STRAIT OF CANS0 INDUSTRIAL 3 DEVEL-OPMENT AUTHORITY (SCIDA)

STRAIT OF CANS0 INDUSTRIAL 3 DEVEL-OPMENT AUTHORITY (SCIDA) Canso Superport PORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS STUDY FENCO CONSULTANTS LTD.

Suite 1020, Cogswell TO\VL-' 2000 Barrington Street Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3Ki 902-422 - 7495 Cable 'FENCOENG' Telex 019-21845 May 15, 1980 Strait of Canso Industrial Development Authority (SCIDA) P. 0. Box 610, Church Street Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia BOE 2V0 Attention: Mr. J. Lansky, P.Eng. Executive Director Dear Sirs, PORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS STUDY We are pleased to submit 12 copies of our final Report on the above study. This Report which is a follow-up of our Interim Report submitted in March 1980, incorporates comments made by Mr. R.E. Innes and views expressed during the study by various organizations and individuals. The Report provides a port profile documenting existing situation of facilities, operations and other activities in the area; reviews and analyses various port administration systems in Canada and overseas, and finally recommends an optimum system of port management and promotion structure for Canso Superport to be implemented in stages. The input on Canada's port policy, legislative intent and port administration systems ar~alysis has been contributed by Mr. Brian Flemming, of Eastern Policy Research Associates Ltd., who has been our collaborating advisor on all matters pertaining to these aspects of the study. We hope that this Report will provide a useful basis for a decision to improve the port administration and management system at Canso Superport. FENCO CONSULTANTS LTD. @ Vancouver. Calgary - Edmonton. Savlt St.. Marie. Hamilton. Toronto Ottawa. Montreal. Fredericton Halifax - St. John's

STRAIT OF CANS0 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY May 15, 1980 Page 2 We wish to acknowledge valuable advice and guidance given by Mr. P. Bates, Ex-Executive Director, SCIDA and Mr. R.E. Innes of R.E. Innes Ltd. during the course of the study. Should you require us to assist further in the implementation prodecure of our recommendations, we would be pleased to respond. Yours very truly, FENCO CONSULTANTS LTD. V. Zahorski, P.Eng. Vice President

CANSO SUPERPORT PORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS STUDY MAY 1980 0 FENCO

CANS0 SUPERPORT PORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS STUDY INDEX PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION Background Objectives Methodolody Report Contents 2. PORT PROFILE Location & Harbour Characteristics Port Facilities Port-Oriented Industries Services Cargo Traffic Ship Traffic Port ~dministration/management Revenues & Expenditures Socio-Economic.Data Summary 3. APPLICABILITY ANALYSIS Canadian Ports Pol icy Ports Policy in the United States of America European Ports Policies Possible Systems Specified in the Terms of Reference 4. CONSLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5. APPENDICES Schedule of Harbour Dues and Port Charges National Harbours Board Act, 1936 Harbour Commissions Act, 19 64-65 Short Review of Gibb Report, 1932 List of Persons Contacted References

INTRODUCTION Background The creation of Canso Superport through the combined effects of the building of the Canso Causeway and developments in shipping have created new growth opportunities for the Strait of Canso region. The coming of large tankers and the prospect of oil and gas discoveries on the eastern continental shelf have created new growth prospects for the Strait area. While technology has advanced rapidly in the past decade, the policy underpinning port administration and development has generally lagged behind in Canada, the United States, and elsewhere. ~t was against this general kackdrop that the Strait of Canso Industrial Development Authority (SCIDA), in the implementation of their mandate to promote the industrial growth of the Strait of Canso area and the Canso Superport, came to realise that the present management and administration system was probably inadequate and might even be an impediment to the orderly growth and development of the port.

Furthermore, it came to the attention of SCIDil. that a1 thou9h a large number of studies relating to the Strait of Canso area have been carried out in the past, there has been scant attention paid to the port management and administration, and more particularly its promotion, such that the principal ob~ectives and strategies of SCIDA and the Province of Nova Scotia relating to the development of the area have been constrained. Accordingly, SC I DA commissioned FENCO CONSULTANTS LTD. in December 1979 to carry out an examination of the various Port Management Systems and from the examination to recommend the optimum Port Management arrangement for Canso Superport. Objectives As the principle objective of the study FENCO set out to develop and recommend a Port Management System for Canso Superport which would be: (a) Compatible with the aims and objectives of SCIDA. (b) In concert with the development plans of the Province of Nova Scotia. (c) Within the present or future ports policy framework established or planned by the Federal Government. (d) In accord with the power which may be given to the port to plan, develop, operate and control land use and water facilities which are needed to stimulate the flow of commerce through the port. (e) Eligible for funding from all levels of government in order to achieve - its objectives. (f) Able to be as self-sufficient as possible through the ability to use its earnings and resources. The important facet of this study is the Government's intention with respect to the porks in Canada. There has been increasing interest in past years both on the part of the provinces and industry for an overhaul of the existing port legislation in Canada. A need is seen for an administration system that would eliminate the present fragmentation of the port pol icy, planning and operations. Particularly a structure which would allow meaning f ul participation at the regional and local port levels is seen as a requirement, and in addition there is an administrative need to integrate the port system with the overall marine functions of Transport Canada. We have therefore tried to relate the requirements of the Canso Superport to the present thinking in the formulation of Canada's port pol icy.

Mcthodoloqv In order to achieve the above objectives, the study was carried out in the following steps: (a) (b) Compile data on the existing situation to proviclt? an overall view of the facilities, operations zr:!! other activities taking place in the Canso Superport region and thus to determine the level of present activity and future potential so that the resulting administrative requirements are assessed. Analyse and evaluate various systems of port administration to examine how far they are applicable in the case of Canso Superport. (c) Using input from (a) and (b) above, develop recommendations for a possible administration system for Canso Superport. Report Contents Following the above methodology, the 01 lowing chapters: the Report is presented in - Chapter 2, Port Profile, documents port and harbour f ac il ities, port-oriented industries located in the area, existing services, cargo and ship traffic, present port administrative structure, socioeconomic data etc. - Chapter 3, Applicability Analysis (Port Administration Systems Analysis) reviews the history of the Canadian experience in ports policy leading to the Canadian ports followed at present and proposed in the future. It also reviews port policy in the United States of America and other countries. In the light of these reviews, various possible systems for Canso Superport are evaluated. - Chapter 4, Conclusions and Recomaendat ions draws inferences from port profile and port administration systems analysis and describes suitable system of port management and promotion structure compatible with the aims and objectives of SCIDA on one hand and the Canadian Ports pol icy framework on the other.

PORT PROFILE The Strait of Canso is a natural deep water area dividing mainland Nova Scotia from Cape Breton Island. The Str-ait is spanned by the Canso Causeway. The towns and communities of Port Hawkesbury, Port Hastings and Point Tupper are situated on the isl'and side, and Auld Cove and Mulgrave are on the mainland side, all within the immediate area of interest of this study (see Fig 2.1). Existing industries of a port-related nature in the area include: - Gulf Refinery - Nova Scotia Forest Products M i l l - Georgia Pacific Corporation's Gypsum Plant and mad ing Facilities - Breton Industrial and Marine Shipyard

The Strait of Canso is a sizeable and significant industrial port, with approximately 7.3 mill ion tonnes of throughput in 1977. The Strait is designated as the province's deepwater industrial growth area, and it has very substantial potential for future development. At present the port area is managed under the Ports and Harbours Division of Canadian Coast Guard (Ministry of Transport). This profile of the existing port facil ities and operations is presented in the following sections: Location and Harbour Characteristics Port Facil ities port-or iente'd Industries Serv ices Cargo Traffic Ship Traffic Port Arndinistration/Management Revenues and Expenditures Socioeconomic Data

