WPCD 2BJZ Courier3|j Bx6X@`7X@HP LaserJet 4 (Add) 1919M RM 702HPLA4ADD.PRSx  @\7!kWX@26 ZFv@3|j HP LaserJet 4 (Add) 1919M RM 702HPLA4ADD.PRSXj\  P6G;\7!kWXP X- I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#X\  P6G;IP#X01Í ÍX01Í Í#Xj\  P6G;3XP#a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` 2pkXk.a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  2,vt{ a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` 2% ^   f a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h 2W    a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2Qa1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   2M_a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . 238e<a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""A.SSxSSJJSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.xJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxSxIqIqIrSrS{dgIiSiSgIxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.SSSS8Sz]SSuSg/g,?2?2>,H2H2H2H2H2J2J2!2222!2I822F2>>$?2@>J2:J2J2H2H2YHB$B$C26&6&6&62>$>?2J2J2J2J2J2J2^HH2@,@,@,J2?2J262?2H2<!22!!!WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHHH222!,))22X222YY2#2222Y#!!442Ydd22==Ld2d2H2;SS88Y!42^x#"ddddHHddd2Hdd4HHYYddd2YYddd Y2!!dddddH=dYHHHHHHHHHH!d2H282YdHdC2!2H,29HNAddHHHHHHHHHHddddd.dHHHHdddddddddddddddddddHHddddddSC=NdHddd+;HHHHddddddHHH2HHdHHdddHHH,HHHH,HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!HHH!HHH!HHH!HHHHHHHHHHHHHH=?8=8C,?'A,J2H,!F,C8[8J,C2H,H=92=22?,H,C=H8N===H?J!2HHH=,====I!!2222HJ222HHH=!92,!ddhrZz.lZrrvvnFFZ8satellite operation as set forth in Note 5 of Section 73.3555 of the Commission's rules. Also  xbefore the Commission is Red River's abovecaptioned application to modify KDLTTV's  xfacilities. Red River proposes to relocate KDLTTV's site nearer to Mitchell, its community of license, and farther away from Sioux Falls, the site of new Channel 46.   x2. Red River contends that the operation of station KDLTTV as a satellite of the new  XJ!- xstation on Channel 46 in Sioux Falls meets the three criteria established by the Commission in  X3"- xTelevision Satellite Stations, 6 FCC Rcd 4212 (1991). Pursuant to that policy, an applicant for  xsatellite status is entitled to a presumption that the proposed operation is in the public interest if"#|,))ZZ""  xit meets the following three criteria: (1) there is no City Grade contour overlap between the  xparent and satellite; (2) the proposed satellite would provide service to an underserved area; and  xi(3) no alternative operator is ready and able to construct or to purchase and operate the proposed  xsatellite as a fullservice station. 6 FCC Rcd at 421314. Applications meeting this criteria, when  X- xunrebutted, will be viewed favorably by the Commission. Id. at 4214. If an applicant cannot  X- xMqualify for the presumption, we will evaluate the proposal on an ad hoc basis and grant the  Xz- xapplication if there are other compelling circumstances that warrant approval. Id. While Red  xRiver does not meet all three criteria for a presumptive waiver, for the reasons set forth below,  xwe find that the operation of KDLTTV as a satellite of the new station would be consistent with  X7-our policy based on an ad hoc analysis.    x3. With respect to the first criterion, a review of station KDLTTV's modified facility  xand the proposed facilities of the new Channel 46 station demonstrates that their City Grade  x<contours do not overlap. With respect to the second criterion, an applicant can use two different  xtests to demonstrate that an area is underserved. Under the "transmission test," a proposed  xsatellite community of license is considered underserved if there are two or fewer fullservice  X- xstations already licensed to it. Television Satellite Stations, 6 FCC Rcd at 4215. Our records  xshow that KDLTTV is the only television station licensed to Mitchell. Accordingly, Mitchell qualifies as an underserved area.   x4. As to the third criterion, to qualify for the presumption, an applicant must demonstrate  xthat no alternative operator is ready and able to construct or to purchase and operate the proposed  x satellite as a fullservice station. 6 FCC Rcd at 4215. In the case of new applicants seeking  X- x[satellite authorization, economic showings are acceptable.  Id. Initially, we note that Red River  xdoes not base its satisfaction of the third criterion on efforts to sell station KDLTTV, and, in  xfact, wishes to keep the station and operate it as a satellite of new Channel 46. Red River asserts  x that, because the station has for years been barely able to compete in a small market which  xcontinues to decline, it is apparent that no other operator would be able to operate Channel 5 in  xMitchell as a fullservice station. While we do not find that this argument meets the third  xcriterion, we find that Red River has made a strong enough showing to justify satellite operation  XZ- xunder our ad hoc analysis.  