45330 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Act, and any enforceable duties are

imposed as a condition of Federal

assistance or a duty arising from

participation in a voluntary Federal

program.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 206

Disaster assistance, Public assistance.

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 206 is

amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 206

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42

U.S.C. 5121 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No.

3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.,

p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979

Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3

CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412; and E.O. 12673, 54

FR 12571, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 214.

2. Section 206.227 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 206.227 Snow assistance.

Emergency or major disaster

declarations based on snow or blizzard

conditions will be made only for cases

of record or near record snowstorms, as

established by official government

records. Federal assistance will be

provided for all costs eligible under 44

CFR 206.225 for a specified period of

time which will be determined by the

circumstances of the event.

Dated: August 18, 1997.

James L. Witt,

Director.

[FR Doc. 97–22679 Filed 8–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–02–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket No. 94–124; FCC 97–267]

Use of Radio Frequencies Above 40

GHz for New Radio Applications

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: By this Memorandum

Opinion and Order the Commission

grants the petition for reconsideration of

Cutler-Hammer by amending the

regulations to permit operation of lower

power fixed radar systems in the 59–64

GHz band, permits interim equipment

approval and operation of unlicensed

services in the 59–64 GHz band

provided that the equipment complies

with the proposed spectrum etiquette

contained in the Fourth Notice or

Proposed Rule Making, denies Vorad

Safety Systems, Inc.’s petition for

reconsideration requesting relaxation of

the spurious emission limits for vehicle

radar systems operating in the 46.7–46.9

GHz band, and corrects two

typographical errors contained in the

First Report and Order (‘‘Order’’) in this

proceeding.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 26, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

A. Reed (202) 418–2455 or Rodney P.

Conway (202) 418–2904. Via electronic

mail: jreed@fcc.gov or rconway@fcc.gov,

Office of Engineering and Technology,

Federal Communications Commission.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s

Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET

Docket 94–124, FCC 97–267 adopted

July 28, 1997, and released August 14,

1997. The full text of this Commission

decision is available for inspection and

copying during normal business hours

in the FCC Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C., and also may be purchased from

the Commission’s duplication

contractor, International Transcription

Service, (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

Summary of the Memorandum Opinion

and Order

1. Cutler-Hammer, a manufacturer of

sensors used in industrial applications,

filed a petition for reconsideration

requesting the Commission amend its

rules to permit the operation of lower

power, fixed field disturbance sensors

(radar) in the 59–64 GHz frequency

band. Cutler-Hammer states that lower

frequency sensors of the type currently

being manufactured have performance

limitations that millimeter wave sensors

can overcome and improve on sensor

performance with the 5 GHz of

frequency bandwidth.

2. Cutler-Hammer recognizes that a

number of parties participating in this

proceeding expressed concern about

suggestions that vehicle radar systems

be permitted to operate in the 60–61

GHz band. It agrees that the potential for

interference from mobile field

disturbance sensors to fixed operations

is hard to predict and to avoid. Fixed

field disturbance sensors operating

characteristics are much more

predictable and the potential for causing

and receiving interference is more easily

determined, while the operating

characteristics of mobile field

disturbance sensors are very difficult to

predict due to the inherently variable

nature of the system, which results in

unpredictable radiation patterns and

potentials for causing and receiving

interference. Cutler-Hammer indicates

that, in contrast, the low power fixed

field disturbance sensors it desires to

employ would operate with very little

power and would create a predictable

radiation pattern, permitting them to be

designed and installed in such a way

that they would neither be susceptible

to, nor likely to cause, interference.

Accordingly, Cutler-Hammer believes

that the prohibition against the use of

fixed field disturbance sensors is

unnecessarily broad and is not

supported by the record.

3. The Commission agrees with

Cutler-Hammer that fixed field

disturbance sensors at the proposed

output level of 9 nW/cm2 as measured

at 3 meters from the transmit antenna

would not be likely to be a source of

interference to other communications

systems operating with an output level

of up to 9 μW/cm2 as measured at 3

meters from the transmit antenna in the

59–64 GHz band. This is the only

unlicensed frequency band under the

Commission’s regulations that provides

a bandwidth this wide and at a power

level that makes operation practical.

Accordingly, the Commission is

granting the request from CutlerHammer to remove the prohibition

against fixed field disturbance sensors.