STRAIT OF CANS0 SOUNDINGS IN FATHOMS -,,I _I.,."...a I..,.,.J"..J,.I L.,.." h".l>..l 1aA.l

LOCATION AND HARBOUR CHARACTERISTICS The Strait of Canso is a natural sheltered deep water harbour 14.5 miles (23.2 km) long and from a half-mile (0.8 km) to more than a mile (1.6 km) in width. The Canso Causeway, constructed in 1954, connects the mainland with Cape Breton Island carrying a two-lane highway and CN main line rail track to Sydney. There is a toll charge ($1.50 for cars, return) to use the causeway road. There is a Seaway size lock in the causeway. The width of the main harbour channel between deep water contours of 110 f t (33.5 m) narrows from 2,000 f t (610 m) at the South entrance to 1,000 f t (305 m) towards the causeway end of the Strait. A local widening between the 110 it (33.5 m) contours in the vicinity of Pirate Harbour provides a turning basin located beyond all existing deep water wharves. The width of the entrance channel from Chedabucto Bay in the South exceeds 1800 ft (550 m) and with one exception the water depth exceeds 90 f t (27.4 m) throughout. The exception is a ledge some 5 miles (8 km) to. the seaward of Eddy Point where the depth restriction is approximately 90 f t (27.4 m) below low water. Average tide ranges in the Strait are 5.2 ft (1.5 m) springs and 2.8 ft (0.8 m) neaps. The Strait of Canso possesses all essential ingredients for a major deep water port capable of handling virtually any type and size of ship; i.e. protected natural deep water in close proximity to the land, low tidal range, small currents, essentially ice and sedimentation free conditions, and approximately 22 miles (35 km) of shoreline providing deep water interface possibil ities.

PORT FACILITIES The existing port facilities in the Strait of Canso are in three areas: - Cape Breton side on the eastern shore of the Strait - The Mainland side on the western shore of the Strait - The Causeway connecting Cape Breton Island with mainland Nova Scotia Within the last 20 years or so, major activity has largely been concentrated on the Cape Breton side of the Strait. The mainland side of the Strait is not yet developed except for a few relatively minor facilities. An inventory of the physical port facil ities Is and summarized below (a1 so see Fig. 2.2): CAPE BRETON MAINLAND 1. Government Wharf, Port Hawkesbury 2. Fina Wharf, Port Ha wkesbury 3. Breton Industrial and Marine Facilities, Point Tupper 4. Georgia Pacific Corporat ion, Gyps um Load ing Facilities, Point Tupper 5. Nova Scotia Forest Products Terminal, Madden Point 6. Gulf Canada Limited Oil Products Terminal, Pebbles Point (to be demo1 ished) 7. Gul f Canada Limited ma in Oil Terminal, Wright Point Government Fisheries Wharf, Aulds Cove Construction Aggregates Ltd. Barge Wharf, Cape Porcupine Acadia Fisheries Wharf, Venus Cove (adandoned) Irving Oil Wharf, Venus Cove (abandoned) Government Wharf, Mulgrave CN Ro-Ro Mulgrave Facility, Government Fisheries Wharf, Pirate Harbour Government Wharf, Sand Point The salient features of the above facilities and the Canso Ship Lock are briefly described below:

CAPE BRETON SIDE The port facilities on this side are located in the Port Hawkesbury and Point Tupper area. All the facilities are privately owned except the Government Wharf at Port Hawkesbury, operated by Canadian Coast Guard (Ministry of Transport). From north to south the main wharves are: Government Wharf located at Port Hawkesbury has a length of 498 f t (154 m) with an L-Head 110 f t x 65 f t (33.5 m x 19.8 m), 22 f t (6.7 m) width and 18 f t (5.5 m) depth alongside at L.W. The public wharf facility is used for miscellaneous small boat purposes, at present, and is also used by vessels for winter and summer lay-up. Along side this wharf are the facilities of the Port Hawkesbury Yacht Club, which has a very small timber wharf and a boat mooring area. Fina Wharf, an old abandoned wharf is located east of the Government Wharf. It was built during the last war by the Armed Forces for boom defence purposes. The wharf area, which is in poor repair, has recently been bought by a private concern for boat building and possibly for establishing a yacht club. Breton Industrial and Marine Ltd. facilities for boat building are located at Point Tupper. The facilities of this very active company comprise: - Two wharves, 250 f t x 30 f t (76.2 m x 9.l'm) with 30 f t (9.1 m) depth-and 162 f t x 25 ft (49.4 m x 7.6 m) with 18 f t (5.5 m) depth. - One floating dry dock of 1,000 tons capacity designed for ships up to 200 f t (61 m) length (under construction). - Slipway with 2 cradles, one of 1,000 ton and another of 100 ton capacities. - One shipbuilding and fabrication shop 175 ft (53.4 m) long, 80 f t (24.4 m) wide, and 40 f t (12.2 m) high. The Gypsum Loading Wharf owned and operated by the Georgia Pacific Corporation, Gypsum Division, is located at Point Tupper. 0 FENCO

The wharf is 1,100 f t long consisting of 7 concrete crib dolphins with catwalks in between; there are 5 breasting dolphins and 2 mooring dolphins. The central dolphir, carries the fixed loading equipment. The water depth is 31 ft (9.5 m) below mean low water. Annual tonnage throughput is 770,000 tons ( 1979); The Forest Products Terminal owned and operated by Nova Scotia Products Industries Ltd. is also located at Madden Point (Point Tupper). The wharf was constructed in 1960 at a capital cost of $480,000. The wharf can take ships up to 650 f t (198 m) length and 28 f t (8.5 m) in depth. In 1979, 51 general cargo ships (forest products), 10 tankers and 1 caustic ship used the wharf. Ships using the terminal vary, in general, from 4,000 to 30,000 dwt with an average of about 7,000 dwt. The Tanker Terminal owned and operated by Gulf Canada is located at Wright Point. The wharf is 1,918 f t (5.85 m) in overall length with a depth of 100 (+) ft (30 m) at the outside and 60 (+) ft (18 m) inside berth. The terminal has taken crude oil tankers up to a maximum of 360,000 dwt (AL ANDALUS), the largest tanker to visit N. America. The annual tonnage throughput has varied from 7.28 million tons in 1977 to 5.35 million tons in 1979. Gulf Canada Limited has another minor oil terminal for product loading, at Pebbles Point, but it is now due for demolition.

PUBLIC WHARF, PORT HAWKESBURY PORT HAWKESBURY YACHT CLUB AREA (ADJACENT TO PUBLIC WHARF)

GYPSUM LOADING WHARF, POINT TUPPER BRETON INDUSTRIAL & MARINE FACILITIES, POINT TUPPER

GULF WHARF NOVA SCOTIA FOREST INDUSTRIES WHARF'

MAINLAND SIDE WHARF FACILITIES The existing facilities, from north to south, comprise the following : A Fisheries Wharf owned and operated by Fisheries and Oceans Canada is located at Auld Cove north of the causeway. The wharf is 230 ft (70 m) long, and 20 f t (6 m) wide with a depth of 10 f t (3 m) below LWOST. A Barge Wharf owned and operated by Construction Aggregates Limited is located just south of the causeway and is used for loading sand and aggregates, mainly for PEI but some shipments have been sent to Bermuda. The wharf is 150 f t (46 m) long with a depth of about 10 f t (3 m) alongside. Three Acadia Fisheries Wharves located on the' north side of Venus Cove were owned and operated by Acadia Fisheries Ltd. These wharves are in ruins, two of them together with the fish processing plant were destroyed by fire in 1970 and the third is derelict. The Irving Oil Wharf is 201 ft (61.3 m) long, with a 17 f t (5 m) square wharf at its outer end with least depth of 11 ft (3.4 m) and is situated on the south'side of Venus Cove. - Two oil pipes lead from the wharf to eight oil storage tanks on the hill behind the wharf. The wharf is not used presently, The Goverment Wharf used as a general cargo wharf is located at Mulgrave on the south point of Murray Cove. The wharf is operated by Canadian Coast Guard. The wharf is 905 f t (276 m) long, with a depth varying from - + 14 f t (4.3 m) to + 25 ft (7.6 n) below LWOST. The wharf is provided with rail Tacilities by the CNR. A warehouse 120 f t by 72 f t (36.6 m x 22 m) is located on the wharf which is mainly used by the Canadian Coast Guard, Emergency Services. A CN Ro-Ro Ramp located at the southern extremity of the Mulgrave ~overnment wharf, was built by CN as a ferry ~kiarf to service and load - ferry vessels carrying rail cars or trucks to Newfoundland, It is considered as an alternative berth to the N. Sydney ferry facilities on the infrequent occasions when the latter are blocked by ice or when extra ferries are operated to clear occasional rail traffic backlogged at the N. Sydney docks. It is understood that the ramp has not yet been used by CN.