See, e.g., Plains Television Partnership, 9 FCC Rcd 4435 (1994);  XE-Sunshine Television, Inc., 8 FCC Rcd 4428 (1993). x   @x5. First, as Red River notes, Mitchell, KDLTTV's city of license, has a population of  x.only 13,800. The Commission has authorized satellite operations in communities considerably  X- xMlarger than Mitchell. For example in Eagle 22, Ltd., 7 FCC Rcd 5295 (1993), the Commission  xapproved satellite operation in a community with a population of 87,758. Second, Red River has  xshown declining economic and demographic trends in the Sioux Falls market. Davison County,  xin which Mitchell is located, has experienced a decline in population from 17,820 in 1980 to  x17,475 in 1992. Likewise, the national ranking of the Sioux FallsMitchell market has steadily  xdeclined, from 95th ADI in 1986 to 105th (DMA) in 1996, harming the market's ability to obtain  xinational advertising dollars. The number of television households in the market has also declined"c%,-(-(ZZ $"  X-during this time period, from 231,800 in 1986 to 228,730 now. zPy-#c P7P#э Television and Cable Factbook, years 19861996.   x6. In addition, as Red River points out, all other communities in the market, with the  xsingle exception of Sioux Falls, including several that are larger than Mitchell, are served only  xMby satellites of the Sioux Falls stations or have no television allocations at all. For example,  xNChannel 9 in Aberdeen (population of 25,200) is a satellite of station KSFYTV, the ABC  x affiliate in Sioux Falls. Similarly, the only commercial television assignments in Pierre (pop.  x12,900) and Huron (pop. 12,300) also serve as satellites of Sioux Falls network affiliates. Two  xother communities that are larger than Mitchell Watertown (pop. 18,100) and Brookings (pop.  xy16,270) have no commercial television allotments. We agree with Red River's contention that  X - x.these facts tend to demonstrate that operation of KDLTTV as a satellite is warranted. Sidney  X - xT. Warner, 64 RR 2d 1774 (1988) (inability to support fulltime station shown by fact that other similarlysized communities in region were satellites of network affiliates).   x7. Additionally, Red River asserts that KDLTTV has been able to operate as a full xservice station licensed to Mitchell only because it reaches enough of Sioux Falls to bring in  xadvertising revenue. In fact, it continues, approximately 95% of KDLTTV's advertising revenue  x=comes from businesses located in Sioux Falls. However, Red River states, KDLTTV has been  xable to deliver a good quality signal to only a fraction of the population of Sioux Falls, as  xcompared to its competitors. Thus, it asserts, many residents of the market cannot receive a  xfourth television "voice", depriving them of overtheair NBC programming and the diversity of  x]media voices that the Commission strives to promote. This is due in large part to severe  x[shadowing of KDLTTV's signal. Red River asserts that, because KDLTTV's transmitter must  xibe located a significant distance to the west in order to cover Mitchell, and two ridges lie between  x KDLTTV's transmitter and Sioux Falls, its ability to reach Sioux Falls residents is impaired.  x/In terms of population, approximately 220,289 people, or 63% of those falling within KDLT xTV's Grade B contour, live in areas shadowed by terrain. Red River states that KDLT-TV's  xcoverage disadvantage is worsened by the fact that all of KDLT-TV's competitors operate VHF  x.satellite stations to serve the large, sparsely populated areas of the market west of Sioux Falls,  x[while Red River does not. Consequently, Red River concludes, KDLTTV's ratings and market  XR- xshares run a distant third to its competitorsRZ zP]- xi#c P7P#э According to BIA Publications, Inc., KDLTTV's share of the Sioux FallsMitchell DMA for 1995 was 14%, compared to the ABC and CBS affiliates whose shares were 32% and 46%, respectively. , and these sharp disparities in viewership would  xcontinue to impede the economic viability of any potential standalone station in Mitchell.  xHowever, as a result of Red River building a new fullservice station in Sioux Falls and  xmodifying the facilities of KDLTTV by relocating its transmitter site, the severe terrain  xshadowing problem will be eliminated and service to Mitchell will be substantially improved.  xStation KDLTTV from its new location will serve 22,000 people who could not previously",-(-(ZZ"  X-receive KDLTTV, providing them with overtheair NBC programming for the first time. yPy- xԍ #c P7P#Two areas, containing a total of 9,000 viewers, will lose service from KDLT-TV which will not be replaced  xby Channel 46. However, Red River states that onehalf of the southern loss area receives NBC service from  xKTIV(TV), Sioux City, Iowa. Red River commits to serve the other half of the southern loss area with a new TV  xKtranslator station. In the northern loss area, Red River has a TV translator in Brookings, South Dakota, which will  xxinitiate service within the next three months. The remaining northern loss area will be served by new TV translator  xservice from Red River as well. Red River states that cable service is currently provided to all of the communities  x\in both the northern and southern loss areas, except Badger, which will be served by the proposed translator.  xAdditionally, Red River pledges to operate at KDLTTV's current site until the new translators have been  xconstructed. In view of the above replacement service, we believe that grant of the modification would be in the public interest.    ~x8. In addition, Red River claims that KDLTTV is desperately in need of capital  x1improvements. Red River notes that the previous licensee was forced to limit capital  ximprovements and other expenditures in an effort to stay afloat, including reducing news coverage  x.from seven to five days a week, and reducing the news staff to 15. While KDLTTV's network  xcompetitors have staffs of 70 to 75 persons, KDLTTV's staff consists of only 44 persons. With  xits competitive disadvantage, Red River states that it has less revenue to spend on service directed  xspecifically to its community of license, Mitchell. While it is fully committed to serving  xMitchell, it states that it does not have the resources to expand the programming devoted to that  x=community. Given the lack of growth of Mitchell and the Sioux Falls market, Red River asserts  x<that the economic situation for the station is unlikely to improve. However, Red River anticipates  xthat the satellite combination will generate sufficient revenues to allow it to upgrade the quality of its service to Mitchell.   !x9. Moreover, Red River asserts that it is apparent that no alternative operator would be  xjable to operate KDLTTV as an independent fullservice station, because KDLTTV has barely  xremained viable even with its network affiliation. Since Red River will retain its NBC affiliation  xfor Channel 46, any buyer of KDLTTV would assertedly have to operate Channel 5 as an  XK- xyindependent station or as an affiliate of an emerging network. The fact that an allotted channel  X4- xremained dark in Sioux Falls for decades until very recently, see fn. 1, Red River contends,  x>underscores the unlikelihood that anyone would be interested in such a station licensed to  xMitchell, over 65 miles away. Finally, with the inauguration of new Channel 46 and KDLTTV  xzas its satellite, Red River points out, there will be no decrease in the number of voices in the  X- xSioux Falls market. There will remain four separately owned television stations.hXa  xP - x#c P7P#э The other stations are: KSFY (ABC), Channel 13, licensed to Elcom of South Dakota, Inc.; KELO (CBS),  xChannel 11, licensed to Midcontinent Television of South Dakota, Inc.; and KTTW (Fox), Channel 17, licensed to Independent Communications, Inc. h In sum, we  xbelieve that Red River has made a showing here of compelling circumstances to warrant satellite  xyoperation based on the unique facts of this case. KDLTTV's community of license has a small  xpopulation and declining economic and demographic trends; and all other communities in the  xmarket are either served by satellites of stations licensed to Sioux Falls or have no television  xallocations at all. Furthermore, Red River has succeeded in operating KLDTTV as a fullservice"g ,-(-(ZZ"  xstation in Mitchell only because it has been able to bring in Sioux Falls advertising revenue.  x/While the station is not in bankruptcy, Red River has shown that it is experiencing difficult  xeconomic circumstances. Further, while Red River desires to improve service to Mitchell,  xKDLTTV's city of license, it can only do that if the station is approved for operation as a  x[satellite of new Channel 46 in Sioux Falls. This is apparently the only way that is economically  xviable for Red River to improve service to Mitchell, its community of license, and at the same  xtime add new service to thousands of viewers in Mitchell and the Sioux Falls market. Moreover,  xas a result of this waiver, there will be no decrease in the number of voices in the Sioux Falls  xmarket. Finally, it appears unlikely that any alternative operator would be willing and able to operate the proposed satellite in Mitchell as a standalone fullservice station.   x10. Based on our review of the information submitted, we conclude that Red River has  X - xKset forth sufficiently compelling arguments to support an ad hoc determination that a grant of the  xwaiver of the duopoly rule pursuant to the satellite exception set forth in Note 5 to Section  X - xy73.3555 would serve the public interest. However, in a recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,  xjthe Commission has undertaken a reexamination of its broadcast television ownership policies,  X- xincluding the continued exemption of satellite stations from broadcast ownership restrictions. See  X- xSecond Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket Nos. 91221 and 878, FCC 96 x438 (released November 7, 1996). Accordingly, we will condition the grant of this satellite  XS- xwaiver on whatever action is taken in that proceeding. In view of the foregoing, and h aving  xKdetermined that the applicant is qualified to operate the stations as proposed, we find that a grant of these applications will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity.   Px11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, That the request by Red River for operation of  x<station KDLTTV, Mitchell, South Dakota, pursuant to the satellite exception to the duopoly rule,  xSection 73.3555 of the Commission's rules, IS GRANTED, subject to the outcome of the Commission's pending television ownership rule making in MM Docket Nos. 91221 and 878. x` `   x12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the application (File No. BPCT941227KH) for modification of the facilities of station KDLTTV, Mitchell, South Dakota, IS GRANTED.   x13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the application (File No. BPCT941227KI) for  xa construction permit for a new television station on Channel 46 at Sioux Falls, South Dakota, IS GRANTED. x` ` x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@Barbara A. Kreisman x` `  hh@Chief, Video Services Division x` `  hh@Mass Media Bureau