[Federal Register: January 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 18)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5117-5126]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29ja09-6]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 2, 80, and 90
[WT Docket No. 04-344; FCC 08-208]
Maritime Communications
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission or FCC) adopts additional measures for domestic
implementation of Automatic Identification Systems (AIS), an advanced
marine vessel tracking and navigation technology that can significantly
enhance our Nation's homeland security as well as maritime safety.
Specifically, in the Second Report and Order in WT Docket No. 04-344,
the Commission designates maritime VHF Channel 87B (161.975 MHz) for
exclusive AIS use throughout the Nation, while providing a replacement
channel for those geographic licensees that are currently authorized to
use Channel 87B in an inland VHF Public Coast (VPC) service area
(VPCSA); determines that only Federal Government (Federal) entities
should have authority to operate AIS base stations, obviating any
present need for the Commission to adopt licensing, operational, or
equipment certification rules for such stations; and requires that
Class B AIS shipborne devices--which have somewhat reduced
functionality vis-[agrave]-vis the Class A devices that are carried by
vessels required by law to carry AIS equipment, and are intended
primarily for voluntary carriage by recreational and other non-
compulsory vessels--comply with the international standard for such
equipment, while also mandating additional safeguards to better ensure
the accuracy of AIS data transmitted from Class B devices. These
measures will facilitate the establishment of an efficient and
effective domestic AIS network, and will optimize the navigational and
homeland security benefits that AIS offers.
DATES: Effective March 2, 2009 except for Sec. 80.231, which contains
new information collection requirements, that have not been approved by
OMB. The Federal Communications Commission will publish a document in
the Federal Register announcing the effective date. The incorporation
by reference listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the
Federal Register as of March 2, 2009.
[[Page 5118]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Tobias, Jeff.Tobias@FCC.gov,
Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-1617,
or TTY (202) 418-7233.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Federal
Communications Commission's Second Report and Order in WT Docket No.
04-344, FCC 08-208, adopted on September 15, 2008, and released
September 19, 2008. The full text of this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Center, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The
complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor,
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room
CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full text may also be downloaded at:
http://www.fcc.gov. Alternative formats are available to persons with
disabilities by sending an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or by calling the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).
1. In this Second Report and Order, the Commission concludes that
it would promote the primary objectives of this proceeding, and would
serve the broader public interest, to designate Channel 87B for
exclusive AIS use in the thirty-three inland VPCSAs, just as it
previously designated Channel 87B for exclusive use in the nine
maritime VPCSAs in the Report and Order at 71 FR 60067, October 12,
2006. Making Channel 87B, like Channel 88B, available only for AIS
throughout the Nation will serve the public interest by expanding the
effectiveness and reliability of AIS.
2. Many commenters argue that Channel 87B should be designated
exclusively for AIS use in the inland VPCSAs for reasons independent of
the need to accommodate satellite AIS. These commenters note that AIS
offers great benefits as a tool to assist vessels in navigating safely
on waterways within inland VPCSAs, just as it does with respect to
vessels in coastal areas and on the high seas. These commenters echo
RTCM's assertion, made earlier in this proceeding, that AIS can provide
vessel operators with the ability to ``see'' around islands and bends
in narrow, obstructed or winding waterways in a way that radar cannot.
According to RTCM, the unique navigational benefits of AIS will be
especially important for large passenger vessels, large barge tows and
similar vessels that have limited maneuverability on these inland
waterways.
3. Commenters assert that designation of a channel other than
Channel 87B for inland AIS operations would result in many of the same
problems that led the Commission to reject the use of a channel or
channels other than Channel 87B for AIS in the maritime VPCSAs, i.e.,
it would prevent the establishment of a seamless global AIS network
(and, in this case, even a seamless nationwide AIS network) and would
require vessels transiting an AIS ``fence'' between maritime and inland
VPCSAs to switch to a different AIS channel. These commenters believe,
in sum, that a failure to designate Channel 87B for AIS use on inland
waterways would prevent the United States from realizing the full
navigational safety and homeland security benefits of AIS.
4. Most commenters also believe that non-AIS operations should be
prohibited on Channel 87B in the inland VPCSAs in order to protect the
integrity of AIS operations not only in the inland VPCSAs, but also in
the maritime VPCSAs and even in international waters. NTIA contends
that the threat of co-channel interference to AIS from non-AIS
transmissions on Channel 87B in inland VPCSAs is such that the
Commission's main objective in this proceeding--to ensure that AIS is
deployed widely, quickly, reliably, and cost-effectively, and in a
manner that will maximize its capabilities--``cannot be fully attained
unless the Commission designates AIS Channel 87B on a nationwide
basis.'' Commenters note, in this regard, that, non-AIS transmissions
on Channel 87B from transmitters located within inland VPCSAs would
cause interference to AIS transmissions, even on the high seas, due to
atmospheric ``ducting,'' which can cause VHF signals to be received
several hundred miles away. Even relatively distant non-AIS
transmissions on Channel 87B could therefore interfere with and degrade
AIS operations, reducing the effectiveness of AIS for homeland security
as well as navigational safety.
5. MariTEL disputes the other commenters' arguments that non-AIS
operations on Channel 87B, even in inland VPCSAs, will cause
interference to AIS operations. MariTEL contends that the Commission
previously considered and rejected similar arguments in permitting the
use of VPC spectrum for land mobile operations pursuant to waivers. In
those waiver decisions, according to MariTEL, the Commission determined
that the use of VPC channels for maritime communications would not be
compromised if land mobile use of the channels occurred sufficiently
distant from the coast and navigable waterways. This argument overlooks
the fact that the referenced decisions by the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau's former Public Safety and Critical
Infrastructure Division did not permit land mobile use of Channel 87B,
and expressly conditioned the non-maritime use of the frequencies on
there being no harmful interference to current or future marine
communications, including but not limited to AIS. In addition, the
waivers granted in those cases were of limited geographic scope. The
Commission therefore is not persuaded that those waiver decisions
contradict the consensus view of the commenters other than MariTEL that
non-AIS operations in inland VPCSAs can cause harmful interference to
co-channel AIS communications, or that these decisions otherwise
undermine the rationale for a nationwide designation of Channel 87B for
AIS. The Commission therefore concludes that the public interest in
homeland security and maritime safety would best be served by
prohibiting non-AIS operations on Channel 87B throughout the Nation in
order to protect the integrity of terrestrial (i.e., non-satellite) AIS
communications.