A small Fisheries Wharf is located at Pirate Harbour, south of the town of Mulgrave. It is administered by by Fisheries and Oceans. This facility is a finger wharf 85 f t by 30 ft (25.9 m x 9.1 m) with a depth of 11 ft (3.4 m) at the face at low water. It can accommodate two or three small fishing boats. The Government Wharf at Sand Point, just north of Eddy Point. CANS0 SHIP LOCK A ship lock is located on the east side of the Causeway to permit passage of vessels through the Strait. The lock is owned by Canadian Coast Guard. The dimensions of the lock and maximum dimensions of ships allowed in the lock are: LOCK DIMENSIONS SHIP DIMENSIONS Length 800 f t (244 rn) 735 f t (224 m) Width/Beam 80 f t (24.4 m) 76.5 ft (23.3 m) Depth/Draf t 32 f t (9.8 m) 28.0 ft (8.5 m) Vessels with a draft greater than 28 f t (8.5 m) and not more than 30 f t (9 m) may proceed through the lock when tidal conditions are favourable. The tidal difference at the lock is 2.5 f t (0.8 m). The largest ship which has so far used the lock is the ONTARIO POWER of 30,149 dwt having a length of 711 ft (216.9 m) and beam of 75.5 f t (23 m). The lock is used from April 15 to middle of January. The non-navigable days are generally 81 days/year, when ice blocks the area north of the Causeway. So far, 41,000 vessels have used the lock since- its construction in 1955. In 1979, 3,200 vessels used the lock, more than any other year, due to increased traffic of tuna boats. (The area north of the causeway was re-opened for tuna fishing in 1979. ) The roadway swing bridge on the south of the lock is owned by CN and operated on the instructions of the Lock Master. Navigation has priority over road and rail traffic.

SITE OF FORMER FISH PLANT, MULGRAVE IRVING WHARF, MULGRAVE

MULGRAVE PUBLIC WHARF COAST GUARD WAREHOUSE AXD OFFICES, & TRANSIT SHED, MULGRAVE PUBLIC WHARF

MULGRAVE PUBLIC WHARF

MULGRAVE PUBLIC WHARF CN MARINE RAMP, MULGRAVE

FISHERIES WHARF, PIRATE HARBOUR

FISHERIES WHARF, SAND POINT

CANS0 LOCK

PORT-ORIENTED INDUSTRIES The principle port-oriented the Strait of Canso area are: industries presently located in - Pulp and paper m i l l (Nova Scotia Forest Industries Limited) - Heavy water plant (Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd). - Electric Power Plant (Nova Scotia Power Corporation) - Oil Refinery (Gulf Canada Limited) In addition to the above four major industries which form a sizeable industrial complex in the Point Tupper area, the Bestwall Division of the Georgia Pacific Corporation has established gypsum stock-pile and loading facilities and Breton Industrial and Marine Limited are operating a relatively small but very active shipbuilding and repair yard. PULP AND PAPER MILL Major industrial growth in the Strait of Canso commenced with the construction of a pulp m i l l at Point Tupper in 1961, by Nova Scotia Forest Industries Ltd. A paper m i l l was added in 1971 The total investment in the site, plant and equipment amounted to $133 million. The plant capacity is 150,000 tonnes per year of pulp and 146,000 tonnes per year of newsprint. These products are exported mainly to the UK, Europe, India and Brazil. The export figures for 1977, 1978 and 1979 were as follows: Newsprint Woodpulp Total ( tonnes) (tonnes) ( tonnes) The plant occupies an area of + 124 acres (+ 50 ha), and employs about 2,000 people (1,066 in the mill-and 1,000 in the woods and trucking) with a total salary over $20 million. HEAVY WATER PLANT The plant was constructed in 1969/7O at Point Tupper by Canadian General Electric for production of heavy water for use in nuclear reactors, at a total investment cost of $75 million. It was taken over by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. in 1975. The plant produces approximately 400 tons (363 tonnes) of heavy water per year, most of which is used in Canada. The labour force at the plant includes some 200 people.

ELECTRIC POWER PLANT The Nova Scotia Power Corporation established a thermal electricity generating plant west of the heavy water plant at Point Tupper in 1969. The plant began operation in 1970 with a capacity of 80 megawatts, later expanded to 230 megawatts in 1970. By 1974, the total investment was $50 million on the generating plant and another $15 million on transmission facilities. It employs 90 people at the plant. GULF REFINERY Gulf Canada ~imited established an oil refinery at Point Tupper, and it began full scale operations in 1971 after a total investment of $105 million on the refinery and terminal facilities. The production capacity of the refinery is 87,000 barrels per day. Almost all of this production is now used in Canada, although in the early years of operation (before 1973), about half the oil processed was exported to the USA. The tank farm capacity is 7.3 million barrels, 50% for products and 50% for crude oil. The area occupied by the refinery is 1,820 acres (737 ha.) of' which 547 acres (221 ha) is built-up and the remaining -area is undeveloped. The refinery employs -some 200 to 220 people of which 143 are Gulf employees while 60-80 are on maintenance contracts. GYPSUM LOADING FACILITIES The Bestwel.1 Division of the Georgia Pacific Corporation established gypsum facilities at the northern tip of Point Tupper in 1961-62. Their gypsum quarries are located inland at River Denys in Cape Breton from where the material is transported by rail to their stockyard at Point Tupper for shipment abroad. In 1978 and 1979 Georgia Pacific exported 760,000 tons (690,000 tonnes) and 770,000 tons (700,000 tonnes) respectively. The stockyard covers an area of about 12 acres (5 ha). men are employed at the terminal. Four

SHIPYARD AND SHIP REPAIK FACILITIES At Point Tupper, Breton Industrial and Marine Ltd. have been operating a small dynamic shipyard since 1970, when it was purchased by the present owner from Canso Marine Railway Company. The firm has a new floating dock of 1,000 tons capacity designed for ships up to 200 ft (61 m) length and two cradles of 1,000 tons and 100 tons capacities, with a covered shipbuilding and fabrication shop 175 f t (53 m) long and 40 f t (12 m) wide. Although this firm has a lengthy background, it grew under new ownership from an initial 5 man shipyard in 1970 to 150 people now with a payroll of about $3 million in 1979. In 1980-81, the labour force is expected to be increased to about 200 men. This flourishing firm builds many types of small boats and specializes in a1 uminurn construction. It has exported a number of vessels and could expand further if there was more good labour available. AGGREGATE QUARRY Construction Aggregates Limited have a quarry just south of the Causeway on the Mulgrave side. They produce aggregates for construction purposes and ship some of their products (sand and gravels) to PEI by barge. FISHING Fishing in the port area is a minor activity only. However there are a number of fishing harbours in areas bordering the Strait, both to the north and' south. Fish landing statistics for the Strait area are given under Socioeconomic Data, later in the Profile.