The Commission also recognizes that, in

many cases, the manufacturing process

may require that the sensor be capable

of movement, even though the

equipment in which the sensor is

installed is fixed. Thus, the Commission

will clarify in its rules that the

permission to operate fixed field

disturbance sensors applies to sensors

installed in fixed equipment, even if the

sensor itself moves within the

equipment. However, this action does

not affect the Commission’s existing

prohibition on mobile field disturbance

sensors in the 59–64 GHz frequency

band.

4. Although the Commission stated

previously in this proceeding that

operation in the 59–64 GHz band would

be permitted only after adoption of a

spectrum etiquette, we now believe that

this prohibition no longer is necessary

and would be detrimental to the

introduction of new products and

services. Therefore, the Commission

will permit operation in the 59–64 GHz

band, of any authorized, unlicensed

communications devices, including

fixed field disturbance sensors, on an

interim basis pending consideration of

the Spectrum Etiquette proposed in the

Fourth Notice of Proposed Rule Making.

The Commission believes that

permitting interim operation will serve

the public interest by permitting early

rollout of new and innovative

technologies and services. The

Commission will require, however, that
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 45331

equipment approved for such interim

operation comply with the proposed

Spectrum Etiquette. The Commission

stresses that any spectrum etiquette

finally adopted in this proceeding may

differ significantly from the proposed

Spectrum Etiquette contained in the

Fourth NPRM and that manufacture and

operation of equipment under this

interim provision is at the risk of the

manufacturer and operator exclusively.

The Commission also stresses that

initial operation which complies with

the proposed Spectrum Etiquette does

not guarantee continued operation if

any changes in that etiquette are

adopted.

5. Vorad Safety Systems, Inc.

(‘‘Vorad’’), a manufacturer of field

disturbance sensors used for vehicle

collision avoidance systems, requests

reconsideration of the spurious

emission limit for sensors operating in

the 46 GHz band. Vorad requests that

the limits on spurious emissions

applicable to field disturbance sensors

operating in the 76 GHz band also be

applied to sensors operating in the 46

GHz band. The limits on spurious

emissions from transmitters in the 76

GHz band are 300 pW/cm2 at 3 meters

for side or rear looking sensors and 600

pW/cm2 at 3 meters for forward looking

sensors. The limit for spurious

emissions from transmitters operating in

the 46 GHz band is 2 pW/cm2 at 3

meters.

6. Vorad adds that the Commission

relaxed the standard for vehicle radar

systems in the 76 GHz band but adhered

to its strict proposal for radar operating

in the 46 GHz band. Vorad states that

the adopted limit conflicts with the

Commission’s stated goal of encouraging

expeditious development of an

important safety product. Vorad adds

that meeting the stricter limit using

current technology would be possible

only by reducing operating power,

which would significantly degrade the

performance of the system.

7. Vorad argues that the limit on

spurious emissions adopted by the

Commission for the 46 GHz band is not

technically justified. It states that the

Commission based its decision on the

need to protect existing and future U.S.

Government uses of the 94 GHz and 140

GHz bands. However, Vorad indicates

that the evidence in the record does not

demonstrate that there is a real threat of

interference to such uses by vehicle

radar systems, since vehicle radar

systems use highly directionalized

antennas and will primarily be used on

the nation’s highways. It adds that it has

operated vehicle radar systems in the 24

GHz band for several years and has been

experimenting with operations in the 47

GHz band for over a year. Vorad

indicates that the spurious emissions

from its 24 GHz and 47 GHz

transmissions were suppressed by only

50 dB, and that no complaints of

interference were received. Thus, Vorad

states that its experience with these

systems demonstrates that an

attenuation standard of 50 dB is

sufficient to protect other spectrum

users. Vorad adds that there is no

evidence that operations in the 46 GHz

band will present more of an

interference risk than do operations in

the 76 GHz band, for which a much

more reasonable standard was adopted.

The limits on spurious emissions from

transmitters in the 76 GHz band are 300

pW/cm2 at 3 meters for side or rear

looking sensors and 600 pW/cm2 at 3

meters for forward looking sensors. If

the transmitter is operated at its

maximum permitted output levels,

spurious emissions must be attenuated

by at least 50 dB.

8. Finally, Vorad argues that vehicle

radar systems in the 76 GHz band will

create spurious emissions over a much

larger range of spectrum than will

operations in the 46 GHz band. It states

that the narrow 200 MHz bandwidth

employed by transmitters in the 46 GHz

band will limit the bandwidth of

harmonic emissions. In contrast, the

permissible bandwidth of the 76 GHz

radar is 1000 MHz, resulting in spurious

emissions over much more of the

spectrum due to intermodulation

frequency products.