6. In addition, the Commission concludes that non-AIS operations on
Channel 87B would likely cause interference to satellite AIS
communications. NTIA says that ``[p]reliminary reports demonstrate
that, with specific configurations, it is possible for land-based
stations reliably to receive AIS signals from approximately 350
nautical miles.'' The Maritime Transportation and Security Act of 2002
(MTSA), however, requires the Coast Guard to develop long-range
tracking capabilities, and the Coast Guard's goal in furtherance of
that mandate is to extend AIS coverage to two thousand nautical miles
from the United States shoreline. NTIA is therefore exploring the
possibility of using a low earth orbit communications satellite system
to receive, process and relay AIS data, and has contracted with
ORBCOMM, a mobile satellite service licensee, to evaluate satellite
detection of AIS signals. The consensus of the commenters is that
satellite AIS, if it proves feasible, will offer significant advantages
over terrestrial AIS by, for example, expanding vessel tracking
capabilities to encompass areas of the high seas well beyond the reach
of non-satellite AIS.
7. NTIA and other commenters argue that the Commission should bar
non-AIS transmissions on Channel 87B, even in inland areas, in order to
avoid disruptions to satellite reception of AIS signals, which could,
as ORBCOMM
[[Page 5119]]
notes, ``hinder the U.S. Coast Guard in fulfilling its critical
homeland security role.'' NTIA asserts that a report by the Department
of Defense Joint Spectrum Center (JSC) analyzing technical issues
relating to satellite AIS demonstrates that non-AIS co-channel signals
``cause[] degradation in AIS signal detection * * * that is both
unpredictable and unmanageable,'' and that this signal degradation
``will significantly decrease the effectiveness of the AIS system'' to
the point of defeating the purpose of using satellite AIS to expand
long-range vessel tracking capabilities. ORBCOMM concurs that there is
no current means of controlling non-AIS co-channel interference to
satellite AIS, explaining that it is developing protocols/algorithms
that will allow it to address simultaneous AIS transmissions from
different ships, but that these do not prevent interference to AIS
communications from non-AIS sources.
8. MariTEL argues that the Commission should not designate Channel
87B for AIS in the inland VPCSAs as an accommodation to satellite AIS
because ``there is no evidence that space-based monitoring will provide
the Coast Guard with any more information than it would otherwise
receive from terrestrial monitoring,'' and because, even if such space-
based monitoring of AIS transmissions on Channel 87B is deemed
beneficial, satellite AIS can co-exist with non-AIS operations on
Channel 87B in inland VPCSAs. The Commission finds neither argument to
be convincing. MariTEL does not dispute that satellite AIS can greatly
enlarge the distance at which AIS transmissions can be received and
relayed. In addition, MariTEL's argument that an AIS satellite should
be able to distinguish land mobile radio transmissions on Channel 87B
in inland VPCSAs from AIS transmissions on the channel elsewhere fails
to effectively address the comments submitted by the entities
responsible for implementing satellite AIS indicating that it is not
currently possible to filter out the non-AIS transmissions, and that
those non-AIS transmissions would likely degrade satellite AIS
reception, even with respect to AIS transmissions from vessels far from
shore. The Commission therefore concludes that non-AIS operations on
Channel 87B would likely need to be terminated if satellite AIS proves
feasible and is fully implemented.
9. In sum, the Commission agrees with commenters such as NTIA that
``[t]here are compelling safety and national security reasons to
designate Channel 87B for AIS on a nationwide basis.'' Because the
desirability of deploying AIS in coastal and international waters
applies equally to inland rivers and lakes, the optimization of the
domestic AIS network clearly requires the designation of Channels 87B
and 88B for inland AIS, and permitting any non-AIS uses of Channel 87B
anywhere in the Nation would compromise the integrity of the domestic,
and by extension the global, AIS network. The Commission also finds
that implementation of satellite AIS would serve the public interest,
and that clearing Channel 87B of non-AIS operations would be necessary
to maximize the effectiveness of satellite AIS operations
10. As a consequence of its designation of Channel 87B for AIS in
the inland VPCSAs, the Commission must establish a framework for
clearing the channel of non-AIS operations. In the Report and Order,
the Commission held that site-based VPC and private land mobile radio
(PLMR) licensees in the maritime VPCSAs could continue to operate on
Channel 87B until the expiration of their current license terms, but
authorizations to operate on Channel 87B would not be renewed. In the
inland VPCSAs, in contrast, there are no site-based VPC licensees and
only two site-based PLMR licensees, one of which is a public safety
entity. In addition, there is less maritime activity in the inland
VPCSAs, further reducing the short-term potential for Channel 87B
licensees in those areas to cause interference to AIS operations.
Moreover, the full-scale implementation of satellite AIS is a longer-
term project than the implementation of ship-to-ship and ship-to-shore
terrestrial AIS operations. Under these circumstances, the Commission
concludes that it can afford an additional period of grandfathering
protection to the site-based Channel 87B PLMR licensees in inland
VPCSAs. Specifically, the Commission will permit them to remain
authorized to operate on Channel 87B for fifteen years after the
effective date of the rule amendments adopted herein. This will provide
incumbent site-based licensees with an ample period of time to adjust
to the redesignation of Channel 87B without any disruption to their
present operations, while at the same time ensuring eventual clearance
of all non-AIS operations from the channel.
11. With respect to geographic licensees in the inland VPCSAs, the
Commission noted earlier in this proceeding that two duplex channel
pairs in the VHF maritime band have been set aside in each inland VPCSA
as public safety interoperability channels. Specifically, Channel 25
(157.250/161.850 MHz) is set aside in every inland VPCSA, and either
Channel 84 (157.225/161.825 MHz) or Channel 85 (157.275/161.875 MHz) is
also set aside in each inland VPCSA. The Commission's ULS database
indicates that only four entities are currently licensed pursuant to
the set-aside. The Commission noted earlier in this proceeding that it
had designated significant additional spectrum for public safety
interoperability, in the VHF band and elsewhere, in the years following
the set-aside of these VPC channels for that purpose, and it requested
comment as to whether, in the event it designated Channel 87B for
exclusive AIS use nationwide, any of these set-aside channels should be
redesignated for use by inland VPCSA licensees.
12. In light of its determination to redesignate Channel 87B for
exclusive AIS use in those VPCSAs, the Commission finds that it is
appropriate to redesignate one of the public safety set-aside channel
pairs in each inland VPCSA for use by inland VPCSA licensees. The only
commenters addressing this issue--MariTEL, PacifiCorp, and RTCM--all
favor redesignation of the channels, at least in the absence of any
showing that they are needed for public safety interoperability
communications. MariTEL argues that ``equity demands nothing less.''
