26 OCTOBER 2017 • FOGHORN By Peter Lauridsen, PV A Regulatory Affairs Consultant REGULATORYREPORT PVA Meets with FCC to Discuss a Radiophone Agreement for Great Lake Operators P VA and the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) have advanced the investigation into the re- quirements and practicali- ty of the Bi-National Great Lakes Radiotelephone Agreement (hereafter Agreement). In consecutive articles earlier this year, I discussed the Agreement and its impact on United States vessels (our emphasis is passenger vessels) operating on the Great “We now have five Gladding-Hearn boats. They are the 747 of our water-taxi fleet. They’re dependable, well built, and our customers really like them. The yard is also easy to work with, responsive and stands behind their product.” Tom Fox, Chief Executive Officer New York Water Taxi Gladding-Hearn all-aluminum construction, Incat-Crowther Designs, LOA 72', beam 27', 149 passengers, speed 26 knots with 12 metric tonnes of deadweight. It takes experience to integrate customer detailing and guaranteed speeds, backed by dependable customer service. All at a price you can afford. If you’re looking to build a new boat or upgrade an old one, we can offer com- plete design and construction, from security patrol boats to high-speed ferries. To learn more call Peter Duclos at 508 676-8596 or visit: www.gladding-hearn.com. The 747 of our fleet Lakes, which require radiotelephone inspections by private sector individuals under the authority of FCC regulations every 13 months. The second of the articles described a possible leveling agent through the Regulatory Cooperation Council, a bi-national organi- zation dedicated to identifying candidate regulations and agree- ments for adjustment so the business and trade of each country (U.S. and Canada) was treated equally. I also reported that we intended to approach the FCC whose regulations implemented the treaty elements. Recently, members of the PVA staff met with FCC Division level people in programmatic, engineering, and legal positions. We believe the meeting has laid the foun- dation for a cooperative approach to seeking one or more solutions. Our discussions started with the early acknowledge- ment that the Agreement addressed no unique technological issues in Great Lakes radiotelephone service. As you may recall from my earlier articles, the inspection failure rate for the current inspection process was about one percent and consisted mainly of the absence of a copy of the Agreement or the regulations. We focused on how to structure change under the Agreement rather than assume that the Agreement will be withdrawn easily or quickly. Given the technological ad- vancement in electronics over the last 50-plus years of the Agreement, withdrawal would be a reasonable resolution. The longer-term effort will include other interests that may not see the urgency we feel. Undoubtedly there may be persons or reasons that may advocate the status quo. The Agreement does provide for withdrawal of either party – an unlikely event and would require statecraft. The Agreement provides an application process for a one-year delay – a temporary measure that includes payment of a fee to avoid paying the inspection. It is probably not in the interest of the operators that seek repeal or modification. The Agreement provides for exempting a vessel for one or more voyages. It is not clear what justification is required. The government would not want to be flooded with applica- tions and industry would not want to make repeated appli- cations. The paperwork involved in many applications could “PVA staff met with FCC Division people in programmatic, engineering, and legal positions. The meeting has laid the foundation for a cooperative approach to seeking solutions.”