9. The National Telecommunications

and Information Administration (NTIA)

was the only party to file comments in

response to the Vorad petition. NTIA

strongly opposes VORAD’s request to

relax the spurious emission limit. It

states that the majority of U.S.

Government operations occur in the

propagation windows centered at 94

GHz, 140 GHz and 220 GHz. The band

centered at 220 GHz is centered at a null

for water absorption, while still having

relatively low attenuation properties

due to absorption from dry air. Since the

bands being addressed in this

proceeding did not exceed 155 GHz and

spurious emissions were addressed only

below 200 GHz, the 220 GHz band was

not addressed in the Commission’s

earlier considerations. It adds that new

radio receiver technologies using wide

bandwidth (typically 4–10 GHz) and

improved sensitivities have resulted in

greater resolution and precision for

detection and guidance systems and

remote sensing of the environment.

NTIA points out that a joint Federal

Aviation Administration/Department of

Defense/Industry program is currently

underway to develop and test ‘‘synthetic

vision’’ systems intended for use in

airport environments during poor

visibility. Further, it states that recent

analysis indicates that the noise

threshold of these receivers can be more

than 30 dB below the threshold

assumed by the Commission in its Order

for this type of equipment, so further

relaxation of the limit on spurious

emissions could have serious

consequences on the effectiveness of

systems in these bands. Finally, NTIA

states that it invited Vorad to present its

views to the Interdepartment Radio

Advisory Committee (IRAC), but that

Vorad did not respond to this offer.

NTIA adds that it remains willing to

assist Vorad should it decide to pursue

an effort to demonstrate compatibility of

its equipment, but in the interim urges

the Commission not to relax the limit on

spurious emissions.

10. The Commission is denying

Vorad’s petition to relax the limits on

spurious emissions from field

disturbance sensors operating in the 46

GHz band. The Commission recognized

in the Order that its decision might have

an adverse economic impact on

manufacturers but concluded that the

limit was appropriate to protect present

and future U.S. Government operations

in the 94 and 140 GHz bands. It stated

that the 94 GHz and 140 GHz bands

share many potential uses, since these

bands are in the only two atmospheric

transmission windows between 60 GHz

and 300 GHz. The 94 GHz band is

employed for radio astronomy, U.S.

Government passive imaging systems,

and Department of Defense classified

applications. The 140 GHz band is used

for radio astronomy and Government

military passive imaging systems. In

particular, the Commission noted that

the Advanced Research Projects

Agency’s MIMIC program to develop

lower-cost millimeter wave components

has involved technology in the 94 GHz

area and is likely to increase the use of

this and other millimeter wave bands.

The Commission, in the Order, added

that, while it appreciated the arguments

in the comments from General Motors

Corporation and GM Hughes Electronics

for relaxing the spurious emission

limits, it did not agree that directional

antennas and the use of vehicle radar

systems on highways would be

sufficient to eliminate interference to

airborne passive sensors. Further, as

noted by NTIA in its comments on

Vorad’s petition, current development

of a passive imaging system used as an

aircraft landing aid in adverse weather

conditions involves resolution

capabilities which are directly related to

the amount of RF signal noise in the
45332 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1See 9 FCC Rcd 7078 (1994), 59 FR 61304,

November 30, 1994.

2Subtitle II of the CWAAA is ‘‘The Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996’’ (SBREFA), codified at 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

3See 11 FCC Rcd 4481 (1995), 61 FR 14041,

March 29, 1996.

band. Thus, we continue to believe that

the presence of excessive spurious

emissions from other signal sources,

e.g., harmonic emissions from vehicle

radar systems in the 46 GHz band,

would degrade the usefulness of these

bands for passive imaging and other

possible functions.

11. While Vorad indicates that its

previous experience with field

disturbance sensors operating at 24 GHz

and at 47 GHz and employing a

spurious emission suppression of 50 dB

has not resulted in complaints of

interference, the Commission does not

find this sufficiently conclusive to relax

the spurious emission requirements.

