Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 5117 

Service FCC Form No. Fee amount 

($) 

Payment 

type 

code 

b. New License (per application) ................................................................................ 310 & 159 ............................ 640.00 MNN 

c. License Renewal (per application) .......................................................................... 311 & 159 ............................ 160.00 MFN 

d. License Assignment or Transfer of Control (per station license) ........................... 314 & 159 or 315 & 159 or 

316 & 159.

100.00 MCN 

e. Frequency Assignment & Coordination (per frequency hour) ................................ Corres & 159 ........................ 60.00 MAN 

f. Special Temporary Authorization (per application) .................................................. Corres & 159 ........................ 170.00 MGN 

12. Permit to Deliver Programs to Foreign Broadcast Stations (per application): 

a. Commercial Television Stations .............................................................................. 308 & 159 ............................ 95.00 MBT 

b. Commercial AM or FM Radio Stations ................................................................... 308 & 159 ............................ 95.00 MBR 

13. Recognized Operating Agency (per application) ......................................................... Corres & 159 ........................ 1,015.00 CUG 

■ 8. Section 1.1108 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 1.1108 Schedule of charges for 

applications and other filings for the 

international telecommunication services. 

Remit payment (along with a copy of 

invoice) for these services to the: 

Federal Communications Commission, 

International Telecommunication Fees, 

P.O. Box 979096, St. Louis, MO 63197– 

9000 

1. Administrative Fee For Collections (per line item) ......................................................... 99 & 99A .............................. $2.00 IAT 

2. Telecommunication Charges .......................................................................................... 99 & 99A .............................. .................... ITTS 

■ 9. Section 1.1109 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 1.1109 Schedule of charges for 

applications and other filings for the 

Homeland services. 

Remit manual filings and/or payment 

for these services to the: Federal 

Communications Commission, 

Homeland Bureau Applications, P.O. 

Box 979092, St. Louis, MO 63197–9000 

1. Communication Assistance for Law Enforcement (CALEA) Petitions ........................... Corres & 159 ........................ $5,880.00 CLEA 

■ 10. Section 1.1113 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1.1113 Return or refund of charges. 

* * * * * 

(c) Applicants in the Media Services 

for first-come, first-served construction 

permits will be entitled to a refund of 

the fee, if, within fifteen days of the 

issuance of a Public Notice indicating 

there is a previously filed pending 

application for the same vacant channel, 

such applicant notifies the Commission 

that they no longer wish their 

application to remain on file behind the 

first applicant and any other applicants 

filed before his or her application, and 

the applicant specifically requests a 

refund of the fee paid and dismissal of 

his or her application. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–1945 Filed 1–28–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

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-a`-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 noncompulsory 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 § 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. 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
5118 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 nonsatellite AIS. 

7. NTIA and other commenters argue 

that the Commission should bar nonAIS transmissions on Channel 87B, even 

in inland areas, in order to avoid 

disruptions to satellite reception of AIS 

signals, which could, as ORBCOMM 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 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 coexist 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 nonAIS transmissions, and that those nonAIS 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 sitebased 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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
5120 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 § 80.231 and revises 

§ 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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
5122 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 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 sitebased 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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
5124 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

■ 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 

■ 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. 

■ 2. Section 2.106, the Table of 

Frequency Allocations, footnote US399, 

is revised to read as follows: 

§ 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 nonFederal 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 coprimary 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 

■ 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. 

■ 4. Amend part 80 by adding § 80.231 

to read as follows: 

§ 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 

§§ 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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 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). 

■ 5. Amend § 80.275 by revising the 

heading and paragraph (a) introductory 

text to read as follows: 

§ 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: 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 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: 

§ 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

Channel designator 

Carrier Frequency 

(MHz) 

Ship 

transmit 

Coast 

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 

1For 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. 2The 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. 3The frequency 161.975 MHz is available 

only for Automatic Identification System communications. No license authorizing a sitebased 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. 4The 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 80.393 by adding an 

undesignated center heading ‘‘AIS 

STATIONS’’ immediately above 

§ 80.393 and by revising the section to 

read as follows: 

AIS Stations 

§ 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. 

■ 8. Amend § 80.1101 by adding 

paragraph (c)(12)(vi) to read as follows: 

§ 80.1101 Performance standards. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES
5126 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 18 / Thursday, January 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

(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 § 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). 

■ 9. Amend § 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: 

§ 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 § 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 § 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 

§ 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 

§ 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 

§ 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 5dBμV/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 terrainbased 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 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with RULES