MariTEL also suggests that giving inland VPCSA licensees replacement
spectrum would make them ``whole'' for the loss of Channel 87B.
13. The Commission therefore redesignates duplex Channels 84 and 85
for VPC communications in the inland VPCSAs. (The Commission decides to
make Channels 84/85 available to inland VPCSA licensees, rather than
Channel 25, for several reasons. All four of the public safety
licensees are licensed on Channel 25, but not all four are licensed on
the other channels. In addition, Channel 25 is more useful for public
safety interoperability because it is set aside throughout the inland
VPCSAs. Finally, PacifiCorp, the only commenter addressing this precise
issue, favors the reallocation of Channels 84 and 85, explaining that
the reallocation of those channels would be more beneficial than a
reallocation of Channel 25 in providing additional flexibility to
inland VPCSA licensees and lessees with respect to signal strength
across the border of adjacent VPCSAs.) Like incumbent site-based PLMR
licensees operating on Channel 87B, site-based incumbents currently
authorized on Channels 84/85 will remain authorized to operate on those
[[Page 5120]]
channels for a period of fifteen years following the effective date of
these rule amendments. As noted above with respect to incumbents on
Channel 87B, a grandfathering period of fifteen years should provide
affected public safety licensees with ample time for transition without
any disruption to their present operations. In addition, making these
former public safety set-aside channels available to inland VPCSA
licensees is equitable because it will restore the operating capacity
of these licensees, who, unlike the maritime VPCSA licensees, were
under no pre-existing obligation to make any of their licensed spectrum
available for AIS. This action is also equitable in consideration of
the fact that the nationwide AIS designation of Channel 87B is itself
intended to promote public safety. The Commission finds that this
action will not disserve public safety, especially in light of its
determination to temporarily grandfather the existing public safety use
of the channels.
14. In order to provide a transition period for inland VPCSA
geographic licensees to switch from Channel 87B to Channels 84/85, the
Commission will permit inland VPCSA geographic licensees to continue to
operate on Channel 87B for up to two years after the effective date of
these rules, while allowing them to modify their licenses to replace
Channel 87B with Channel 84 or Channel 85, as appropriate, any time
after the effective date. This transition period should be ample to
avoid any disruption of existing operations by inland VPCSA licensees,
and should not otherwise prove onerous to the licensees. At the same
time, this limited relief for existing inland VPCSA licensees should
not compromise efforts to implement AIS in the United States as quickly
and broadly as possible. At the end of the two-year transition period,
the Commission will modify any inland VPCSA licenses that were not
previously modified to replace Channel 87B with Channel 84 or Channel
85, as appropriate.
15. In the FNPRM in this proceeding, the Commission, noting that
the International Electro-technical Commission (IEC) was in the process
of developing AIS base station equipment standards, asked interested
parties to address standards and procedures for authorizing AIS base
station equipment under part 80, and sought comment on whether it
should adopt rules for the licensing and use of AIS base stations.
After reviewing the record, the Commission concludes that AIS base
stations should be operated only by Federal entities, and, as a
consequence, that the Commission need not adopt any rules pertaining to
AIS base station equipment certification, licensing, or operation.
16. Almost all of the commenters addressing this question believe
that private sector entities should not be licensed to operate AIS base
stations. NTIA states that control of AIS base stations is ``an
inherently federal government function.'' According to NTIA, AIS base
stations control all aspects of the AIS network, and can override
certain shipborne AIS functions. It explains, ``Base stations manage
the AIS VHF Data Link by managing communications traffic on AIS through
various means to provide for the safety of navigation, to obtain
information necessary for VTS [Vessel Traffic Services] and national
security purposes, to transmit safety related messages, and to serve as
an aid to navigation.'' RTCM adds, ``This power of AIS Base Stations to
affect the operating characteristics of AIS systems should only be
available to federal agencies with responsibility for navigational
safety and security.''
17. Alone among the commenters, MariTEL asserts that AIS base
stations should also be permitted to conduct commercial operations.
MariTEL also argues that a determination not to permit private sector
entities to be licensed for AIS base stations means that Channel 87B
will in fact have been reallocated for exclusive Federal use, not the
shared Federal/non-Federal use to which the Commission said the channel
was being reallocated in the Report and Order in this proceeding. The
Commission disagrees because, in making this argument, MariTEL ignores
the existence of ship-to-ship AIS communications, which do not directly
involve AIS base stations, and are authorized under part 80 of the
rules pursuant to Commission-issued ship station licenses.
18. The Commission agrees with NTIA and the other commenters who
argue that the responsibilities of operating AIS base stations should
be undertaken only by Federal entities. AIS base stations will query
and send commands to vessels. They will have the capability of
overriding certain shipborne AIS functions through remote control. They
will serve as aids to navigation, in a fashion similar to lighthouses.
They will be responsible for maritime traffic management. Given the
critical role played by AIS base stations in the global AIS network, it
would be inappropriate to permit private sector entities, or even state
or local government entities, to operate such stations in the United
States. Permitting non-Federal entities to control AIS base stations
could potentially jeopardize maritime domain awareness and maritime
safety by diffusing responsibility and accountability for AIS base
station operations.
19. It follows from this determination--that only Federal entities
should operate AIS base stations--that the Commission should not
promulgate rules for the licensing and operation of AIS base stations.
The Commission is statutorily prohibited from licensing Federal
Government radio stations. There is likewise no reason for the
Commission to adopt rules to govern the certification of AIS base
station equipment, because the Commission plays no role in certifying
equipment for Federal Government stations. Although most commenters
favor the international standard, IEC 62320-1, as the basis for
equipment certification rules for AIS base stations, the comments do
not account for the fact that radiofrequency equipment used in Federal
Government radio stations is subject to certification by NTIA, not the
Commission. In any event, the Commission has no reason to expect that
the Federal Government will employ AIS base station equipment that is
not compatible with the international standards. The Commission
therefore declines to adopt any rules pertaining to the licensing,
operation, or certification of equipment for AIS base stations.