SERVICES The main port services provided at the Strait of Canso are: - Vessel Traffic Control and Aids to Navigation - Pilotage - Tug Service - Stevedoring - Shipping Agency - Ship Chandlery - Fire Fighting - Customs and Immigration - Environmental Services - Road and Rail Links VESSEL TRAFFIC CONTROL AND AIDS TO NAVIGATION In the interest of safe navigation within the area of the Strait of Canso and its approaches, the Canadian Coast Guard has established a Vessel Traffic Management Centre at Eddy Point to regulate ship movement in the Strait of Canso and Chedabucto Bay. This centre is manned on a 24-hour basis and is equipped with radar, VHF, MF and RT transmitting and receiving communications equipment. An unmanned subsidiary station is located near Canso to provide supplementary coverage in the approaches to Chedabucto Bay. This station is hooked-up with the main station at Eddy Point. The shipping in this area is regulated on a two-tier basis: - The Eastern Canada Traffic Regulatory System (ECAREG Canada), introduced in July 1976, provides widespread coverage to ships entering or moving within the Canadian territorial waters, through the regional centres at Dartmouth, St. John's, and Montreal. All vessels over 500 grt and all vessels carrying pollutants or other dangerous goods or any vessel towing such craft are required to report to ECAREG Canada to enter Canadian Waters 24 hours in advance. Reporting is msndatory. - The local Vessel Traffic Management System (VTM) located at Eddy Point monitors ship movements in Chedabucto Bay and the Strait of Canso area using radar surveillance and direct VHF radio communication. All vessels 20 metres or over in length are required to report to this centre as soon as they approach within 5 nautical miles of the specified zone. Reporting is mandatory.

About 14 regular employees are located at the VTM Eddy Point. centre at The channel dimensions and the present system of aids to navigation (buoys and beacons) establ ished in 1970 prov iding for a channel depth of 91 ft below datum (draft 85 f t to 86 ft generally) are quite adequate for. supertankers up to about 400,000 dwt. PILOTAGE The Atlantic Pilotage Authority provides pilotage service in the Strait of Canso. Pilotage is compulsory for all ships not registered in Canada and for ships of more than 1,500 grt registered in Canada with a few exceptions as specified in the Atlantic Pilotage Authority Regulations (1974). The Authority maintains 5 pilots at Port Hawkesbury 'and 4 pilots at Sydney. The pilots are interchangeable during peak requirements for pilotage in the Strait of Canso, Sydney and Bras d'or Lake zones as part of the Cape Breton Compulsory Pilotage area. The dispatch of pilots is through the Vessel Traffic Management Centre at Eddy Point. The Pilot boarding station for the' Strait of Canso is: Northern Limit: ( Mouth of Strai t) Lat. 45O42'42" N Long. 62O29'12" W Southern Limit: Lat. 45O24'00" N ( Mouth of Chedabuc to Long. 61 01'00" W Bay) In 1978, out of the total jobs of 2058 for the combined Cape Breton area comprising Strait of Canso, Bras dlor Lake and Sydney, about 1,200 assignments were for the Strait of Canso. The pilotage is at present being subsidized by the Government. Efforts are made by the Authority to be selfsufficient by raising tariffs in 1980.

TUG SERVICE Tug service is provided by Eastern Canada Towing Limited through a charter arrangement with Gulf Canada. Two tugs of 300 gross tons each (M.T. Point Tupper and M.T. Point Melford) are permanently stationed at the Gulf Refinery dock. The tugs each have 4,200 hp with 50 ton bollard pull. Additional tugs,. if required by VLCC's, are sent from Halifax. Two tugs provide assistance to all vessels in excess of 15,000 dwt arriving and departing, and to ships smaller if deemed necessary by the master of terminal staff, due to inclement weather or otherwise, and whenever a stern- in docking may be required. For vessels of 110,000 dwt to 160,000 dwt, three tugs are required, and for vessels over 160,000 dwt four tugs are generally required. The tug charges have recently been revised (April 15, 1979). These are based on summer deadweight tons as reported in Lloyd's Register. STEVEDORING Stevedoring on private wharf facil ities at Nova Scotia Fo-rest Products and Georgia Pacific Corporation are provided by the industries themselves util izing non-unionized labour. The cargo at Mulgrave Government Wharf is handled by ILA workers who have formed a Local headed by a president. The union has 14 full-time stevedores. and about 300 men parttime. The unionized workers also handle lines at the Gulf terminal which utilizes about 14 men as and when required. On occassions unionized workers also handle stores for the tankers. SHIPPING AGENTS I.H. Mathers and Sons Limited and F.K. Warren Limited are shipping agents which operate jointly from Port Hawkesbury and have two permanent employees based at Port Hawkeshury.

SHIP CHANDLERY Ship chandlery is provided by Mattie's Ship Chandler: Services Limited which employs 6 people. The provisions, stores and spare parts required by ships are drawn fron Sydney and Halifax if not available locally. In addition to Mattie's, there are two other ship chandlers which provide provisions etc. to.some of the ships. These are Hawco's Meat and Ship Chandlers located at Port Hawkesbury, and Salter's and Sons Limited which operate from N. Sydney. FIRE FIGHTING Fire fighting services at various wharves are provided by the Fire Departments of Port Hawkesbury and Mulgrave. Gul f Canada Limited have elaborate fire fighting arrangments on the terminal. The tugs M.T. Point Tupper and M.T. Point Me1 ford are also equipped with fire fighting equipment. CUSTOMS Port Hawkesbury is considered 3s a Port of Entry for the Straqt of Canso as far as Customs and Immigration are cci3- cerned. The customs office is located at Port Hawkesbury with three permanent employees. They also look after immigration. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Canadian Coast Guard runs the Mulgrave Marine Bnergency Response and Repair Centre at the Mulgrave public wharf. The pollution abatement equipment is stored in about 3,000 sq ft of shed space (part of the transit shed), and a small annex provides about 1,000 sq f t of office space. The equipment consists of a variety of small vessels and booms, solvents, \ pumps, skimmers, vehicles etc. Nine People are employed at the Centre, which serves the entire Maritime Area in conjunction with smaller regional depots. The Centre is in the charge of the Regional Ehergency Operations Of flcer who reports to the Regional Manager Marine Emergencies in Dartmouth. ROAD AND RAIL LINKS The Trans Canada Highway and the Canadian National railway connect Canso Superport with the national and provincial transportation system. The causeway, connecting Cape Breton Island and the mainland of Nova Scotia, has been a vital link between the southern and northern shores of the Strait of Canso transforming the southern portion into one of the major deep water port-oriented industrial complexes of the Atlantic Prov inces.

CARGO TRAFFIC A summary of the cargo traffic handled at Port Hawkesbury and Mulgrave for the year 1977 available from Statistics Canada is given in tables 2.1 and 2.2. The traffic is divided into "Coastal" and "International": Coastal includes vessels classed as being in coastal service if (1) the vessel is of Canadian or British Commonwealth registry, sails between two Canadian ports, and loads or unloads no foreign freight or if (2) it is of foreign registry, but is granted a waiver to engage in coastal service. International shipping includes vessels classed as being in foreign service, that is when (1) the vessel arrives from or departs for a foreign port; or (2) cargo is loaded for or unloaded from a foreign port; or (3) the registry of the vessel is other than Canadian or British Commonwealth even though the vessel may have sailed between two Canadian ports. The total traffic handled at Port Hawkesbury and Mulgrave for the year 1977 was as follows: r., -- CARGO TRAFFIC AT CANS0 SUPERPORT LOADED UN LOA DE D TOTAL TONS TONNES TONS TONNES TONS TONNES Port 4,100,527 3,719,937 3,912,911 3,549,729 8,013,438 7,269,66,. Hawkesbury az Mulgrave 10,074 9,140 559 507 10,633 9,64 -... ;=; 2? -.-."..-. CC T OTA L 4,110,601 3,729,077 3,913,470 3,550,236 8,024,071 7,279,31 1. Source: Statistics Canada. 2. Traffic excludes fish handled at fisheries wharves in the Strait of Canso.

