9110 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

rebuttable presumption have been

rendered moot by the removal of the

presumption language in rule Section

22.903(f). The Part 22 Rewrite Order 59

FR 59502, November 17, 1992

transferred most of the language of

former Section 22.903(f) to current rule

Section 22.911(d) and changed some of

the introductory language in the new

rule. Section 22.911(d)(2)(i) expressly

prohibits non-consensual contour

extensions from one cellular system into

the CGSA of another cellular system.

The first sentence of Section

22.911(d)(2)(i) states: ‘‘Subscriber traffic

is captured if an SAB of one cellular

system overlaps the CGSA of another

operating cellular system’’—(emphasis

added). The new rule removes any

suggestion of a presumption created by

the prior rule.

47. We observe that current Section

22.911(d)(2)(i) of our rules is based

upon predicted service areas as defined

by an expert agency and is designed to

avoid litigation over the exact location

of actual interference. The idea of

‘‘interference free’’ service areas is a

constant in Part 22 of our rules. See,

e.g., Sections 22.351, 22.537, 22.567,

and 22.912(a) of our rules. 47 CFR

22.351, 22.537, 22.567 and 22.912(a). In

order to ensure uniformity and

simplicity in administering our rules,

and to prevent potentially endless

litigation, we must rely on objective,

rather than subjective standards for the

protection of services. Section

22.911(d)(2)(i) provides a simple,

objective standard to determine when

capture occurs, and encourages parties

to reach agreement on the resulting

effects of SAB overlap.

48. We also reject CIS’s request that

Section 22.903(d)(1) [now 22.912(a)] of

the rules be modified to allow a cellular

licensee to extend service contour into

an adjoining market to compensate for

the adjoining licensee’s extension into

the licensee’s market. Absent agreement

between the affected parties, licensees

are entitled to operate in their service

areas free from co-channel and first

adjacent channel interference and from

capture of subscriber traffic by adjacent

systems on the same channel block. 47

CFR 22.911(d) (formerly 22.903(f)).

49. Our goal is to provide nationwide

seamless cellular service to the public.

As we indicated in the Memorandum

Opinion and Order, 58 FR 11799, March

1, 1993 rather than require the total

elimination of SAB extensions, or

mandate reciprocal SAB extensions as

suggested by CIS, a better result in most

cases is some degree of SAB overlap

between systems with the location of

balanced signal strengths negotiated

informally between the adjacent

licensees on the same channel block.

We believe informal negotiations

between parties in determining

mutually agreeable arrangements

between adjacent systems will achieve

the most expeditious and effective

resolution of service boundary issues.

Thus, promoting negotiation between

parties eliminates possible protracted

administrative and court proceedings,

and provides incentives for cellular

providers to come to agreement on

boundary issues arising from the

convergence of expanding systems. In

sum, permitting market forces to drive

resolution of these issues will effectuate

seamless cellular service nationwide

more quickly than the proposals offered

by petitioners.

IV. Ordering Clause

50. Accordingly, pursuant to Sections

4(i), 303(r) and 405(a) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and

405(a), It is ordered that the petitions for

reconsideration and partial

reconsideration of the Third Report and

Order and Memorandum Opinion and

Order on Reconsideration 58 FR 27213,

May 7, 1993 in this docket, and the

Memorandum Opinion and Order on

Reconsideration, 58 FR 11799, March 1,

1993 Are denied, and the ‘‘Request to

Expedite Action and Comments in

Support of Cellular Information

Systems, Inc.’’ Is dismissed as moot.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 22

Communications common carriers,

Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–4870 Filed 2–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

49 CFR Part 1319

[STB Ex Parte No. 598]

Exemption of Freight Forwarders in the

Noncontiguous Domestic Trade From

Rate Reasonableness and Tariff Filing

Requirements

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.

ACTION: Final rules.

SUMMARY: The Board exempts freight

forwarders in the noncontiguous

domestic trade from tariff filing

requirements. This action eliminates an

unnecessary regulatory burden and

should provide freight forwarders with

additional flexibility to meet the needs

of their customers.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These rules are effective

March 30, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James W. Greene, (202) 927–5612. [TDD

for the hearing impaired: (202) 927–

5721.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Board’s decision adopting these

regulations is available to all persons for

a charge by phoning DC NEWS & DATA,

INC., at (202) 289–4357.

Small Entities

The Board certifies that this rule will

not have a significant economic effect

on a substantial number of small

entities. The rule removes an

unnecessary regulatory burden and, to

the extent that it affects small entities,

the effect should be favorable.

Environment

This action will not significantly

affect either the quality of the human

environment or the conservation of

energy resources.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1319

Exemptions, Freight forwarders,

Tariffs.

Decided: February 13, 1997.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan and Vice

Chairman Owen.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Board adds a new part

1319 to title 49, chapter X, of the Code

of Federal Regulations to read as

follows:

PART 1319—EXEMPTIONS

Sec.

1319.1 Exemption of freight forwarders in

the noncontiguous domestic trade from

tariff filing requirements.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 721(a) and 13541.

§ 1319.1 Exemption of freight forwarders

in the noncontiguous domestic trade from

tariff filing requirements.

Freight forwarders subject to the

Board’s jurisdiction under 49 U.S.C.

13531 are exempted from the tariff filing

requirements of 49 U.S.C. 13702.

[FR Doc. 97–4868 Filed 2–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P