ships of 1,600 tons or over and all passenger vessels making international voyages. Essentially the Convention imposed upon such vessels four fundamental requisites:

1, a radio transmitter; 2, a radio receiver; 3, a radio operator; and, 4, radio listening watches. The treaty was ratified by the United States in 1936, and in 1937 the Congress amended the Communications Act, part II, title III, so as to make the provisions of the treaty applicable to both domestic and international voyage vessels of American registry.

Parenthetically, the provisions of part II, title III, are somewhat more stringent in certain respects than those of the treaty because of this country's higher concept of radio standards. It is important to emphasize here that the 1929 Safety of Life at Sea Convention applied only to vessels on international voyages, and did not apply to vessels on domestic or coastwise voyages. The 1937 amendment to the act had two purposes one was to implement the 1929 Safety of Life at Sea Convention which, as I have just stated, applies only to vessels proceeding on international voyages, and the other was to bring the noninternational voyage ships, that is, domestic or coastwise ships under the same requirements imposed upon vessels on international voyages.

In other words, it was the objective of the Congress at that time to bring our national marine radio safety requirements in line with the provisions of the treaty, and to put the entire American merchant marine on an equal basis with respect to radio equipment, radio operators, and listening watches.

It is worthy of note, and I have already said before, that the requirements contained in that statute, while encompassing the requirements of the Safety of Life at Sea Convention, went beyond those requirements in several particulars since Congress believed that in some respects the standards for our own ships in regard to radio should exceed those agreed upon as minimum for accord on a worldwide basis. The 1937 provisions of the Communications Act, together with the 1929 International Safety of Life at Sea Convention, superseded the provisions of the 1910 Radio Act to which I referred in the beginning of my remarks.

No changes occurred in the marine radio field until 1948 when there was held in London another International Safety of Life at Sea Conference similar in scope to the one held in 1929. Again the maritime nations of the world reviewed the world situation in regard to the application of radio to safety of life at sea, and made certain changes in the 1929 convention for the purpose of strengthening international requirements and bringing more international voyage ships under treaty.

Incidentally, I am prepared to discuss any or all of these changes if the committee should desire me to do so. In 1949 the Senate ratified that Convention, and it became effective insofar as United States ships are concerned on November 19, 1952. I again repeat and emphasize that this treaty like the 1929 treaty affects only ships on international voyages. We have, therefore, before us today a bill introduced for the purpose of implementing the 1948 treaty.

That ends that part of my statement that I prepared this morning after I had prepared what I will now give you.

Senator JOHNSON. May I ask a question?

Senator SCHOEPPEL. Surely. Senator Johnson.

Senator JOHNSON. I didn't quite catch what you said about the limitation on the Convention. Is that a limitation on the Convention only between international ports? That is, New York and London, for instance, and not between New York and Charleston, S. C.

Commissioner WEBSTER. That is correct, sir. An international convention can only apply to the ships that travel from our ports to some foreign port. That is the scope of the international convention in all respects.

Senator JOHNSON. It has no effect whatsoever

Commissioner WEBSTER. No, sir.

Senator JOHNSON. With respect to a situation where both ports are in the United States?

Commissioner WEBSTER. That is correct. I doubt if you couldI am not an international treaty lawyer, so I don't know, but I would just question as to whether in a treaty you would want to write a provision that just affected your own internal domestic situation.

Senator JOHNSON. I don't think you would, but I think you might very well include all ports of all nations that were parties to the Convention, all ports and all nations that were party to the Convention. I think it could be, but I wasn't asking what should be. was asking for what the actual situation is.

I

Commissioner WEBSTER. Well, it only affects the ships leaving our ports and proceeding to a foreign port.

Senator JOHNSON. Then most countries have laws as laws supplementing and implementing the conventions?

we have Commissioner WEBSTER. I am sure they do because I know that the United Kingdom does and Canada does. I haven't investigated closely the other countries, but I am sure they must have domestic laws that affect their domestic shipping; that is, domestic voyages. Senator JOHNSON. Thank you.

Commissioner WEBSTER. The bill consists of a number of amendments proposed by the Commission with respect to certain provisions of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, relating to the radio equipment and operators required on board certain vessels. The provisions proposed to be amended are contained in sections 351 to 362 of part II of title III of the act and are substantially the same as the radio requirements of the 1929 Safety of Life at Sea Convention ratified by the Senate in 1936. The amendments contained in S. 2453 have as their primary objective the modernization of the compulsory ship radio requirements for domestic voyage-I would like to go back and repeat that because it is important.

The amendments contained in S. 2453 have as their primary objective the modernization of the compulsory ship radio requirements for domestic voyage United States shipping to bring them in line with those now specified internationally by the 1948 Safety of Life at Sea Convention, which Convention changed some of the radio provisions of the old Convention and which was ratified by the Senate in 1949, coming into force on November 19, 1952. The principal effect of the enactment of the proposed legislation under consideration here would be to insure that vessels engaged in domestic voyages would comply with safety requirements no less effective than those applicable to ships engaged in international voyages.