Out of the total of 8.024 million tons (7.279 million tonnes) handled in 1977, liquid bulk accounted for 89%, dry bulk 9% and general cargo 2 8. Since 1977 the liquid bulk traffic has declined - from 51 million barrels (7.2 million tons) in 1977 to 34 million barrels (4.8 million tons) in 1978 and 37.5 million barrels (5.4 million tons) in 1979 according to traffic figures provided by Gulf Canada Limited.

- W w 4 Z z 0 B Ll 4 B 0 E,- A. - UI Cr1 7. 0 B cn z 0 E mmmm wa3mm W'Prn03 - - C mdmm ~ m d 0 ma34 d L rn'm o m -3 m ~ ~ co m LnPe'3 P ---I ~ m m m COWOd m o d - C\1 - - e m W' m m m m - w P m b N P - W ~ N ~ C J CJ ~.w~-103mmma3 m mmcnd-~m~nd N L C - - - -. N w C J c n w ~ ~ P O W * Lnm o l~ C e - - - - - - - wmec?mep--o \ommm.+omo U)dCIC'lo>CJOCJ WCVWUl e P - w' m - m e - m ~ WCJ - o m -3' - - - -3 tn W -3 m -3 ul w w U3. o W ~\1 - P 03 m w' - m d o L 03 a w a a: 0 d Z 3 cn w z z 0 E - - NO w 03-0 rlw'rl I m d m N P P - P ld.w' N 4 m 03 03 t.n A d 4 1 1 1 4 1 I U) l~ P w' - m P ul 0. C 4 03-3 - m m N P 4 O\ w' In 4 m W w 4 z 0 B a W a 4 0.c3 W w 4 Z z 0 E m z 0 E Kl w Z z 0 B m Z 0 E m- b\ m LnO- I mwm L L C V d P mom-m www- +-dm - 4 - - - L mmw'm e m m o m b d m- m.d'0 m b w m m d w w 4 4 4 4 -mmm w w m d m m 4 4 d r- 0 P - w' P CV w 4 - P cv - N - - P P 0 w' o m CV m m o 03 d 0 d 03 N 4 1 1 1-1 I d m (13 4 m W - - - - 1 4-1 mwwm m a ~ - 4 w mw C J ~ O \ - I mm P W C V ~ p-3 mlnw-3 rn w mcv m-m-ern 9.- ba\mcv o m m4-ru NO - - h h i h 4 1 m q m e m- mmwm WCV w e -3' 0 N - 05 m 05 - m ul ' P N 4 03-3' -3' 4 4 0 Ln -3' 4 \D cn ul 4 4 -I 4 Cn - CV 4 cn 5 m r- m. 01-4 cn r( P - m - P (Y. ul o o 4 4 w' >( E H P 0 r: r: O U. 2 a 0 k a, d 4 0 (d Ll 0 c, U aj arc d& A.400 C - A i, E a,--( rn50dk R 3 II) a,u eersa: 4 1 l I I c3 R B. E 'D. 0. a: B 0 E c n l l l l l l ~ l J 4 z G H B 4 z 0; W B Z H ci G I. 4 0 & & I3 p: O PI a: E 0 B d -.

TABLE 2.2 CARGO TRAFFIC AT CANS0 SUPERPORT - 1977 MULGRAVE COMMODITY TONNAGE LOADED TONNAGE UNLOADED TOTAL TONNAG TONS TONNES TONS TONNES TONS TONNE A. COASTAL - Fuel Oil - - 559 507 559 507 TOTAL-COASTAL - - 559 507 559 507 B. INTERNATIONAL - Pulpwood - Veneer, plywood - Equipment misc 6,985 1,395 1,694 6,337 1,266 1,537 - - - - - - 6,985 1,395 1,694 6,33 1,26 1,53 TOTAL-INTERNATIONAL 10,074 9,140 - - 10,074 g114 C. PORT TOTAL 10,074 9,140 559 507 10,633 9,64

SHIP TRAFFIC During the year 1977, traffic to and from the Strait of Canso as recorded at Eddy Point Vessel Traffic Management (VTFI) Centre total led 4868 comprising 1020 upbound, 1058 downbound and 2785 others (fishing boats, buoy vessels, etc.). The breakdown of this traffic by vessel type was: 959 tankers, 394 freighters and 2,510 others with a total gross registered tonnage of 15,413,774 out of which tanker traffic accounted for 19,310,547 deadweight tonnage. There were 49 movements of vessels over 50,000 dwt. The ship traffic data for the fiscal years 1977-78 and 1978-79 (April to March) as maintained at Eddy Point VTM Centre is summarized as follows: Vessel Movements: - Upbound 990 - Downbound 1,004 - Others (f ishing, buoy etc) 2,919 TOTAL 4,913 Vessel Movement by Type: - Tankers 919 611 - Freighters 377 365 - Others 3,617 3,525 TOTAL 4,913 4,501 Tonnage: - Total grt 15,530,168 12,370,475 - Tankers dwt 20,611,801 13,442,196 - Vessel movement over 500,000 dwt 50 48 The above data shows that there has been a slight decline in shipping activity in the Strait of Canso recently related to the present energy situation, OPEC prices, Iranian pol itics, e tc. The maximum size vessel which has so far used the Strait of Canso is AL ANDALUS of 360,000 dwt.

The harbour is owned and controlled by the Federal Government under the terms of the British North American Act of 1867. Under the present system, Public Works Canada construct, own and maintain the publ ic facilities while Transport Canada (MOT) is responsible for their administration/management through the Canadian Coast Guard. A new system is expected to be adopted by April, 1980 under which MOT/CCG will be the owners as well as the administrators of the public facilities. The present management of the publ ic facil ities under the Coast Guard is based on a four tier basis, i.e. Local, District, Regional and National : Locally, two Harbour Masters are appointed, one for Mulgrave side and the other for Port Hawkesbury side of the Strait. They act as Harbour Masters under the terms of Canada Shipping Act, Part XII, Public Harbours and Harbour Masters, Pub1 ic Harbours Regulations, 1954, as amended from time to time. The two Harbour Masters also act as wharfingers under the terms of Government Harbours and Piers Ac t, Government Wharves Regulations, as amended from time to time. In principle, the two Harbour Masters are responsible for enforcing the harbour rules and regulations under the Act. In practice, however, they simply collect harbour dues and port charges. They are appointed on part-time/ commission basis. In fact they are not qualified Harbour Masters in the strict sense of the designation. Consequently they do not exercise powers bestowed upon them under the Act for duties relating to ship safety, pollution, hand1 ing of dangerous goods, explosives, etc. 2. The two Harbour Masters report to the District Superintendent of Terminal Facilities, Canadian Coast Guard, Dartmouth, N.S. 3. The District Superintendent in turn reports to the District Manager, Dartmouth on one hand and liaises with the Regional Manager, Terminals Branch, Dartmouth, N.S. on the other. 4. The next line of command is the Regional Director, Canadian Coast Guard, Maritimes Region who reports. to Commissioner, Canadian Coast Guard, Ottawa.

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES The tariffs of harbour dues and port charges for the use of wharves, piers, etc are fixed by the Federal Government under the Public Harbours Regulations (Canada Shipping Act) and the Government Wharves Regulations (Government Harbours and Piers Act). The main items of revenues from the public facilities at Canso Superport are: Harbour Dues Berthage Wharfage Storage Wintering Summer 1 aying-up Water lot leasing Licensing The revenues for the fiscal years 1975-76 and 1978-79 are given in Table 2.3. These revenues amounted to $77,346 and $9,844 in 1978-79 for Port Hawkesbury and Mulgrave respectively. Harbour dues accounted for the major portion of the revenues. Other changes were practically negligible. The schedule of charges and dues are given in Appendix I. Recent expenditures on the pub1 ic facil ities are minimal. The exact figures are not available, however it is roughly estimated that the total cost does not exceed $50,000 per year.

