This change made no appreciable difference to the Canadian allocation picture but did allow for the assignment of one more channel in the Washington area. Two additional UHF channels, numbers 68 and 78 were obtained for the Hamilton area.

6. A number of changes in the United States picture were discussed but in practically all cases these changes had little or no effect on the Canadian allocation structure. In those cases where Canadian coverage would, in any way, be jeopardized, the Canadian delegation protested and the F.C.C. withdrew their proposals. In two cases, namely Wheeling, West Virginia and Green Bay, Wisconsin the proposed United States changes technically encroached somewhat on the coverage of future Canadian assignments but in each case the interference areas either lay outside of Canada or in unpopulated areas so the Canadian delegation agreed to these changes.

7. In view of the fact that Canada has at the present time no television stations in operation and only two under construction, i.e. Montreal and Toronto, and the United States have a large number of stations already in operation and have been active in this field for many years, it is felt that the drafting of a television allocation plan for the Canada-United States border area which assures the future of television in Canada, has been extremely worthwhile. The F.C.C. have been most co-operative in the preparation of this allocation plan and have also co-operated with Mexico in drafting a similar plan for the United States-Mexico border regions.

8. A draft text of an (U.S. draft) agreement between the United States and Canada for the assignment and utilization of television channels along the common border has been prepared and will, in due course, be sent through the diplomatic channels so that the document, the letters of transmittal and acknowledgment will form an exchange of notes between the respective Governments. A draft of the text is appended hereto.^?

9. Engineering recognition was given to the use of off-set carriers as a means of obtaining better service and minimizing inter-station interference. The actual off-sets are not indicated in the tables since these are primarily matters to be worked out by the allocation engineers as assignments are made. It is expected that many of the off-sets can be worked out in advance and it is the intention of the F.C.C. and our own engineers to get together in the near future towards this end.

10. It may be noted that the geographical separations in Canada between stations on the same and adjacent channels are somewhat greater than the corresponding separations in the United States. The reason for these differences is the fact that Canadian metropolitan centers are generally much farther apart and consequently much of the rural areas will obtain only fringe service, and it was felt that by keeping inter-station interference to an absolute minimum this fringe service could be made much more useful. Furthermore, it is doubtful if Canadian economics could stand the strain of establishing and operating the large number of TV stations contemplated in the United States planning. It therefore appears logical to arrange for the maximum possible exploitation of each Canadian assignment by keeping the geographical separations as wide as possible.

11. The F.C.C. are particularly anxious to obtain Canadian approval of this arrangement at technical level so that they may advise their industry. The long delays which have been necessary through the F.C.C. hearing procedures has caused considerable concern in the United States industry. Furthermore, it would be in Canada's interests to have our position established. It is therefore recommended that approval be obtained of the work done and the agreement reached as set forth in the appended documents so that the more formal ratification by exchange of notes can take place in due course. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation are in full accord with the details of this arrangement as set forth.

G.C.W. BROWNE