20. The final set of issues presented in the FNPRM in this
proceeding involved standards for certifying Class B AIS shipborne
equipment, and further measures the Commission might adopt to ensure
the accuracy of data transmitted from such devices. As the Commission
noted in the FNPRM, Class B AIS devices are generally intended for use
by vessels that are not subject to a mandatory AIS carriage
requirement, and provide a less expensive alternative to Class A
devices to encourage voluntary AIS carriage. For reasons discussed
below, the Commission concludes that it should base part 80
certification of Class B AIS devices on compliance with the pertinent
international standard for such devices, IEC 62287-1, as proposed in
the FNPRM. The Commission therefore adds a new Sec. 80.231 and revises
Sec. 80.1101(c)(12) of the Commission's rules to incorporate IEC
62287-1 by reference as the Commission standard for certifying Class B
AIS equipment. As suggested by some commenters, however, the Commission
also adopts additional requirements as safeguards to better ensure that
Class B AIS devices will transmit accurate static data, including the
correct Maritime Mobile
[[Page 5121]]
Service Identity (MMSI) number. (An MMSI number, also referred to
simply as an MMSI, is a unique nine-digit number assigned to commercial
and recreational vessels participating in the Global Maritime Distress
and Safety System (GMDSS). The MMSI functions as a ``phone number'' for
the vessel and must be programmed into the vessel's digital selective
calling (DSC) radio. MMSIs are also used for AIS transponders.)
21. The commenters addressing this issue generally favor the
Commission's proposal to incorporate by reference IEC 62287-1 as the
standard for certifying Class B AIS equipment under part 80. As ACR
Electronics explains, the incorporation by reference of IEC 62287-1 is
the option most consistent with the paramount goals of this proceeding
to facilitate speedy and widespread deployment of AIS equipment. Given
that, as ACR Electronics also notes, there currently is no alternative
basis for certifying Class B AIS equipment, rejection of IEC 62287-1 as
the standard for certifying Class B AIS devices would necessitate the
development of a different standard, which would result in a
substantial and unacceptable additional delay before Commission
certification of Class B AIS devices could begin. Further, reliance on
the existing IEC standard will reduce the cost of Class B AIS devices,
and thus promote voluntary AIS carriage. It will also moot any concerns
regarding interoperability of Class B AIS devices both domestically and
on a worldwide basis.
22. The Commission disagrees with MariTEL's contention that the
Commission should delay certifying Class B AIS equipment until it
determines whether IEC 62287-1 ensures that Class B AIS devices do not
cause interference to VPC operations in adjacent spectrum. The
Commission already has determined, after reviewing an extensive record
that included separate technical studies submitted by MariTEL and NTIA,
that ``the interference impact of wideband simplex AIS on VPC
operations can be effectively mitigated through commercially reasonable
means,'' and MariTEL has not adduced any evidence to suggest that Class
B AIS devices would pose a greater interference threat to VPC
operations than Class A AIS devices, or that adopting rules for the
certification of Class B AIS devices otherwise requires revisiting that
earlier determination. The Commission finds, in sum, that certification
of Class B AIS equipment in accordance with the established
international standard for such equipment would serve the public
interest for the same reasons that underlie the Commission's earlier
determination to certify Class A AIS equipment in accordance with the
established Class A international standard. The Commission therefore
amends our rules as proposed to incorporate by reference IEC 62287-1 as
the standard for certifying Class B AIS equipment under Part 80.
23. The Commission also agrees in principle with those commenters
who believe that the Commission should adopt additional measures,
beyond reliance on IEC 62287-1, to ensure the accuracy of MMSIs and
other static data programmed into Class B AIS devices. The Commission
has reviewed the proposals to that end in the record, some of which are
very detailed and extensive. As discussed below, the Commission adopts
three measures to provide better assurance that Class B AIS devices
will be programmed with the correct static data, and in particular the
correct MMSI. None of these measures conflicts with IEC 62287-1, and
none should be burdensome for either equipment manufacturers or end
users. It is unnecessary, and might be counterproductive, to prescribe
more complicated processes, as some comments contemplate.
24. First, as urged by NTIA, the Commission prohibits any person
from knowingly entering an incorrect MMSI or other static data in a
Class B AIS device. Although this is a very basic measure, it ensures
and clarifies that the Commission may impose the full range of
sanctions at its disposal for the willful or knowing entry of false
data. The Commission says it would view any violations of this
requirement as very serious, because the transmission of inaccurate
static data could result in the misidentification of vessels, thus
compromising the Coast Guard's ability to use AIS to full effect on
behalf of its maritime domain awareness efforts. Second, the Commission
requires that the static data, including MMSI, be entered by sellers
and professional installers of Class B AIS devices, not the end users.
As commenters note, IEC 62287-1 prohibits end users from altering
MMSIs, once programmed in the unit, but does not prohibit end users
from entering the numbers initially. Thus, this requirement would go
further than IEC 62287-1 by requiring professional entry of the MMSI
number at the point of sale or installation. NTIA proposes such a
requirement, and it is consistent with the comments of ACR Electronics,
RTCM and the Task Force asking the Commission to require persons that
sell and install Class B AIS units to ensure that the appropriate
static data is entered, or at least to encourage them to enter the data
themselves. Third, and also as recommended by NTIA, as well as by RTCM,
the Commission requires manufacturers to include a conspicuous label on
Class B AIS devices explaining how to enter and confirm static data,
and warning that inputting an MMSI that has not been properly assigned
to the end user, or otherwise entering any improper or inaccurate
static data, is prohibited. Manufacturers also will be required to
include this information in the user's manual. As RTCM notes, IEC
62287-1 contains only minimal guidance on the contents of manuals and
user instructions, so adoption of this requirement does not conflict
with the standard. NTIA believes that these three measures together
provide a significant safeguard to ensure that the static data
transmitted from Class B AIS devices, particularly MMSIs, are accurate
and reliable. The Commission therefore adopts these measures. The
Commission also adopts its proposal, unopposed by any commenter, that
applicants for Commission certification of a Class B AIS device first
obtain Coast Guard certification of the device, consistent with the
Commission's procedures for Class A AIS devices.
25. Finally, the Commission notes that, while the FNPRM was
pending, equipment manufacturers requested waivers to permit the
authorization and use of Class B AIS transponders. The Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau's Mobility Division sought comment on the
waiver requests, and the commenters support authorizing Class B AIS
devices before the conclusion of this proceeding. They assert that
allowing voluntary vessels to fit the lower-cost Class B AIS devices as
soon as possible will improve maritime security and safety of
navigation. The Commission agrees that it is in the public interest to
allow the use of Class B devices prior to the effective date of the
rules adopted herein. Therefore, the Commission grants the waiver
requests to the extent that it will certify Class B equipment that
meets the requirements adopted in this Second Report and Order prior to
the effective date of the new rules.