TABLE 2.3 CANS0 SUPERPORT - REVENUES ' 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 Apr/7 Jan 3 PORT HAWKESBURY 1. Harbour Dues 122,034 115,835 139,745 75,085 106, 2. Berthage 819 980 835 325 1, 3. Wharfage 61 111 - - 4. Formal leases, 961 961 961 1,936 1, 1 icenses, permits S UB-TOTALS 123,875 117,887 141,541 77,346 110, 1. Harbour Dues 409 277 135 610 2. Berthage 1,434 1,067 2,416 3,087 3,. 3. Wharfage 3,179 595 1,083 5,722 4. Formal leases, 3,265 6,185 3,035 425 1 icenses, permits S UB-TOTALS 8,287 8,124 6,669 9,844 5, TOTAL NOTES: 1). 10 months only. 2) Cargo shipped from Port Hawkesbury Government Wharf in 1977-78 and 1978-79 was nil. 3) From Mulgrave Government Wharf, the cargo was shipped as follows: pulp Wood 4,408 cords* 4,736 cords Explosives - 2,064 tonnes Fish - 30 tonnes 1 cord = 3.625 cu. m.

SOCIO - ECONOMIC DATA MANPOWER The counties considered for socioeconomic profile of the Strait of Canso are Antigonish, Guysborough, Inverness and Richmond. Estimates of total polutaion for portions of counties within the Strait area and the population growths between 1961 and 1976 are given in Tables 2.4 and 2.5 During a decade of major industrial growth in the Strait of Canso ( 1961-19 71 ) when significant industries were establ ished by Nova Scotia Forest Industries Limited, Nova Scotia Power Corporation, Canad ian General Electric and Gulf Canada Limited, the total population in the Strait grew from about 37,500 in 1961 to 43,500 in 1971. The industrial growth levelled off in the 70's and the population decreased to 39,000 in 1976, a decrease of 2.2% per annum over the five year period. The distribution of experienced labour force and trends in employment during the ten year period 1961-1971, are shown in Table 2.6. During the period 1961-1971, there was a noticeable shift, as would be expected, in occupation from resource-based - industries, especially fishing and agriculture, to the manufacturing sector. There are indications that there is even a migratory tendancy recently in the population of fishermen from this area as the Strait of Canso is virtually a dead area for fishing. The percentage increase in the labour force in the manufacturing sector is sel -explanatory. The industries establ ished in the region during the decade 1961-1971 have provided employment opportunities not only to local people but have attracted an experienced labour force from outside. At present, about 2700 people are employed by the major industries established in the region i.e. Nova Scotia Forest Industries Ltd., Gulf Canada Limited, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, Nova Scotia Power Corporation and Breton Industrial & Marine Limited. The number of people employed in various industries and port services are indicated under the respective sections.

TABLE 3.4 STRAIT OF CANS0 REGION POPULATION, 1961-1976 REG1 ANTIGONISH GUYSBOROUGH INVERNESS RICHMOND TOTP. COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY COUNTY STUE Estimated Total Population, 1961 12,184 9,538 4,721 11,071 37,5 Estimated Total Population, 1971 14,372 9,170 7,530 12,477 43,5 Estimated Total Population, 1976 11,750 9,562 8,047 9,652 39,O Per Cent Change 1961-'1971 + 18.0% - 3.9% + 59.5% +12.7% +16 Total Population in Communities 1971 11,633 7,328 5,824 10,.642 35,4 Per Cent of Total Population in Communities 81% SOURCE: Statistics Canada, 1961 and 1971 and Department of Development Statistics Division as complied in " Eva1 uation of the ~trai't of Canso subsidiary Agreement" by Prof. R. I. McAllister.

TABLE 2.5 STRAIT OF CANS0 REGION SUBDIVIS ION POPULATION TRENDS -.....-.-. PLACE 1966 % CHANGE 1971 % CHANGE 1976 POPULATION 19 66-71 POPULATION 19 71-76 POPULATI<...- Antigonish B 5,518 + 15.6 6,377 -- 6,368 Antigonish Town 4,856 + 13.0 5,489-1.9 Guysborough B 7,366 + 0.2 7,380-2.0 Canso 1,190 + 1.6 1,209-5.7 Mulgrave 1,124 + 6.4 1,196 -- Inverness County 3,396 + 22.4 4,158-1.2 Port Hawkesbury 1,866? Richmond -- A 4,093 + 20.5 4,932-2.5 4,811. <. Richmond C 4,470 + 11.1 4,967-2.5 4,481 - - Study Region P (Approximately) 34,770 +.15.2 40,044-2.6 39,011 SOURCE: Statistics Canada, 1961 and 1971, and Department of Development Statistics Division as compiled in "Evaluation of Strait of Canso Subsidiary Agreement" by Prof. R. I. McAl lister.

TABLE 2.6 STRAIT OF CANS0 REGION AND NOVA SCOTIA PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL EXPERIENCED LABOUR FORCE BY INDUSTRY 1961-1971 - ISDt'STRY 1961 - IS71 Schan=c 1961-; Slr3il 0: h'ova Strait (il. Xova Strail 01 1 Ca~izn 1;r:Ton kn:i~ C21150 Rczion Scoii3 Canso "ntzion 5 Alints 2nd Qu-rrria 0.SSr <-35 0-75 2-25 + 0.3 - I'in3;lcc. Jn~ur3ncc a d }:e31 Ext~tr 1-25 2.455 Is5 3-15 + 0.6 -I tishin: an3 Tr2~pi;lz 9.6% 3-2% 2-75 2.0Ca 6.9 /.=ricul~ur= 7-65 5-15 2-7% 2-5% 4.9 I'orrs~ry 3-45 137c 2.85 1.1% - 0.6-1'uh;ic Aclrnini~tr~ti~n 2nd Defrncc 355 15-5s 4-970 13-55 -k 1-4 - I:ldus!ry Lr~ts?iciried or Undtfimd 1-95 1-770 6-1% 7.25 -t 6.3 + Trznj,no;;z:Ion. Co~rr.un<c31ion~ ~113 C:!IE~ Elilitits 1 #LO5 10-55'0 8.74- S.15-5-3 1-rsdr I I-GTa 15-55; IZ-SS 152% 31 A - Cocstruclion 13-77'' 6.6% 14-S?c 75F~ + 1.1 - f- I\lnnur~clur;n= 12.SYc J~i.4~ 17.3% 14.25 +1.5 Co~rna~nity, Eusincsr and Pcrson31 S C ~ ~ I~IJC~I~~CS ~ C C 20.95;. 19.09 23.75 23.2% 31.S i- S~\~rrcr Slztli<t;c5 C~nsd3, Census 01 Can3da 1961 and 1371 as compiled in "Evaluation of the.strait of Canso Subsidiary Aqreement" by prof. R. I. McAllister.

FIG. 2.3 LAND OWNERSHIP

RESOURCE POTENTIAL Land The Strait of Canso has considerable land potential not only for industrial and urban development but also for agriculture, forestry and recreation. Over the last two decades, large areas have been developed for industries, bulk-handling port installations, water supply reservoirs, new roads, etc. The industrial development and related bulk-handling port facilities have, however, been confined on the east side of the Strait, and there is still considerable land available for development on both sides of the Strait. Fig. 2.3 shows land ownership in the vicinity of the port activities area of the Strait of Canso. The area has not been regarded as an important agricultural resource. In fact there has been a declining trend in farm activity in this area. Improved acerage and the number of people in farming have diminished greatly over the last several decades, and there are no commercial farms in the immediate study area. Fores trv The capability of land resource for forestry is only moderately good in this area. However, the construction of the Nova Scotia Forest Industries pulp and paper mill has given an important new value and impetus to local forestry through the provision of a large outlet for pulpwood within the immed iate area. Fresh Water Major rivers and large watersheds are not available in the area to provide large quantities of water generally required by major industries. This deficie;~cy has however been overcome through the government funded resevoir construction program.