First, operations in the 94 GHz and 140

GHz bands are only now being

developed. As U.S. Government and

other operations increase in these

bands, along with the proliferation of

field disturbance sensors in the 46 GHz

band, the potential for interference

would also increase. Second, Vorad’s

argument does not address the

cumulative effects of multiple

transmitters operating simultaneously

within a service area. Finally, 50 dB

attenuation of the spurious emissions

from transmitters operating in the 24

GHz band results in an emission level

that is relatively close to the emission

limit adopted in the Order for spurious

emissions from the 46 GHz band.

12. The Commission does not agree

with Vorad’s claims that harmonic

emissions from the 76 GHz system

present the same, or greater, interference

potential to 94 GHz and 140 GHz

systems as sensors operating in the 46

GHz band, even if the 76 GHz devices

use frequency doublers or triplers to

achieve the fundamental emission. If, as

suggested by Vorad, the 76 GHz systems

generate their fundamental emissions

through the use of a 25.5 GHz oscillator,

the third harmonic is at 76.5 GHz, the

fourth harmonic is at 102 GHz, the fifth

harmonic is at 127.5 GHz, and the sixth

harmonic is at 153 GHz. If the 76 GHz

systems generate their fundamental

emissions through the use of a 38.25

GHz oscillator, the second harmonic is

at 76.5 GHz, the third harmonic is at

114.75 GHz, and the fourth harmonic is

at 153 GHz. In every case, the harmonic

emissions from the 76 GHz system are

well removed from the 94 GHz and 140

GHz bands. While Vorad also argues

that the wider bandwidth of the 76 GHz

system will result in spurious emissions

covering a larger bandwidth, as

compared to systems in the 46 GHz

band, this wider bandwidth is not

sufficient to cause the harmonic

emissions to fall within the 94 GHz or

140 GHz bands.

13. We decline to permit a higher

spurious emission level for field

disturbance sensors operating in the 46

GHz band. Accordingly, the Petition for

Reconsideration of Vorad Safety

Services, Inc. is denied.

14. The Commission is taking this

opportunity to correct two

typographical errors contained in the

Order in this proceeding. Section

15.215(a) is being amended to reflect the

two new rule §§ 15.253 and 15.255

covering operations above 40 GHz.

Section 15.215 notes the exceptions to

the general emission limits contained in

§ 15.209 and should have been amended

in the Order. Section 15.31(f)(1) is also

being corrected to reflect that the

inverse linear-distance-squared

extrapolation factor (40 dB per decade)

for measurements above 40 GHz applies

only to measurements performed in the

near field. In response to the Second

Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 61 FR

14041, March 29, 1996, in this

proceeding, Epsilon Lambda, General

Motors and Vorad expressed concern

that measurements at the specified

distance of 3 meters could result in

measurements in the near field,

requiring the use of an inverse lineardistance-squared extrapolation factor

(40 dB per decade) instead of inverse

linear-distance (20 dB per decade), as

previously specified in the rules. The

Commission agreed with these

comments but inadvertently stated that

all measurements above 40 GHz could

be made at a distance greater than 3

meters using an inverse linear-distancesquared extrapolation factor, even if the

measurements were not being

performed in the near field. However,

the inverse linear-distance-squared

factor correctly extrapolates the change

in signal level versus distance when

measurements are made in the near

field, whereas the inverse lineardistance factor correctly extrapolates the

change in signal level versus distance

when measurements are made in the far

field. The use of the inverse lineardistance-squared extrapolation factor

under all measurement conditions could

permit a manufacturer to increase

measurement distance until the results

demonstrated compliance, even though

the emissions exceed the limit when the

product is measured at a shorter

distance. Accordingly, the rules are

being amended to indicate that the use

of an inverse linear-distance-squared

extrapolation factor applies only to

near-field measurements. Measurements

in the far field will continue to be

extrapolated employing an inverse

linear-distance extrapolation factor.

15. In accordance with the above

discussion and pursuant to the authority

contained in Sections 4(i), 302, 303(e),

303(f), 303(g), 303(r), and 405 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, it is ordered that the Petition

for Reconsideration filed by CutlerHammer, Inc., as supplemented, to

permit operation of low power, fixed

field disturbance sensors in the 60 GHz

band is granted as described below by

the amendments to part 15 of the

Commission’s Rules and Regulations are

amended as shown below, effective

September 26, 1997.

