WPCf$ 2HBVX@Z3|x (TT)y.C8*XC\  P6QP"5@^*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ*7777CE7SSxJxJxJxJxJooJfJfJfJfJ7.7.7.7.xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxJxSxSxSxSxS]SxSxJxJoJoJoJfJfJfJxSxSxxSxSxSxSCS7S777SAxSf.fExSxSxSxo7oE]A]AN:*LS7JSSSSS.4}}S2S}277JJS77SS7J72t7[[[[^ee*C`^.wRSSn[Cfx`xWlRx[][ceIfIs`Wx[rriwge*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ7SJSS7]777JJ:S7A7xx*7SSSS!S7.S^7SC[227`L*724S}}}Jxxxxxxoffff7777xxxxxxx^xxxxxx]SJJJJJJoJJJJJ....SSSSSSS[SSSSSSSHP LaserJet 4/4MtScript ROOM 224HPLAS4.WRSSC\  P6Q,,PP2);z Z  yO-#C\  P6QP#3|xHP LaserJet 4/4MtScript ROOM 224HPLAS4.WRSSx  @,,PX@2@[o@ \J "5@^;B\ddBBBdBBBBddddddddddBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBdddYdYdYBdd77d7ddddJM7ddddYYdYDZBdd!dddRdddYYYYYY}Y}Y}Y}YB7B7B7B7ddddddddddYdddddrddddYdd}d}d}dddddddddddddBddd}7}RdddJRkMkMNdBddBYQQddddddFdddFBBggd44ddzBgBFtBnnyy2do7cQQnCzohcnonvyXzXshn~|yxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;B\ddBBBdBBBBddddddddddBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBdddYdYdYBdd77d7ddddJM7ddddYYdYxxBdgdddk4xxxxBBggdddzM4xx;BdddddddddQBdddFFdodBdFdQY}}}}BBBBrdYYYYYYYYYYY7777ddddddddddddddCourier New (TT)Courier New (Bold) (TT)Courier (W1)Courier (W1) (Bold)CG Times (W1)CG Times (W1) (Bold)"5@^;B\ddBBBdBBBBddddddddddBBDZdzM`zoǐBBBddddoYoYFdo7Bo7odooYMBodddYdddDZBdd!dddRddodddddϐYYYYYM7M7M7M7oddddooooddoddddzodddYdddddddddoodododdModo7RoodᔐYYoMoMNdBddBdUUddddddFdddFBBrrd44ddzBrBFtBnnyy2do7cUUnCzohcnonvyXzXshn~|yxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;B\ddBBBdBBBBddddddddddBBDZdzM`zoǐBBBddddoYoYFdo7Bo7odooYMBodddYdddxxBdrdddo4xxxxBBrrdddzM4xx;BdddddddddUBdddFFdodBdFdUdϐMMMMzoddddddYYYYY7777doddddddoooodo?xxxX/Xx6X@DQX@6?xxxXXx `NQXhOmmmX+6&mRg@Q&@hOmmmX8&mRg`Q&rVwwwX+PXwRg@QX@rVwwwX8qXwRg`QXBRC;XL6MXR  P7jQXP>WC;XZXW  p7sQXPbPGXLb  P7jQP JhPGXZ%gh  p7sQ2^ ^6R @"H^^GPoxxPPPxPPPPxxxxxxxxxxPPjP]PPPxxxjxjxjPxxBBxBxxxxX]BxxxxjjxjPxx(xxxcxxxjjjjjjjjjjPBPBPBPBxxxxxxxxxxjxxxxxxxxxjxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxPxxxBcxxxXc]]NxPxxPjaaxxxxxxTxxxTPP||x>>xxP| PTtP<xBvaaC}vii}GPoxxPPPxPPPPxxxxxxxxxxPPjP]PPPxxxjxjxjPxxBBxBxxxxX]BxxxxjjxjPx|xxx >PP||xxx]>GPxxxxxxxxxaPxxxTTxxPxTxajPPPPxjjjjjjjjjjjBBBBxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"H^^GPoxxPPPxPPPPxxxxxxxxxxPPx]sPPPxxxxjjTxBPBxj]PxxxjxxxPxx(xxxcxxxxxxxjjjjj]B]B]B]Bxxxxxxxxxxxxxjxxxxxxxxxxxxx]xBcxjj]]NxPxxPxffxxxxxxTxxxTPPx>>xxPPTtP<xBvffC}vii}GPoxxPPPxPPPPxxxxxxxxxxPPx]sPPPxxxxjjTxBPBxj]PxxxjxxxPxxxx>PPxxx]>GPxxxxxxxxxfPxxxTTxxPxTxfx]]]]xxxxxxjjjjjBBBBxxxxxxxx"5@^#(7<>(*t(jBBjjvHH}j<<<@jHHHH((>><WC;XZXW  p7sQXPbPGXLb  P7jQP JhPGXZ%gh  p7sQP(1(#XL5h1  P7jQhPk}BBBdddYdYdYBdd77d7ddddJM7ddddYYdYDZBdd!dddRdddYYYYYY}Y}Y}YB7B7B7B7ddddddddddYdddddrddddYdd}d}d}ddd hO-   #&mRg@Q6&@#  hO-$// MO&O New ITFS Station Montrose, SD (DChannels) FCC 94311 //$l à  hOn- $/ 74.913 Selection Procedure For Mutually Exclusive ITFS applica /$  hO%-$/ 74.932 Eligibility and Licensing Requirements /$ #Xx6X@DQ/X@# ///newjob/// $///FCC 94311,12/15/94///$  V <?#XwRg@QPX@#Before the A Federal Communications Commission FWashington, DC 20554  ? <#Xx6X@DQ/X@#  ?S < (#(# ? <` `  hh,Vpp FCC 94311  _ -#XR  P7jQ6MXP#  c-   In re Applications of hh,V) ` `  hh,V)  c- MONTROSE SCHOOL DISTRICT #432 )ppFile No. BPLIF920320DM  c-Montrose, South Dakotahh,V) ` `  hh,V)  c]- OLDHAMRAMONA SCHOOL hh,V)ppFile No. BPLIF930219ED  cJ- DISTRICT #395 hh,V)  c7-Colman, South Dakota hh,V) ` `  hh,V)  c -For Construction Permit and License in the)  c-Instructional Television Fixed Service onV)  c-Channels D1D4 hh,V)  _-  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER lU Adopted: December 8, 1994 Released: December 20, 1994 By the Commission: 1. The Commission has before it for consideration the abovecaptioned mutually exclusive applications of Montrose School District #432 (Montrose) and OldhamRamona School District #395 (Oldham), each seeking a construction permit and license in the Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) on