I. Procedural Matters
A. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
26. This document contains new information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-
13. It will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review under Section 3507(d) of the
[[Page 5122]]
PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies are invited to
comment on the new or modified information collection requirements
contained in this proceeding. In addition, we note that pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we previously sought specific comment on how the
Commission might ``further reduce the information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
27. In this present document, we have assessed the effects of
establishing labeling requirements for manufacturers of Class B AIS
devices, and find that the labeling requirements adopted herein would
not impose an undue burden or excessive cost on such manufacturers,
including those that have fewer than 25 employees. We also find that
the public interest in ensuring that Class B AIS devices transmit
accurate static data, including the correct MMSI number, which is the
underlying purpose of the labeling requirements, outweighs the
incremental compliance cost on manufacturers, including those that have
25 or fewer employees.
B. Report to Congress
28. The Commission will send a copy of this Second Report and Order
in a report to be sent to Congress and the General Accountability
Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
C. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
29. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
incorporated in the FNPRM in this proceeding. The Commission sought
written public comment on the proposals in the FNPRM, including comment
on the IRFA. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
conforms to the RFA.
Need for, and Objectives of, the Second Report and Order:
30. The rules adopted in the Second Report and Order are intended
to facilitate the implementation of maritime Automatic Identification
Systems (AIS) in the United States and its territorial waters. AIS is
an important tool for enhancing maritime safety and homeland security.
In the Second Report and Order, the Commission designates VHF maritime
Channel 87B for exclusive AIS use in inland VHF Public Coast service
areas (VPCSAs) because such designation will best ensure that the
United States can maximize the maritime safety and homeland security
benefits of AIS. The exclusive use of VHF maritime Channel 87B for AIS
in inland waterways will, among other things, provide an important
navigational tool to guide vessels traveling on inland rivers and
lakes, avoid the problems that would inhere in requiring vessels to
switch AIS channels when transiting an AIS ``fence'' between maritime
VPCSAs and inland VPCSAs, facilitate speedy AIS deployment using
existing technical standards and infrastructure, and prevent co-channel
interference to AIS operations not only in inland waterways but also in
coastal and international waters. The Second Report and Order also
concludes that AIS base stations should be operated only by Federal
entities, and, as a consequence, that the Commission need not adopt any
rules pertaining to AIS base station equipment certification, licensing
or operation. Finally, the Commission adopts rules for the
certification of Class B AIS devices, incorporating by reference the
applicable international standard as the basis for such certification,
while also adopting additional measures to better ensure that Class B
AIS devices transmit accurate static data.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the IRFA:
31. No comments were submitted specifically in response to the
IRFA. However, one of the commenters, MariTEL, Inc. (MariTEL), contends
that the Commission should not designate Channel 87B for AIS in inland
VPCSAs, should not adopt rules based on international standards for the
certification of AIS base station equipment, and should not authorize
Class B AIS devices pursuant to the international standards, because
such measures would cause interference to VHF Public Coast (VPC)
stations operating on adjacent channels. As discussed in detail in
Section E of this FRFA, we have considered the potential economic
impact on small entities of these rules, and we have considered
alternatives that would reduce the potential economic impact on small
entities of the rules enacted herein, regardless of whether the
potential economic impact was discussed in any comments.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
Rules Will Apply:
32. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA defines the term
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
33. Small businesses in the aviation and marine radio services use
a very high frequency (VHF) marine or aircraft radio and, as
appropriate, an emergency position-indicating radio beacon (and/or
radar) or an emergency locator transmitter. The Commission has not
developed a small business size standard specifically applicable to
these small businesses. For purposes of this analysis, the Commission
uses the SBA small business size standard for the category ``Cellular
and Other Wireless Telecommunications,'' which is 1,500 or fewer
employees. Between December 3, 1998 and December 14, 1998, the
Commission held an auction of 42 VHF Public Coast (VPC) licenses in the
157.1875-157.4500 MHz (ship transmit) and 161.775-162.0125 MHz (coast
transmit) bands. For purposes of the auction, the Commission defined a
``small'' business as an entity that, together with controlling
interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues for the preceding
three years not to exceed fifteen million dollars. In addition, a
``very small'' business is one that, together with controlling
interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues for the preceding
three years not to exceed three million dollars. There are
approximately 10,672 licensees in the Marine Coast Service, and the
Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as ``small''
businesses under the above special small business size standards.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities:
34. The rule amendments adopted in the Second Report and Order
impose new compliance burdens on manufacturers and vendors of Class B
AIS devices by requiring that such devices comply with the
international standard for Class B AIS equipment, IEC 62287-1, in order
to be certified by the Commission for use in the United States, and by
requiring that static data be entered into Class B AIS equipment only
by the vendor or installer. The rule amendments adopted in the Second
Report and Order also impose requirements for the professional
[[Page 5123]]
installation and labeling of Class B AIS devices to better ensure the
accuracy of the static data transmitted from such devices.
Steps Taken to Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered:
35. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in developing its approach, which
may include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(1) The
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small
entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and
(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for
such small entities.''
36. In the IRFA for the FNPRM, the Commission described, and sought
comment on, possible alternatives to the rule amendments under
consideration in the FNPRM that might minimize the economic impact on
small entities. Specifically, the Commission asked interested parties,
and in particular inland VPCSA licensees, to provide information on the
potential impact on inland VPCSA licensees of designating Channel 87B
for AIS use exclusively throughout the Nation. To the extent that
commenters foresaw such an impact, they were invited to suggest
alternatives that would minimize or eliminate any adverse effect on
small entities. It was noted, for example, that commenters could
suggest that inland VPCSA licensees be accorded treatment similar to
that which was accorded to site-based incumbent licensees, permitting
them to continue to operate on Channel 87B on a shared basis with AIS
for the remainder of their current license terms, but with no
opportunity for renewal of the licenses. Commenters were also invited
to address the possibility of migrating such licensees to different
channels if such were available.
37. In the FNPRM, comment was also invited on rules to govern AIS
base stations, including certification standards for AIS base station
equipment. In the absence of specific proposals, the Commission invited
interested parties to consider generally whether any special measures
should be adopted in the AIS base station rules to prevent a
significant adverse impact on small entities. Parties providing such
comments were asked to address the extent to which they believe small
entities may seek to become AIS base station licensees.