16. It is further ordered That the

Petition for Reconsideration filed by

Vorad Safety Systems, Inc., is denied.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

17. As required by Section 603 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603

(‘‘RFA’’), an Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) was

incorporated into the Notice of

Proposed Rule Making (‘‘NPRM’’) in ET

Docket No. 94–124.1 The Commission

sought written public comments on the

proposals in the NPRM, including the

IRFA. The Commission’s Final

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(‘‘FRFA’’) in this Memorandum Opinion

and Order conforms to the RFA, as

amended by the Contract with America

Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA),

Public Law 104–121, 110 Stat. 847

(1996).2

18. Need for and Objective of the

Rules. Our objectives are to permit the

operation within the 59–64 GHz band of

fixed field disturbance sensors in an

industrial environment. These products

were prohibited under the Order in ET

Docket No. 94–124.3

19. Summary of Significant Issues

Raised by Public Comments in Response

to the IRFA. No comments were

submitted in direct response to the

IRFA. However, Cutler-Hammer, Inc.

filed a Petition for Reconsideration

requesting that the Commission amend

its rules to permit the operation within

the 59–64 GHz band of fixed field

disturbance sensors in an industrial

environment. No comments were filed

in response to this petition.

20. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities to Which the

Rules Will Apply. For the purposes of

this Memorandum Opinion and Order,

the RFA defines a ‘‘small business’’ to

be the same as a ‘‘small business

concern’’ under the Small Business Act,

15 U.S.C. 632, unless the Commission
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 45333

4See 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference

the definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in 5

U.S.C. 632).

5See 15 U.S.C. 632.

6See 13 CFR 121.201, (SIC) Code 3663.

7See U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1992 Census of

Transportation, Communications and Utilities

(issued May 1995), SIC category 3663.

has developed one or more definitions

that are appropriate to its activities.4

Under the Small Business Act, a ‘‘small

business concern’’ is one that: (1) Is

independently owned and operated; (2)

is not dominant in its field of operation;

and (3) meets any additional criteria

established by the Small Business

Administration (SBA).5 Since the

Regulatory Flexibility Act amendments

were not in effect until the record in this

proceeding was closed, the Commission

did not request information regarding

the number of small businesses that

might use this service and is unable at

this time to determine the number of

small businesses that would be affected

by this action in addition to CutlerHammer, Inc.

21. The Commission has not

developed a definition of small entities

applicable to unlicensed

communications devices. Therefore, we

will utilize the SBA definition

applicable to manufacturers of Radio

and Television Broadcasting and

Communications Equipment. According

to the SBA regulations, unlicensed

transmitter manufacturers must have

750 or fewer employees in order to

qualify as a small business concern.6

Census Bureau data indicates that there

are 858 U.S. companies that

manufacture radio and television

broadcasting and communications

equipment, and that 778 of these firms

have fewer than 750 employees and

would be classified as small entities.7

The Census Bureau category is very

broad, and specific figures are not

available as to how many of these firms

will manufacture unlicensed

communications devices. However, we

believe that many of them may qualify

as small entities.

22. Description of Projected

Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other

Compliance Requirements. Our new

rules permit the introduction of a new

type of equipment which will operate in

the 59–64 GHz band. As with other

communications equipment already

permitted to operate within this

frequency band, the transmitter must be

authorized under the Commission’s

certification procedure. No changes

were made to the standards that must be

met by the equipment or the reporting

or recordkeeping requirements.

23. Significant Alternatives and Steps

Taken to Minimize Significant

Economic Impact on a Substantial

Number of Small Entities Consistent

with Stated Objectives. No alternatives

or other steps were addressed in this

proceeding.

24. Report to Congress. The

Commission shall send a copy of this

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,

along with this Memorandum Opinion

and Order, in a report to Congress

pursuant to the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15

Communications equipment,

Highway safety, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

Rule Changes

Title 47 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, Part 15, is amended as

follows:

PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY

DEVICES

1. The authority citation for Part 15

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 304,

307 and 544A.

2. Section 15.31 is amended by

revising paragraph (f)(1) to read as

follows:

§ 15.31 Measurement standards.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) At frequencies at or above 30 MHz,

measurements may be performed at a

distance other than that specified

provided: Measurements are not made

in the near field, and it can be

demonstrated that the signal levels to be

measured at the distance employed can

be detected by the measurement

equipment. Measurements shall not be

performed at a distance greater than 30

meters unless it can be demonstrated

that measurements at a distance of 30

meters or less are impractical. When

performing measurements at a distance

other than that specified, the results

shall be extrapolated to the specified

distance using one of the following

formulas: For measurements above 30

MHz that are not performed in the near

field, an inverse linear-distance

extrapolation factor (20 dB/decade); for

measurements performed in the near

field, an inverse linear-distance-squared

extrapolation factor (40 dB/decade).