Channels D1D4 in the areas of Montrose and Colman, South Dakota, respectively. ]1BASIC ELIGIBILITY 2. Before applying the mutually exclusive selection procedure to determine the number of merit points to be awarded to each applicant, we must first ascertain the basic"=)0*0*0*," eligibility of the applicants. Educational institutions and governmental organizations that"(0*0*0*+" propose to serve either their own enrolled students or students at accredited schools within"(0*0*0*+" their respective jurisdictions establish their eligibility by accreditation from the appropriate"(0*0*0*+" state department of education or a recognized regional or national accrediting organization. "(0*0*0*+" Other ITFS applicants that propose to serve students at accredited schools outside of their respective jurisdictions must, to be eligible, submit letters of intended use from those schools and establish local program committees in those communities. See 47 C.F.R. Section 74.932(a)(1)(5). Both applicants are qualified to be ITFS licensees. Both Montrose and Oldham are school districts accredited by the South Dakota State Board of Education and are applying to provide ITFS service to students enrolled at schools within their jurisdictions.  cH-@  MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE SELECTION PROCEDURE ă 3. In cases of mutually exclusive applications, where applicants are competing for the same or adjacent channels in the same geographic area, each application is reviewed pursuant to our comparative process. This procedure awards a maximum of twelve merit points based on five criteria deemed to be most relevant to predicting the applicant best qualified to  c -provide service for which the ITFS spectrum has been allocated. Instructional Television  c -Fixed Service Second Report and Order in MM Docket No. 83523, (Second Report and  c-Order), 101 FCC 2d 49, 6572 (1985); 47 C.F.R. Section 74.913. First, four points are  c}-awarded to local applicants.J}j c-#XR  P7jQ6MXP#э A "local" applicant is an institution or organization that is physically located in the  c-community or metropolitan area where service is proposed. Second Report and Order, 101 FCC 2d at 59; 47 C.F.R. Section 74.932, Note 1.J Second, three points are awarded to applicants which are accredited schools, educational institutions, or school boards and school districts applying within their jurisdictions. Third, two points are awarded to applicants whose requests would result in the acquisition by these applicants of four or fewer ITFS channels within the particular area. Fourth, either one or two points may be awarded to applicants for specified  c -levels of proposed ITFS programming.,v Kj c-#XR  P7jQ6MXP#э One point is awarded for a proposed weekly schedule of at least 21 average hours per channel of formal educational programming or of at least 41 hours per channel of other ITFS programming. Two points are awarded for a proposed weekly schedule of at least 41 average hours per channel of formal educational programming or at least 61 hours per channel of ITFS programming where at least 21 of those hours are formal educational programming. 47 C.F.R. Section 74.913(b)(4)., Fifth, one point is awarded to applicants which are existing E or F Channel licensees seeking to relocate to another ITFS channel group, where such applicants show an established need for an expanded service that cannot be accommodated on their grandfathered E or F facilities. The tentative selectee is the applicant with the highest score. 4. Under this comparative selection process, the applicants are awarded points based on the following criteria:  c;- Localism. Both applicants are entitled to four points because they are school districts that propose to offer ITFS programming to serve students enrolled at schools within their"( 0*((" respective jurisdictions.  c- Accreditation. Both applicants are entitled to three points for being accredited by the South Dakota State Board of Education.  