38. Finally, the Commission requested comment in the FNPRM on the
Commission's proposal to incorporate by reference IEC 62287-1 as the
standard for certifying Class B AIS devices under Part 80 of the
Commission's rules. The Commission stated that incorporating by
reference the international standard for Class B AIS devices would
reduce costs to manufacturers by eliminating the possible need to
design devices to two potentially conflicting standards, and would
reduce costs to users of the devices both from a pass-through of
manufacturers' cost savings and by eliminating the possible need to fit
their vessels with more than one Class B AIS device if they travel
outside U.S. territorial waters, i.e., removing the need to carry one
Class B AIS device to function within U.S. territorial waters, and
another Class B AIS device to function in international waters or other
nations' territorial waters. The Commission noted, in addition, that
Class B AIS devices are intended generally for use on vessels that are
not required by law to carry AIS devices. Since carriage of Class B AIS
devices is voluntary, the establishment of standards for certifying
such devices should not impose a new compliance burden on vessel
operators. However, to the extent that any commenters believed that the
establishment of equipment certification standards for Class B AIS
devices might impose a significant new compliance burden on any small
entities, the Commission invited those commenters to suggest
alternative or complementary approaches that might reduce or eliminate
that burden, including, but not limited to, the establishment of less
rigorous standards, or the provision of exemptions or grandfathering
protection for small entities.
39. Although the Commission received no comments specifically
addressed to the IRFA for the FNPRM, it has considered all comments to
the FNPRM addressing the impact of any proposed change on small
entities and all suggestions for alternative measures that would have a
less significant impact on small entities. For reasons discussed below,
the Commission has concluded that the rule changes adopted in the
Second Report and Order will not impose undue compliance burdens on
small entities.
40. In order to avoid the disruption of VPC station operations in
inland VPCSAs that might otherwise stem from the designation of Channel
87B for exclusive AIS use in the inland VPCSAs, the Commission has
provided the licensees of those stations with both a significant
transitional period to adjust to the loss of Channel 87B, as well as a
replacement channel. Specifically, the Commission has provided that
site-based licensees operating on Channel 87B in inland areas may
continue to use that channel for fifteen years after the effective date
of these rule changes, and that geographic licensees operating on
Channel 87B in inland VPCSAs may continue to operate on the channel for
a period of two years following the effective date of these rule
amendments. In addition, in each inland VPCSA, the Commission is making
a duplex channel pair, either Channel 84 or Channel 85, depending on
the inland VPCSA, available for VPC use by the geographic licensee as a
replacement for Channel 87B. Channel 84/85 will be made available
immediately upon the effective date of these rule amendments; thus,
licensees will be able to operate on either Channel 84/85 or Channel
87B for a significant period of time, allowing migration of existing
users of Channel 87B to alternative spectrum without disruption of
existing operations on Channel 87B. In addition, the only commenter
opposing the designation of Channel 87B for AIS use in inland VPCSAs
has indicated that the redesignation of Channel 84/85 for VPC use could
suffice to compensate licensees for the loss of use of Channel 87B.
41. The Commission has determined not to adopt rules for the
certification of AIS base station equipment, or for the licensing and
operation of AIS base stations, because AIS base stations perform
critical maritime safety and homeland security functions, and should
therefore be controlled only by Federal entities. Accordingly, there is
no present need to further consider how such rules might affect small
entities.
42. In addition, the Commission continues to find, for the reasons
stated in the IRFA accompanying the FNPRM, that adopting rules for the
certification of Class B AIS devices based on the international
standard, IEC 62287-1, will benefit the manufacturers of such devices,
including small entities, because manufacturers would have to
manufacture Class B AIS devices in accordance with that standard in any
event to serve vessels traveling outside U.S. territorial waters.
Adoption of a different standard incompatible with IEC 62287-1 would
increase costs of manufacturing Class B AIS equipment by requiring that
such equipment conform to both standards. Those costs would be passed
on to consumers, and it is even possible that establishment of
[[Page 5124]]
a U.S.-specific standard for Class B AIS devices would compel vessel
owners and operators, including recreational boaters, to purchase and
install two separate Class B AIS devices. Adoption of a different
standard would also delay domestic deployment of Class B AIS equipment
because no such accepted alternative standard currently exists.
Finally, the Commission has noted that the manufacturers addressing
this issue all support the incorporation by reference of IEC 62287-1.
43. Finally, the Commission has also determined in the Second
Report and Order to impose additional requirements pertaining to the
labeling, sale, installation and operation of Class B AIS equipment.
Specifically, the Commission has adopted rules that: (a) Prohibit any
person from entering an incorrect MMSI or other static data in a Class
B AIS device; (b) require that sellers and professional installers of
Class B AIS devices, not the end users, enter the static data; and (c)
require affixation on a Class B AIS device of a conspicuous label
explaining how to enter and confirm static data, and warning that it is
a violation of the Commission's rules to input an MMSI that has not
been properly assigned to the end user, or to otherwise enter any
improper or inaccurate static data, and to provide this same
information in the user's manual. These provisions do not impose a
significant compliance burden on manufacturers, vendors or users of
Class B AIS equipment. In any event, the Commission does not see any
alternative that would permit differential application of these
requirements on small entities without undermining the purpose of these
requirements, to promote homeland security and maritime safety by
ensuring that Class B AIS devices transmit accurate static data.
F. Report to Congress
44. The Commission will send a copy of this Second Report and Order
in WT Docket No. 04-344, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy
of the Second Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A
copy of the Second Report and Order and the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (or summaries thereof) will also be published in
the Federal Register.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 2
Communications equipment.
47 CFR Part 80
Incorporation by reference, Communications equipment, Marine
safety, Radio, Vessels.
47 CFR Part 90
Communications equipment, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Rule Changes
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR parts 2, 80 and 90 as follows:
PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL
RULES AND REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise
noted.
0
2. Section 2.106, the Table of Frequency Allocations, footnote US399,
is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.
UNITED STATES (US) NOTES
* * * * *
US399 The frequency bands 161.9625-161.9875 MHz (AIS 1 with its
center frequency at 161.975 MHz) and 162.0125-162.0375 MHz (AIS 2
with its center frequency at 162.025 MHz) are allocated to the
maritime mobile service on a primary basis for Federal Government
and non-Federal Government use, and shall be used exclusively for
Automatic Identification Systems (AIS). However, in VHF Public Coast
Service Areas (VPCSAs) 1-9, site-based stations licensed prior to
November 13, 2006, may continue to operate on a co-primary basis in
the frequency band 161.9625-161.9875 MHz until expiration of the
license term for licenses in active status as of November 13, 2006.
