24 JUNE 2017 • FOGHORN REGULATORYREPORT By Peter Lauridsen, PV A Regulatory Affairs Consultant United States-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council L ast month, I addressed the F e d e r a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n Commission (FCC) regulations that are founded on the Agreement between Canada and the United States of America for Promotion of Safety on the Great Lakes by Means of Radio, 1973. In that article I raised several issues. The agreement is undoubtedly founded on radiotelephone and trans- mission technology and knowledge circa late 1960s and early 1970s. We have seen repeated revolutions in tech- nology, materials, and knowledge in the decades since the agreement was negotiated. We also see a difference in how each nation has addressed its own domestic fleet not sailing in trans- national waters. Canada recognizes a relaxation in some agreement require- ments for its own “home waters” while the United States does not provide dif- ferentia in its Great Lakes operating fleet. The April FOGHORN article pointed out the national differences in cost of compliance, frequency of inspec- tion, and passenger capacity applicabil- ity all seemingly detrimental to the U.S. operator. Further research has provided a possible vehicle for addressing differ- ences in application between nations, if not an avenue for total repeal of an agreement that has outlived its purpose. Quoting a Joint Forward Plan of August 2014, “In February 2011, then-President Obama and former Canadian Prime Minister Harper launched the Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC). The leaders created the RCC to facilitate closer cooperation between our two countries to develop smarter and more effective approaches to regu- lation to make the United States and Canadian economies stronger and more competitive, while meeting the fundamental responsibilities to protect the safety and welfare of our citizens. They recognized that regulatory dif- ferences and duplicative procedures impose unnecessary requirements and costs on our citizens, businesses and economies.” An initial RCC Joint Action Plan identified 29 candidate areas for regu- latory cooperation seeking to meet the objectives of the initiative. These 29 areas were the test bed for the RCC and would demonstrate the ability to cooperatively find solutions that met the goals of the RCC. Of the 29, four were related to marine transporta- tion. The one topic that would have a distant relation to our fleet focused on Transport Canada, the regulatory body that oversees maritime compliance, being able to enter into Alternative Security Arrangements with the U.S. Coast Guard. The report has a section titled “Scope of Regulatory Cooperation Going Forward,” which impacts vessel operations: The RCC is focused on areas where benefits can be realized by regulated parties, consumers, and/or regulators without sacrificing outcomes such as protecting public health, safety and the environment. Simply publishing a similar regula- tion may not necessarily be sufficient for reducing unnecessary differences because the various requirements as- sociated with implementation can still result in duplicative and unnecessary