Fisheries Fisheries in the Strait of Canso is of little consequence to the towns of Mulgrave and Port Hawkesbury and other communities. The processing plant of Acadia Fisheries plant located at Venus Cove adjacent to Mulgrave was destroyed by fire in 1970 and has not been rebuilt. The waters of the Strait, from the Causeway southward to a line extending from Chichett Point to Bear Head, have been closed to the harvesting of shellfish because of bacterial contamination in the inner reaches of the harbour. The lobster fishery, which is not affected by the closure, however continues to engage a few local residents on a part-time basis in the shallow waters on both sides of the Strait and the Causeway. While the stocks of the Strait are limited some fishing activity continues in the adjacent coastal waters. The total fish landings and their values for the years 1977 and 1978 are as follows: 1977 1978 LANDINGS VALUE LANDINGS VALUE ( tonnes) ($1 (tonnes) ($1 District (#14) 5,084 459,648 8,675 1,434,681 Richmond ( #9) 9,611 1,570,249 11,275 2,541,082 Inverness ( # 3) 1,704 798,492 2,532 '1,500,036 The landings.and their values at various wharves in these districts relevant to the study area for the years 1977 and 1978 are as follows: 1978 VALUE LANDINGS VALUE ( tonnes) ($1 (tonnes) ($1 DISTRICT N0.14 Mulgrave 5,077 437,991 8,612 1,365,842 Auld Cove 5,084 457,648 54 66,336 DISTRICT NO. 9 - Po in t Tupper DISTRICT NO. 3 Port Hawkesbury Port Hastings 1 2,410 3 5,042

F i.i FENCO FISHERIES DISTRICTS

District #14 58 District #9 140 District #3 189 BOAT LENGTHS FISHERMEN 0 to 45 f t above 100 f t TOTAL The Strait of Canso has some potential as a supply base for foreign fishing trawlers. It has however stiff competition with St. John's in this respect. Minerals The mineral potential of the immediate area has largely been in the occurrence of industrial and construction materials such as sand, gravel and granite, and in the existence of salt structures. Granite rock, abundent at Cape Porcupine at the west end of the Causeway, was quarried for causeway construction and is being further exploited by Construction Aggregates Limited for PEI and export to Bermuda. The development of salt deposits, located within the area could well lead to development of strategic oil storage and petrochemical industries. The gypsum found in nearby quarries is also exported from the area by the Georgia Pacific Corporation. There is also limestone and dolomite in the Strait area. ~ecrea t ion The Strait area lies in the mainstream of Nova Scotia tourist travel from the mainland to the attractions of Cape Breton Island, the Cabot Trail, Bras dlor Lake, the Cape Breton Highland National Park and the Fortress of Louisbourg. The landscape of the Strait itself, including the new industrial developments and shipping traffic provides a number of interesting views. The paving of the coastal highway from.mulgrave to Eddy point and westward to Boylston and Guysborough has recently opened a new circle tour which returns to the causeway by way of Monastery and the Trans Canada Highway. This will increase leisure travel to viewpoints near Eddy Point and the series of interesting beach formations and waterfowl habitants near Hadleyville and St. Francis Harbour, as well as Port Shoreham.

SUMMARY The salient features of the port profile indicating present level of activity in the Canso Superport Area are summarised below: - Import of crude oil at the Gulf wharf, and distribution of product from that facility to the Atlantic Provinces and Quebec. The largest tankers to visit North America have called at this wharf. - Export of pulp and newsprint from the Nova Scotia Forest Products Industries wharf, Point Tupper. - Export of bulk gypsum from the Georgia Pacific wharf, Point Tupper, the gypsum going to the U.S. - The shipbuilding and repair activities of Breton Industrial and Marine Limited, located at Point Tupper. This company has been under new ownership since 1970 and is presently a flourishing small shipyard involved in building fishing vessels, Coast Guard vessels, etc. In ternational orders have been completed over recent years. The shipyard has some small wharves of its own and is building a floating drydock of 1,000 tons capacity. - Sand and gravel is loaded from a small new wharf just south of the mainland side of the causeway, by Construction Aggregates Limited (owned by Nova Construction of Antigonish). The sand and gravel is shipped mainly to P.E. I. for use in concrete and asphalt, etc. and it has a1 so been sent to Bermuda for construction proj ects. - There are two government general cargo wharves in the area; the largest is a common-user marginal wharf at Mulgrave and at the south part of this wharf is a CN Marine ro-ro ramp. This wharf has been used for loading pulp wood and for a base for offshore drilling operations, also for miscellaneous berthing requirements. On Cape Breton side small jetty type structure In Port Hawkesbury, which is used apparently entirely for berthing of small vessels, with no loading or unloading of cargo except for fish in small quantities. CN Marine have apparently not used their ro-ro ramp facility at Mulgrave. It was originally installed to provide an alternative location in the winter time when Sydney could not be used, on account of ice conditions, by the CN ferries running to and from Port-aux-Basques.

- There are three government fisheries wharves for handling small local fishing boats, all on the mainland side at Auld Cove, Pirate Harbour and Sand Point. - There is a lock on the island side of the causeway, this is owned and operated by Canadian Coast Guard. The lock was installed as part of the causeway project to provide a means of navigation through the Strait. It can take ships up to approximately 735 f t in length. No fees are charged for using the lock except if linemen are needed for which there is a nominal fee. -.Tug service is provided by Eastern Canada Towing, who keep two tugs at the Gulf wharf. - The area is a compulsory pilotage area and the Atlantic Pilotage Authority has 4 pilots stationed in the Strait of Canso area and it also draws on other pilots stationed at Sydney. - The Federal Department of Public Works looks after maintenance, etc. for Canadian Coast Guard at the government wharves. There are two harbour masters in the area, however this title should be used with some caution because the responsibilities and activities of the harbour masters fall somewhat short of what the title may suggest. There is one harbour master for the island side of the Strait, and another harbour master for the mainland side. Apparently there was only one harbour master in the past, but at some time an additional harbour master was appointed. The activities of the two harbour masters consist mainly of collecting harbour dues from vessels coming into' the port. In general terms, vessels' dues are only collected from the same vessel twice in one year. It is important to note that the activities of the harbour masters require only part-time duties. The private sector wharf facilities, which outnumber the public wharf facilities in both number and degree of importance, are managed quite adequately by the owners. The extent of present port administration is the harbour masters as mentioned above, together with a regional terminal facilities manager located in Dartmouth. In addition the Canadian Coast Guard has an important Vessel Traffic Management (VTM) Centre at Eddy point. This centre controls all vessel movements, except those below a certain length, in the entire Strait of Canso/Chedabucto Bay area.

- There is an ad hoc Port Adivsory Committee. Harry Mathers Jr. of the shipping agent firm is the new chairman. - The Strait of Canso has considerable land potential not only for industrial and urban development but also for agriculture, forestry and recreation. - There is some small boat fishing activity in the area, but fishing plants or major activity. The area just north of the causeway is now opened up for tuna fishing. - The Strait of Canso area is designated deep water industrial development area for the Province of Nova Scotia. The area has been studied extensively and a number of major projects have been instigated in the past. Most of the infrastructure required for a large scale development of the port is now in place. - Although the Province of Nova Scotia has put major effort into attracting industry to the area, it is significant that there is little in the way of local promotional effort directed specifically for the port.

APPLICABILITY ANALYSIS The analysis of various port administration systems to assess how best and to what extent these systems could be adapted to suit the Canso Superport is carried out in this chapter in relation to port administration systems and related national port policies in Canada, USA and Europe. Out of all three, Canada is dealt with in more detail as it would be unrealistic and impractical to think of any new system for Canso Superport which does not fit within the framework of the Canadian National Ports Policy. USA and Europe are considered because they are not only active trade partners of Canada but also their level of port development, management techniques and sea-borne trade are to a certain extend comparable to those in Canada. The systems adopted elsewhere in the free world have been directly or indirectly in 1 uenced by the European practices at one time or other. These systems have therefore not been specifically reviewed. The systems used in the communist block have been excluded due to completely different sociological set-up in these countries.