Also, in VPCSAs 10-42, site-based stations licensed in the frequency
band 161.9625-161.9875 MHz prior to March 2, 2009 may remain
authorized to operate on a co-primary basis in that frequency band
until March 4, 2024, and geographical stations licensed in the
frequency band 161.9625-161.9875 MHz prior to March 2, 2009 may
continue to operate on a co-primary basis in that frequency band
until March 2, 2011. See 47 CFR 80.371(c)(1)(ii) for the definitions
of VPCSAs, and geographic license.
* * * * *
PART 80--STATIONS IN THE MARITIME SERVICES
0
3. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 4, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, 48 Stat. 1066,
1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, unless
otherwise noted. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105,
as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609; 3 UST 3450, 3 UST 4726, 12
UST 2377.
0
4. Amend part 80 by adding Sec. 80.231 to read as follows:
Sec. 80.231 Technical Requirements for Class B Automatic
Identification System (AIS) equipment.
(a) Class B Automatic Identification System (AIS) equipment must
meet the technical requirements of the International Electro-technical
Commission (IEC) 62287-1 International Standard, ``Maritime navigation
and radio communication equipment and systems--Class B shipborne
equipment of the Automatic Identification System--Part 1: Carrier--
sense time division multiple access (CSTDMA) techniques,'' First
Edition 2006-03. The Director of the Federal Register approves this
incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies of this standard can be inspected at the Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC
(Reference Information Center), call 1-888-225-5322 or at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. IEC publications can be purchased from
the International Electro-technical Commission, 3 Rue de Varembe, CH-
1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, or from the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036, telephone
(212) 642-4900, http://www.ansi.org.
(b) In addition to the labels or other identifying information
required under Sec. Sec. 2.925 and 2.926 of this chapter, each Class B
AIS device shall include a conspicuous label that includes:
Instructions on how to accurately enter into the device and confirm
static data pertaining to the vessel in which the device is or will be
installed; and the following statement: ``WARNING: It is a violation of
the rules of the Federal Communications Commission to input an MMSI
that has not been properly assigned to the end user, or to otherwise
input any inaccurate data in this
[[Page 5125]]
device.'' Instructions on how to accurately enter and confirm static
data in the device shall also be included in the user's manual for the
device. The entry of static data into a Class B AIS device shall be
performed by the vendor of the device or by an appropriately qualified
person in the business of installing marine communications equipment on
board vessels. In no event shall the entry of static data into a Class
B AIS device be performed by the user of the device or the licensee of
a ship station using the device. Knowingly programming a Class B AIS
device with inaccurate static data, or causing a Class B AIS device to
be programmed with inaccurate static data, is prohibited.
(c) Prior to submitting a certification application for a Class B
AIS device, the following information must be submitted in duplicate to
the Commandant (CG-521), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 2nd Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20593-0001:
(1) The name of the manufacturer or grantee and the model number of
the AIS device; and
(2) Copies of the test report and test data obtained from the test
facility showing that the device complies with the environmental and
operational requirements identified in IEC 62287-1.
(d) After reviewing the information described in paragraph (c) of
this section, the U.S. Coast Guard will issue a letter stating whether
the AIS device satisfies all of the requirements specified in IEC
62287-1.
(e) A certification application for an AIS device submitted to the
Commission must contain a copy of the U.S. Coast Guard letter stating
that the device satisfies all of the requirements specified in IEC
62287-1, a copy of the technical test data, and the instruction
manual(s).
0
5. Amend Sec. 80.275 by revising the heading and paragraph (a)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 80.275 Technical Requirements for Class A Automatic
Identification System (AIS) equipment.
(a) Prior to submitting a certification application for a Class A
AIS device, the following information must be submitted in duplicate to
the Commandant (G-PSE), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 2nd Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20593-0001:
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 80.371 by removing the column titled ``Frequency pairs
not available for assignment'' in the table in paragraph (c)(1)(ii),
and revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii) introductory text, and
(c)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.371 Public correspondence frequencies.
* * * * *
(c) Working frequencies in the marine VHF 156-162 MHz band. (1)(i)
The frequency pairs listed in this paragraph are available for
assignment to public coast stations for communications with ship
stations and units on land.
Working Carrier Frequency Pairs in the 156-162 MHz Band \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrier Frequency
(MHz)
Channel designator ---------------------
Ship Coast
transmit transmit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24................................................ 157.200 161.800
84................................................ 157.225 161.825
25 \5\............................................ 157.250 161.850
85 \2\............................................ 157.275 161.875
26................................................ 157.300 161.900
86................................................ 157.325 161.925
27................................................ 157.350 161.950
87 \3\............................................ 157.375 161.975
28................................................ 157.400 162.000
88 \4\............................................ 157.425 162.025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For special assignment of frequencies in this band in certain areas
of Washington State, the Great Lakes and the east coast of the United
States pursuant to arrangements between the United States and Canada,
see subpart B of this part.
\2\ The frequency pair 157.275/161.875 MHz is available on a primary
basis to ship and public coast stations. In Alaska it is also
available on a secondary basis to private mobile repeater stations.
\3\ The frequency 161.975 MHz is available only for Automatic
Identification System communications. No license authorizing a site-
based VHF Public Coast Station or a Private Land Mobile Radio Station
to operate on the frequency 161.975 MHz will be renewed unless the
license is or has been modified to remove frequency 161.975 MHz as an
authorized frequency. Licenses authorizing geographic stations to
operate on frequency 161.975 MHz will be modified on March 2, 2011 to
replace the frequency with either frequency pair 157.225/161.825 MHz
(VPCSAs 10-15, 23-30, 33-34, 36-39, and 41-42) or frequency pair
157.275/161.875 MHz (VPCSAs 16-22, 31-32, 35, and 40), unless an
application to so modify the license is granted before that date.
\4\ The frequency 162.025 MHz is available only for Automatic
Identification System communications. One hundred twenty kilometers
(75 miles) from the United States/Canada border, the frequency 157.425
MHz is available for intership and commercial communications. Outside
the Puget Sound area and its approaches and the Great Lakes, 157.425
MHz is available for communications between commercial fishing vessels
and associated aircraft while engaged in commercial fishing
activities.
\5\ In VPCSAs 10-42, the working carrier frequency pair 157.250/161.850
MHz (Channel 25) is not available for assignment under part 80.