46102-54

Senator SCHOEPPEL. Do you contend that there are ships that have used equipment and requirements that were substandard?

Commissioner WEBSTER. No; no, sir.

Although I am prepared to discuss all provisions of S. 2453, I I understand that the committee is primarily interested in the proposed amendments to section 352 (b) giving the Commission authority to grant vessels full, partial, or conditional exemptions from compulsory radio requirements, and to section 353 (b) authorizing the Commission in emergencies to waive the provision that operators required on cargo ships fitted with auto alarms have at least 6 months previous shipboard service. Therefore, I will address my remarks to those sections.

Since it can be simply and quickly disposed of, I shall first discuss the proposed amendment to section 353 (b) which would authorize the Commission during the present emergency proclaimed by the President to waive the 6 months previous sea experience for radio operators required on certain cargo vessels. As Chairman Hyde pointed out in his letter of July 10-and incidentally, I have a copy of that letter. Would it be appropriate to insert it in the record?

Senator SCHOEPPEL. I take it it has not heretofore been inserted in any part of these proceedings; therefore it will be proper to incorporate it into the record.

(The letter dated July 10, 1953, to Hon. Charles W. Tobey from Rosel Hyde is as follows:)

Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY,

Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

JULY 10, 1953.

DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: By letter dated March 5, 1953, the chairman submitted for the consideration of the Senate a series of proposed amendments to title III, part II of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, which requires radio equipment and radio operators to be provided on board certain ships for safety purposes. These proposed amendments were designed primarily to bring the provisions of the Communications Act more closely in line with the radio provisions of the new Safety of Life at Sea Convention (London, 1948) which was ratified by the Senate on April 20, 1949, and which came into force on November 19, 1952. These proposals, if enacted, will represent the first general revision of the compulsory marine-radio provisions of the act in 16 years and should result in an overall increase in the safety of lives and property at sea. Additionally, such legislation by removing certain differences between title III, part II of the act and the safety convention, will greatly facilitate the execution by the Commission of its dual responsibilities in connection with administration of the act and the radio provisions of the safety convention.

The proposed legislation for the most part simply reflects, domestically, the 1948 radio provisions of the safety convention in whose formulation representatives of all interested non-Government groups participated. However, while the Commission is unaware of any substantial opposition on the part of the shipping industry to the adoption of the Commission's proposals, no bill to introduce this legislation has as yet been submitted. It is felt, therefore, that your committee may desire to secure further clarification of the purpose and details of the proposal. Accordingly, the following suggestions are made:

1. Commissioner E. M. Webster of the Commission has had extensive experience in both the preparation and enforcement of maritime radio safety legislation and treaties. In fact, Commissioner Webster was the Chairman of the Radio Committee at the 1948 Safety Convention. I have appointed the Commissioner to act as liaison with Congress in connection with the instant proposals and I suggest that you or members of your committee staff may wish to contact him for such assistance and information as may be desired.

2. The Commission's letter of March 5, 1953, also incorporated a proposal to amend section 353 (b) of the act with respect to the waiver of the existing requirement that operators on certain cargo vessels have 6 months previous experience. This proposal, which is not related to the Safety of Life at Sea Convention, was

included in our draft proposal along with our other proposals solely because the Commission felt that Congress might wish to consider all amendments to part II of title III of the Communications Act in one package. In view of the difficulties which have apparently arisen, however, it might be helpful if this amendment were to be made the subject of separate legislation in order to avoid any possible confusion with the proposals relating to the safety convention, the purpose of which necessarily differs from the proposed amendment to section 353 (b).

I would be happy to be informed of any further steps which it is considered that the Commission should take to expedite this matter.

Sincerely yours,

ROSEL H. HYDE, Chairman.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION,
Washington, D. C., March 5, 1953.

The VICE PRESIDENT,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. VICE PRESIDENT: The Commission wishes to submit at this time for the consideration of the Senate a series of proposed amendments to title III, part II of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, which compels radio equipment and radio operators to be provided on board certain ships. These proposed amendments are designed primarily to bring the provisions of the Communications Act more closely in line with those radio provisions contained in the new Safety of Life at Sea Convention (London, 1948) which was ratified by the Senate on April 20, 1949, and which came into force on November 19, 1952.

Part II of title III of the Communications Act was enacted by Congress in 1937 as a result of the 1929 Safety of Life at Sea Convention, and the provisions in part II concerning radio equipment and radio operators on board ships are based in part on the radio requirements of the 1929 convention. In view of the coming into force of the new 1948 convention, the Commission believes that it is necessary to amend the Communications Act as set forth in the attached appendix II in order to accomplish the following purposes:

(a) Raise the compulsory radio requirements of title III, part II of the Communications Act to those of the 1948 convention.

(b) Provide exemption provisions (from the compulsory radio requirements of the Communications Act) more nearly in line with those of the 1948 convention. (c) Remove a minor conflict between the Communications Act and the apparent intent of the 1948 convention by excluding from compliance with the compulsory radio provisions of the Communications Act those convention country foreign ships which have been excepted from the radio requirements of the 1948 convention.