* * * * *

3. Section 15.215 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 15.215 Additional provisions to the

general radiated emission limitations.

(a) The regulations in §§ 15.217

through 15.255 provide alternatives to

the general radiated emission limits for

intentional radiators operating in

specified frequency bands. Unless

otherwise stated, there are no

restrictions as to the types of operation

permitted under these sections.

* * * * *

4. Section 15.255 is amended by

revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read

as follows:

§ 15.255 Operation within the band 59.0–

64.0 GHz.

(a) Operation under the provisions of

this section is not permitted for the

following products:

(1) Equipment used on aircraft or

satellites; and

(2) Field disturbance sensors,

including vehicle radar systems, unless

the field disturbance sensors are

employed for fixed operation. For the

purposes of this section, the reference to

fixed operation includes field

disturbance sensors installed in fixed

equipment, even if the sensor itself

moves within the equipment.

(b) Within the 59–64 GHz band,

emission levels shall not exceed the

following:

(1) For products other than fixed field

disturbance sensors, the power density

of any emission shall not exceed 9 μW/

cm 2 at a distance of 3 meters;

(2) For fixed field disturbance sensors

that occupy 500 MHz or less of

bandwidth and that are contained

wholly within the frequency band 61.0–

61.5 GHz, the power density of any

emission within the band 61.0–61.5

GHz shall not exceed 9 μW/cm2 at a

distance of 3 meters and the power

density of any emission outside of the

61.0–61.5 GHz band, but still within the

59–64 GHz band, shall not exceed 9

nW/cm2 at a distance of 3 meters; and

(3) For fixed field disturbance sensors

other than those operating under the

provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this

section, the peak transmitter output

power shall not exceed 0.1 mW and the

peak power density shall not exceed 9

nW/cm2 at a distance of 3 meters.

Note to paragraph (b): Equipment may be

authorized and operated on an interim basis

under the provisions of this section provided

it complies with the Spectrum Etiquette

parameters contained in the December 13,

1996 submission from the Millimeter Wave

Communications Working Group in ET

Docket 94–124. Copies of the submission are

available for inspection at the Federal

Communications Commission Reference

Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C., and may also be purchased

from the Federal Communications
45334 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Commission’s duplication contractor,

International Transcription Service, (202)

857–3800, 1231 20th Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The submission is

also available for viewing on the FCC’s

internet website [http://www.fcc.gov/oet/

dockets/et94–124/].

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–22550 Filed 8–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

COOPERATION AGENCY

Agency for International Development

48 CFR Parts 701, 702, 703, 704, 705,

706, 708, 709, 711, 715, 716, 717, 719,

722, 724, 725, 726, 728, 731, 732, 733,

734, 736, 749, 750, 752, 753; and

Appendices A, C, G, and H to

Chapter 7

[AIDAR Notice 97–1]

RIN 0412–AA32

Miscellaneous Amendments to

Acquisition Regulations; Corrections

AGENCY: Agency for International

Development (USAID), IDCA.

ACTION: Correction to final rule.

SUMMARY: This document contains

corrections to rule document 97–18603,

AIDAR Notice 97–1, Miscellaneous

Amendments to Acquisition

Regulations, in the issue of Tuesday,

July 29, 1997 (62 FR 40464).

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 28, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M/

OP/P, Ms. Diane M. Howard, (703) 875–

1533.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AIDAR

Notice 97–1, Miscellaneous

Amendments to Acquisition

Regulations, was published as a Final

Rule on July 29, 1997 (62 FR 40464).

Several omissions from and errors in the

Rule have been identified and require

corrective action. The specific

corrections are:

1. Amendments 2 and 6 intended to

revise the acronym ‘‘AID’’ and ‘‘AIDdirect’’, respectively, to ‘‘USAID’’ and

‘‘USAID-Direct’’. However, in several

places in the AIDAR, the acronym has

periods between the letters, and this

version of the acronym also needs to be

changed to ‘‘USAID’’. The two

amendments are corrected accordingly.

2. Amendment 32 revised section

715.613–71, but the phrasing in

paragraph (c) needs to be corrected by

moving the first two words in (c)(1)(i)

up to the end of the phrase in (c)(1) in

order to have (c)(1)(ii) read properly.