* * * * *
(ii) Service areas in the marine VHF 156-162 MHz band are VHF
Public Coast Service Areas (VPCSAs). As listed in the table in this
paragraph, VPCSAs are based on, and composed of one or more of, the
U.S. Department of Commerce's 172 Economic Areas (EAs). See 60 FR 13114
(March 10, 1995). In addition, the Commission shall treat Guam and the
Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin
Islands, American Samoa, and the Gulf of Mexico as EA-like areas, and
has assigned them EA numbers 173-176, respectively. Maps of the EAs and
VPCSAs are available for public inspection and copying at the FCC
Public Reference Room, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20554, 1-888-225-5322. In addition to the EAs listed in the table in
this paragraph, each VPCSA also includes the adjacent waters under the
jurisdiction of the United States. In VPCSAs 10-42, the working carrier
frequency pair 157.250 MHz/161.850 MHz (Channel 25) is not available
for assignment under part 80.
(3) VPCSA licensees may not operate on Channel 228B (162.0125 MHz),
which is available for use in the Coast Guard's Ports and Waterways
Safety System (PAWSS). In addition, VPCSA licensees may not operate on
Channel AIS 1 (161.975 MHz) or Channel AIS 2 (162.025 MHz), which are
designated exclusively for Automatic Identification Systems (AIS),
except to receive AIS communications to the same extent, and subject to
the same limitations, as other shore stations participating in AIS. See
note 3 to the table in paragraph (c)(1) of this section regarding use
of Channel AIS 1 by VPCSA licensees in VPCSAs 10-42.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 80.393 by adding an undesignated center heading ``AIS
STATIONS'' immediately above Sec. 80.393 and by revising the section
to read as follows:
AIS Stations
Sec. 80.393 Frequencies for AIS stations.
Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) are a maritime broadcast
service. The simplex channels at 161.975 MHz (AIS 1) and 162.025 MHz
(AIS 2), each with a 25 kHz bandwidth, may be authorized only for AIS.
In accordance with the Maritime Transportation Security Act, the United
States Coast Guard regulates AIS carriage requirements for non-Federal
Government ships. These requirements are codified at 33 CFR 164.46,
401.20.
0
8. Amend Sec. 80.1101 by adding paragraph (c)(12)(vi) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.1101 Performance standards.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
[[Page 5126]]
(12) * * *
(vi) With respect to Class B AIS devices only, IEC 62287-1
International Standard, ``Maritime navigation and radio communication
equipment and systems--Class B shipborne equipment of the Automatic
Identification System--part 1: Carrier--sense time division multiple
access (CSTDMA) techniques,'' First Edition 2006-03 (incorporated by
reference at Sec. 80.231).
* * * * *
PART 90-PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES
The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161,
303(g), 303(r), 332(c)(7).
0
9. Amend Sec. 90.20 by removing paragraphs (g)(3) and (g)(4),
redesignating paragraph (g)(5) as (g)(3), and revising paragraphs (g)
introductory text, (g)(2) and redesignated paragraphs (g)(3)(i),
(g)(3)(ii), (g)(3)(iii)(B), (g)(3)(iii)(D), and (g)(3)(vi) to read as
follows:
Sec. 90.20 Public safety pool.
* * * * *
(g) Former public correspondence working channel in the maritime
VHF (156-162 MHz) band allocated for public safety use in 33 inland
Economic Areas.
* * * * *
(2) In VHF Public Coast Service Areas (VPCSAs) 10-42, the duplex
channel pair 157.250 MHz/161.850 MHz (VHF Maritime Channel 25) is
allocated for public safety use by entities eligible for licensing
under paragraph (a) of this section, and is designated primarily for
the purpose of interoperability communications. See 47 CFR
80.371(c)(1)(ii) for the definitions of VPCSAs.
(i) The channel pair 157.250 MHz/161.850 MHz was formerly allocated
and assigned (under Sec. 80.371(c) (1997) of this chapter) as a public
correspondence working channel in the maritime VHF 156-162 MHz band,
and was also shared (under former Sec. 90.283 (1997) of this chapter)
with private land mobile stations, including grandfathered public
safety licensees. Thus, there are grandfathered licensees nationwide
(maritime and private land mobile radio stations, including by rule
waiver) operating on this channel both inside and outside of VPCSAs 10-
42.
(ii) The channel pairs 157.225 MHz/161.825 MHz and 157.275 MHz/
161.875 MHz were formerly allocated and assigned under this section as
public safety interoperability channels but were reallocated for
assignment as VHF public coast station channels under Sec. 80.371(c)
of this chapter. Public safety operations licensed on these channels as
of March 2, 2009 or licensed pursuant to an application filed prior to
September 19, 2008, may remain authorized to operate on the channels on
a primary basis until March 4, 2024.
(3) * * *
(i) Provide evidence of frequency coordination in accordance with
Sec. 90.175. Public safety coordinators except the Special Emergency
Coordinator are certified to coordinate applications for the channel
pair 157.250 MHz/161.850 MHz (i.e. , letter symbol PX under paragraph
(c)(2) of this section).
(ii) Station power, as measured at the output terminals of the
transmitter, must not exceed 50 Watts for base stations and 20 Watts
for mobile stations, except in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (g)(3)(vi) of this section. Antenna height (HAAT) must not
exceed 122 meters (400 feet) for base stations and 4.5 meters (15 feet)
for mobile stations, except in accordance with paragraph (g)(3)(vi) of
this section. Antenna height (HAAT) must not exceed 122 meters (400
feet) for base stations and 4.5 meters (15 feet) for mobile stations,
except in accordance with paragraph (g)(3)(vi) of this section. Such
base and mobile channels shall not be operated on board aircraft in
flight.
(iii) * * *
(B) Protect stations described in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this
section, by frequency coordination in accordance Sec. 90.175 of this
part.
* * * * *
(D) Where the Public safety designated channel is not a Public
safety designated channel in an adjacent VPCSA: Applicants shall
engineer base stations such that the maximum signal strength at the
boundary of the adjacent VPCSA does not exceed 5dB[mu]V/m.
* * * * *
(vi) Applicants seeking to be licensed for stations exceeding the
power/antenna height limits of the table in paragraph (g)(3)(iv) of
this section must request a waiver of that paragraph and must submit
with their application an interference analysis, based upon an
appropriate, generally-accepted terrain-based propagation model, that
shows that co-channel protected entities, described in paragraph
(g)(3)(iii) of this section, would receive the same or greater
interference protection than the relevant criteria outlined in
paragraph (g)(3)(iii) of this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-1536 Filed 1-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P