cc- FourChannel Limitation. Neither applicant is the current licensee of, or has filed applications for, additional ITFS channels in its proposed service area. Therefore, each applicant is entitled to two points for remaining within the fourchannel limitation.  c - Instructional Programming. ITFS applicants detail their formal educational and other ITFS programming proposals in both a program schedule and a programming "grid." Where the amounts and types of programming proposed in the schedule and in the grid are inconsistent, we will consider as correct, for comparative purposes, the amount and type which result in the least number of points to the applicant, so long as the excess capacity lease permits that  c-level of programming to be transmitted. See Hispanic Information and Telecommunications  c-Network, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 5924 (1992). Montrose's illustrative schedule and programming grid propose an average of 24.375 hours of ITFS programming per channel per week, all of which is to be formal educational programming. Consequently, Montrose is entitled to one programming merit point. In contrast, Oldham's programming grid proposes 21 hours of formal educational programming per channel per week, while its illustrative schedule proposes an average of 21 hours of ITFS programming per channel per week, of which only 15.375 is formal educational programming. Since the lesser amount of formal educational programming specified in the illustrative schedule does not reach the threshold amount at which merit points are awarded, Oldham is entitled to no programming merit points.  cq- E and F Channel Group Relocation. Neither applicant is the current licensee of an E or F channel seeking to relocate to other channels. Therefore, neither is entitled to the one point for such applicants.  c- Total. Montrose is entitled to four points for being local, three points for being accredited, two points for observing the fourchannel limitation, and one point for proposing at least 21 hours of formal educational programming per channel per week, for a total of ten points. Oldham is entitled to four points for being local, three points for being accredited, and two points for observing the fourchannel limitation, for a total of nine points. Thus, the tentative selectee is Montrose.  _|$- v.OTHER MATTERS  ce%-  5. No determination has been made that the tower heights of two of the receive sites"7'0*((P(" proposed by Montrose would not constitute a hazard to air navigation. Accordingly, a grant of a construction permit/license to Montrose will be appropriately conditioned. ` ` 6. Montrose proposes to lease its excess capacity for nonITFS use, as permitted by 47 C.F.R. Section 74.931. The applicant has submitted a copy of its lease with Rural Vision Central, Inc., which conforms in all respects with our requirements. 7. There are no petitions to deny or informal objections outstanding against Montrose's application, and we find Montrose fully qualified to be an ITFS licensee. We also conclude that grant of Montrose's application would serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. 8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, That the application of OldhamRamona School District #395 (BPLIF930219ED) IS DENIED, and the application of Montrose School District #432 (BPLIF920320DM) IS GRANTED, subject to the following: ` `  This authorization is subject to the condition ` `  that construction of the receive towers at ` `  receive sites locations R20 and R21 is prohibited ` `  until clearance is received from the Federal Aviation ` `  Administration, the Commission is so notified, and ` `  appropriate painting and lighting specifications ` `  are determined. 9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the staff of the Mass Media Bureau shall send copies of this decision to the applicants by certified mail, return receipt requested. ` `  hh,FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` `  hh,William F. Caton ` `  hh,Acting Secretary