3. Amendment 59 added a new

clause, 752.225–70, containing wording

which needs to be corrected to prevent

future ambiguities. The specific

correction, in the last sentence of the

section, will provide the Contracting

Officer discretion to require a refund if

restricted goods are purchased without

his or her prior written approval.

4. Several clauses in Part 752 of this

chapter were added or revised to such

extent that they require new dates;

however, the date used was inaccurate

and needs to be corrected to reflect

either the actual month in which the

Rule was published or the month in

which the new clause was implemented

(the new clauses at 752.225–70 and

752.225–71 became effective when a

deviation was approved in February

1997). The specific amendments (and

clauses) are number 59 (752.225–70),

number 60 (752.225–71), number 62

(752.226–2), number 67 (752.7001),

number 68 (752.7004), number 72

(752.7015), and number 76 (752.7033).

Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication on July

29, 1997 of final rule [AIDAR Notice 97–

1] Miscellaneous Amendments to

Acquisition Regulations (62 FR 40464),

the subject of FR document 97–18603, is

corrected as follows:

1. In the Preamble on page 40465, in

the first column under D.

Administrative Changes, in items (1)

insert ‘and ‘‘A.I.D.’’ ’ between ‘ ‘‘A.I.D.’’ ’

and ‘‘to’’ on the fourth line.

CHAPTER 7—[CORRECTED]

2. On page 40466 in the second

column, in the second line of

amendment 2, ‘‘acronym’’ should read

‘‘acronyms’’ and ‘ ‘‘A.I.D.’’ ’ should read

‘ ‘‘AID’’ and A.I.D.’’ ’.

3. On the same page and column,

amendment 6 should read as follows:

‘‘6. In Chapter 7, sections 711.002–71,

722.170, 752.211–70 and 752.7002 are

amended by revising ‘‘AID-direct’’

wherever it appears to read ‘‘USAIDdirect’’, and sections 728.307–2,

728.309, 728.313, and 752.7003 are

amended by revising ‘‘A.I.D.-direct’’

wherever it appears to read ‘‘USAIDdirect’’.

715.613–71 [Corrected]

4. On page 40468 in the first column,

in amendment 32, paragraph (c)(1)

under section 715.613–71 should read

as follows:

‘‘(c) * * *

(1) The cognizant technical office

makes a preliminary finding that an

activity:

(i) Is authorized by Title XII; and

(ii) Should be classed as collaborative

assistance because a continuing

collaborative relationship between

USAID, the host country, and the

contractor is required from design

through completion of the activity, and

USAID, host country, and contractor

participation in a continuing review and

evaluation of the activity is essential for

its proper execution.’’

752.225–70 [Corrected]

5. On page 40470, in the first column

in amendment 59, in the clause heading

for section 752.225–70, ‘‘(May 1997)’’

should read ‘‘(February 1997)’’, and in

the last sentence of the clause, the final

phrase, ‘‘the Contractor agrees to refund

to USAID the entire amount of the

purchase’’ should read ‘‘the Contracting

Officer may require the contractor to

refund the entire amount of the

purchase’’.

752.225–71 [Corrected]

6. On the same page and column, in

amendment 60, in the clause heading

for section 752.225–71, ‘‘(May 1997)’’

should read ‘‘(February 1997)’’.

752.7001 [Corrected]

7. On the same page, in the third

column in amendment 67, in the clause

heading for section 752.7001, ‘‘(May

1997)’’ should read ‘‘(July 1997)’’.

752.7004 [Corrected]

8. On the same page and column, in

amendment 68, in the clause heading

for section 752.7004, ‘‘(May 1997)’’

should read ‘‘(July 1997)’’.

752.7015 [Corrected]

9. On page 40471 in the first column,

in amendment 72, in the clause heading

for section 752.7015, ‘‘(April 1996)’’

should read ‘‘(July 1997)’’.

752.7033 [Corrected]

10. On the same page and column, in

amendment 76, in the clause heading

for section 752.7033, ‘‘(May 1997’’)

should read ‘‘(July 1997)’’.

Dated: August 11, 1997.

Marcus L. Stevenson,

Procurement Executive.

[FR Doc. 97–22712 Filed 8–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6116–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

49 CFR Part 1157

[STB Ex Parte No. 563]

Commuter Rail Service Continuation

Subsidies and Discontinuance Notices

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board,

DOT.