(d) Provide for the issuance of safety radiotelegraphy and safety radiotelephony certificates by the Commission.

(e) Provide in title III, part II of the Communications Act for the exercise by the Commission of authority with respect to lifeboat portable radio equipment. In general, the radio provisions of the Safety of Life at Sea Convention apply only to certain classes of vessels of signatory countries engaged on international Voyages except voyages solely on the Great Lakes. The radio provisions of the convention are, for the most part, self executing with respect to such vessels in the sense that those requirements automatically became applicable to such vessels on November 19, 1952, and the Commission has the authority to promulgate regulations implementing these requirements without the necessity of further domestic legislation, pursuant to sections 303 (r) and 359 of the Communications Act. The provisions of title III, part II of the act, however, are such as to encompass two additional categories of vessels: (1) certain United States ships which are not engaged on international voyages but which sail in the open sea-generally those engaged on coast wise voyages; (2) certain foreign vessels of countries not parties to the 1929 or 1948 safety conventions which use United States ports. Amendment of the act will not affect the ships of countries which are parties to the 1929 convention but which have not ratified the 1948 convention until the United States denounces the 1929 convention and such denunciation becomes effective. Title III, part II of the act currently reflects radio requirements of the 1929 Safety Convention which are lower than those of the 1948 convention. Accordingly, in order to insure the application of the higher radio requirements of the 1948 Safety Convention to the two additional categories of vessels referred to above, the Communications Act should be amended to incorporate the new standards of the 1948 convention.

The primary differences between title III, part II and the 1948 convention safety radio standards in those areas where the standards in the convention exceed those contained in the act are listed in appendix I attached hereto. It is not anticipated that amendment of the Communications Act to raise its standards to those of the convention would place a substantial burden upon those United States ships complying with the existing provisions of title III, part II of the act. This conclusion is based upon the fact that the equipment on such ships now substantially meets the higher standards that would be imposed by the proposed modification of the act. Further, the majority of such ships are from time to time nr vigated on international voyages and will automatically be compelled to meet the higher standards of the 1948 convention upon its coming into force. In each case where the 1948 convention provides that enforcement of certain requirements may be deferred, similar provision is made in the proposed amendments to the Communications Act. However, with respect to cargo ships of the group between 500 and 1,600 gross tons, it is anticipated that a substantial burden may be imposed upon such ships by amending the act so as to subject them to the compulsory radio provisions. Vessels in this tonnage group are not normally navigated on international voyages. It is estimated that there are approximately 186 ships in this group. In anticipation of the fact that cargo ships in the 500 to 1,600 ton group may require some time to comply with the new requirements which would be imposed by the proposed amendment of the Communications Act, a clause has been included in the proposed modification which would allow the Commission, if necessary, to defer until January 1, 1954, the application of the radio requirements to such ships in this group which are not also subject to the radio requirements of the Safety Convention.

The existing provisions of the Communications Act with respect to exemption of ships from the radio requirements are patterned after those contained in the 1929 convention. The exemption provisions of the 1948 convention differ from those now contained in section 352 (b) of the Communications Act in several respects. The chief differences are as follows:

(a) The Communications Act flatly excludes from the Commission's exemption authority vessels which exceed a specified number of miles either as to length of voyage or distance from shore. The exemption provisions of the 1948 convention do not specify mileage but merely refer to length of voyage and distance of the ship from the shore as two of the elements to be considered in determining whether exemptions should be granted.

(b) The Communications Act has traditionally been interpreted to preclude the grant of either partial or conditional exemptions. The 1948 convention specifically provides for the grant of "exemptions of a partial and/or conditional nature, or complete exemption ***"

It is believed that from an administrative standpoint, the more flexible provisions of the 1948 convention are preferable to those currently contained in the act. Therefore, it is proposed that the exemption provisions of the Communications Act be modified to more nearly follow those of the 1948 convention.

There are several classes of vessels listed below which are excepted by regulation 3 of chapter I of the 1948 convention from complying with the convention regulations, which, with respect to foreign vessels, are not excepted under section 352 of the Communications Act unless they carry convention certificates. These classes of ships are:

(a) Ships not propelled by mechanical means (with respect to vessels within this class, the Communications Act excepts vessels in tow but does not except sailing ships).

(b) Wooden ships of primitive build.

(c) Pleasure yachts not engaged in trade. (The Communications Act excepts only yachts which are of less than 600 gross tons.) (d) Fishing vessels.

Vessels excepted under the convention do not normally carry convention certificates. The Commission is of the opinion that the application of the provisions of title III, part II of the act to such vessels would be contrary to the apparent intent of the 1948 convention and that it would be desirable to amend the Communications Act to avoid the possibility of administrative difficulties in connection with this apparent conflict.

Section 359 (b) of the Communications Act now provides that all certificates concerning radio particulars provided for in any applicable safety convention shall be issued by the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, although the inspection for the safety radiotelegraphy certificate required by the 1929 convention involves only the Commission. Some advantages would be gained in the