6.3 Amendment to the performance standards for radar reflectors (relevance to agenda item 9)

(1) Consideration at the plenary session

At the plenary session, the UK explained the purport of the proposal. Japan expressed its view that Japan can support, generally, the matter relating to the passive reflectors in regard to the draft amendment submitted by the UK (NAV48/9), but pointed out the insufficiency in data which would be necessary as a basis for discussing active reflectors, and asked the UK to submit the relevant data to the WG・B.

　

(2) Consideration at the WG・B

The WG・B had no time to discuss the relevance, which was entrusted to the task by a small group consisting of the countries concerned. The small group was participated in by the UK, Japan, Norway, ISO and ISAF (International Sailing Federation).

The result of the consideration was such that ISO's opinions were approved almost completely and the following were agreed:

(a) Passive radar reflector

　

　

(b) Active radar reflector

As a result it was agreed that a correspondence group should be established to study in order to give urgent and further consideration to both passive reflectors and active reflectors (including experiments).

　

6.4 Review on performance standards for radar installations (relevance to agenda item 10)

IALA (International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities) explained its presented document and the Chairman entrusted the detailed consideration task on the document to the WG・B. Additionally, Sweden explained that Sweden would submit a document to the next session. The session this time had no time to consider.

　

6.5 Relevance to ITU (relevance to agenda item H)

The Secretariat explained the presented document (NAV48/11) and then the Chairman entrusted the consideration task on the document, to the WG・B. There was no specific opinion at the WG and it was agreed that the presented document was noted.

There was no specific opinion on other presented documents (NAV48/INF.3, NAV48/INF.8) regarding this agenda item and then the contents of the documents were noted.

　

6.6 Guidelines for the installation of AIS (relevance to agenda item 18A- NAV48/18)

At the plenary session, there was an explanation on the presented document NAV48/18 and the Chairman entrusted the detailed consideration task to the WG・B with the purpose of presenting the consideration results to MSC 76. The WG・B considered the document presented by Sweden and the US and developed "the draft guidelines for the installation of AIS" as had been presented by the draft text with some amendments to terms made (NAV48/WP.1/ANNEX 1).

It was decided that the draft guidelines are to be made into an SN Circular so that they may be applied voluntarily and that they are presented to MSC 76 for approval.

The final plenary session made some minor amendments to these draft guidelines, approved the SN Circular and decided to present the draft guidelines to MSC 76.

　

6.7 Draft performance standards for AIS installations not complying with the provisions of the recommendations on the safeguard of AIS-VHF data link- MSC 74(69) (relevance to agenda item 18C-NAV48/18/2)

The presented document NAV48/8/2 was explained. The Chairman entrusted the detailed consideration task on the document to the WG・B with the intention of presenting the consideration results to MSC 76. The WG・B discussed the document presented by the US, and decided that the draft standards were not intended to become the performance requirements for class B - AIS, but the recommendations for safeguarding "AIS・VHF data link structured under class A" from the class B・AIS's entry. The contents of the recommendations consist of 3 points as follows:

At the final plenary session, there was no specific challenge and it was agreed that the recommendations on the AIS・VHF data link safeguard should be submitted to MSC 76.

　

6.8 Guidelines for the display and the usage of AIS information on the radar scope (relevance to agenda item 18H-NAV48/16)

At the plenary session, the presented document NAV48/16 was explained. The Chairman entrusted the detailed consideration task to the WG・B. With regard to this matter, the UK had pointed out at NAV47 that it was necessary to perform further consideration about the AIS display when connecting AIS and other instruments installed on the bridge (such as radar and ARPA). MSC 75 added the related consideration task to the work schedule of the NAV Sub-Committee. However, the NAV session this time had no time to do this, and it was decided that the WG・B should consider it next time.

　

6.9 AIS binary message (relevance to agenda item 18J-MSC75/6/3 and NAV48/INF.7)

Documents MSC75/6/3 and NAV48/INF.7 presented by Germany were explained. The Chairman entrusted the detailed consideration task to the WG・B. The WG・B considered the presented documents and confirmed the necessity of the cooperation with ITU and IALA.

It was also confirmed that IMO should take the lead in the matter of maintenance and registry of internationally applied identification (IAIs) and that the work hereafter should be carried out in collaboration with IALA.

At the final plenary session, Germany remarked that the WG report was different from the policy laid down in MSC76/6/3, that is to say, although IALA was an AIS related body, it was a land side organization, so the consideration task on this item which deals with ship related navigational information should be centralized at IMO and then carried out. The plenary session accepted the German remark and decided to continue the consideration task on readjustment and introduction of messages.

　

6.10 Maritime safety problem (relevance to agenda item 18I-NAV48/2/2)

(1) Ship's long range tracking system (relevance to NAV48/2/2)

Under the instruction by MSC 75, it was decided to consider the technical requirements. With regard to this matter, it was agreed, almost as agreed at MSC 75, that INMARSAT C was the most favourable one. It was also pointed out that there existed ships, not fitted with INMARSAT C, navigating A1 area, A2 area and other areas as their navigation area.

　

(2) Ship's safeguard warning (relevance to NAV48/2/2)

Under the instruction by MSC 75, it was decided to consider technical requirements. With regard to safeguard warning, in case current GMDSS installations are used, INMARSAT C, EPIRB-E, MF/HF DSC, VHF DSC, etc. exist, and although adjustments are required to some degree as countermeasures against terrorism, DSAS (Discreet Surveillance and Alert System) and EPIRB-E+ are considered to be quite suitable ones as novel systems, and a draft amendment to the draft SOLAS revision was prepared.

It was decided that these matters were to be provided as information to an MSC interim meeting in September (NAV48/WP.1/Add.1 ANNEX 5 and ANNEX 6).

　

(3) Safety against external interference of AIS equipment (relevance to NAV48/2/2 and MSC75/17/2/Add.1)

At the plenary session, the presented document MSC75/17/Add.1 was explained. The Chairman entrusted the detailed consideration task to the WG・B. The WG・B considered the presented document and admitted the possible impairment to the safely due to the electric or mechanical influence of the AIS equipment. For this reason, it was decided that the consideration task on this matter should be circulated to COMSAR 7 for discussion.

No specific opinion appeared at the final plenary session. The consideration results on the safety against the external interference of the AIS equipment were approved and it was decided that this item should be put to the COMSAR.