The inferences drawn from a review of the national port policies in the various countries are then used to analyse the ten possible systems of port administration for their appl icabil ity to Canso Superport. CANADIAN PORTS POLICY Canada's ports policy today is largely a hostage of historical precedent. The lengthy and often complicated history of ports policy and port development in Canada has led at several stages, both before and after Confederation, to significant attempts at several levels to bring some order to this policy. Because we appear to be nearing the end of the latest wave of attempted reform of the policy, it is essential that those planning the future of Canso Superport appreciate some of this history and use this knowledge to assess the position of Canso within the prospective new ports system of Canada and decide where it must go to obtain maximum benefits both from its natural advantages as a port and the new legal and pol icy framework which is emerging. Historical Backqround The British North America Act, 1867, placed navigation and shipping under the exclusive control of the federal authority. ~t the same time, it placed the land surrounding port areas squarely under the control of the provinces. Both prior to and after Confederation, there were various kinds ofport systems in use in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and elsewhere in what was to become Canada. For example, there was a private corporation running the port of Port Hope, Ontario. Harbour commissions existed before Confederation with Toronto's commission having been formed under legislation in 1850. A ter 1867, "federal commissions" existed in ports such as Halifax, Montreal, Saint John and Vancouver. Other ports had a "Harbour Master" system. Following major scandals in a number of ports, Prime Minister R.B. Bennett in 1931 appointed Sir Alexander Gibb to do a national ports study which was completed in 1932. This was Canada's first major step in formulating a consistent national ports policy which, up to this stage in our history, had been afflicted by some of the same weaknessess as the country's railway pol icy: over-construction in boom periods, cut- throat competition and bankruptcy during recessions

usually followed by government takeover. So, the Gibb Report and the National Harbours Board Act of 1936 which emerged from it were designed to do for Canada's ports what the formation of the CNR had done for railways. It also began the modern tug-of-war between centralist and regionalist models of port management and development, which struggle continues to the present day. The- National Harbours Board Act was, as might be expected, inspired by a strong preoccupation with excessive, and sometimes corrupt, investments made in too many local Canadian harbour commission ports in the booming 1920's. The onslaught of the Depression bankrupted commissions, municipalities and even provinces so that only the central government was capable of tack1 ing the complex problems presented by f a1 1 ing domestic and international traffic in heavily over-expanded ports. The Act set the NHB on a firm course of tight central control, technological and financial retrenchment, jurisdictional aloofness from local governments and, indeed, even of unconcern for any harbour facilities not under its exclusive jurisdiction. The " federal commission" ports ceased to exist and were taken into the NHB system. This policy worked well until the post-world War I1 economic expansion and growing resource development in Canada. By the early 1960's port cities and marine-oriented provinces began to demand more positive federal responses to their marine terminal and.other shipping needs. While - "federal commission" ports ceased to exist in 1936, Municipal Commissions continued to operate, notably the Toronto Harbour Commission. Others were incorporated between 1936 and 1964; some of these incorporations included the ports of Windsor (1957), The Lakehead (1958), Oshawa (1960) and Nanaimo (1960). The opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in the early 1960's caused renewed interest in the harbour commission form of administration. At the same time, the Glassco Commission was completing its work which had been initiated and promoted by desire of government to have an inquiry into and a report on the organization and methods of operation of the departments and agencies of government and to recommend " any changes to promote economy and efficiency". As a result of these two factors, the government of the day decided to introduce a new standard Act in order to regulate and make more efficient this burgeoning system. This was done through the Harbour omm missions Act o f 1964-65 which legislation remains virtually 'the same today, only having been amended in minor detail since then.

The standard Act offered a number of improvements. Ne w Harbous Commissions may be establ ished by Order- in-council and commissions have equal autonomy with respect to jurisdiction powers and authority. They also encourage active local participation in port promotion and planning. At a third public policy level, under terms of the' BNA Act, publ ic harbours became the property of Canada and control and administration of publ ic harbours came under the jurisdiction of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. Post-Confederation legislation permitted Harbour Masters to be appointed in numerous ports across the country. The Canada shipping Act of 1934 contained a number of changes relating to public harbours and Harbour Masters. The Department of Transport was formed in 1936 and the administration of the ~anada Shipping Act came under the jurisdiction of the new Department. The Glassco commissioners deplored the "somewhat chaotic pattern" of the division of responsibility between various departments and government agencies for the construction, maintenance, operation and administration of harbour work. They also criticized the unrealistic user charges and the differing policies of the various entities in charge of harbour administration, i.e., the Department of Transport, the Harbour Commissioners, the National Harbours Board, etc. Yet, despite the attention given to reforming ports policy in Canada, by the late 1960's harbour administration proved to be no less chaotic than before with the Minister of Transport operating ports with varying degrees of authority under the following statutes: - The Canada Shipping Act, Part X; - The Government Harbours and Piers Act; - The Harbour Commissions Act. 1964: - The individual Harbour Commission Acts for the Harbours of Tbronto, Hamilton, Belleville, Winnipeg and St. Boniface, North Fraser and Port Alberni; - he National Harbours Board Act, 1936;. - The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act; and Navigable Waters Protection Act.

In 1968, the Manning-Cavey-deVos Study of Harbour Administration in Canada reviewed the Canadian situation, compared it with other countries and made six recommendations which were as follows: "(1) A single agency of government reporting to the Minister of Transport should be responsible for all federal activities relating to ports and harbours in Canada. (2) Under this single agency the local harbour commission format should be used whenever feasible, and harbours meeting the required criteria should be administered by local harbour commissions. However, the agency should be established on a basis which would permit a flexible policy in the matter of operation of various ports thereunder so that where the local harbour commission format was not feasible, direct staffing and administration would be possible either in accordance with the pattern now followed by the National Harbours Board, or in accordance with the pattern followed by the Department of Transport under the Canada Shipping and Government Harbours and Piers Act. ( 3 ) In day-to-day operat ions local commissions should be automonous except that their capital expenditures, public borrowings and user charges should be subject to approval by the new agency. Present legislation relat-.ing to the local harbour commissions may require some revisions to provide for more varied local representation according to each case. (4) The responsibility for design and construction of marine works and for marine dredsinu should also be consolid- J * ated rather than divided among several agencies;' because of the size of this activity and in the interests of efficiency, consol idation or marine works construction should take place under the proposed new Harbours and Ports Agency. Consolidation of dredging could also take place under this new agency or could take place within the existing organization of the Department of Transport. In any case, it should be under the Minister of Transport. ( 5 ) Cargo hand1 ing arrangements should, wherever feasible, be left as a responsibility of private industry.

(6) The new agency should be responsible for overall harbour planning and advice on harbour pol icy, including capital expenditures, user charges, borrowings or grants, and should combine the objectives of adequate facilities, efficient operation and financial self-sufficiency in ports and harbours while bearing in mind that the rate of progress towards this objective must be related to the actual size and rate of growth of the harbours them- - selves." [ Italics added] Anyone connected with SCIDA who wants to have a detailed and extensive review of Canadian ports pol icy should read the Manning-Cavey-deVos study. The 1970 reorganization of the Department of Transport af fected Canadian port administration. The Department was changed from a department to a so-called "Ministry Concept". Part of the rationale for the restructuring was a greater integration of transportation planning and the expenditures of funds in reponse to demands for new facilities. The main implication under this reorganization for Canada's port and harbour administration has been that all NHB ports, NHB headquarters, commission ports and public harbours were made to report in future, along with the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority and Marine Services section, to the Administrator, Marine, of the Ministry of Transport. Shortly af ter the Ministry was reorganized, the Canadian Ports and Harbours Planning Committee was set up to examine port planning on a national basis. Representation from commis'sion harbours, pub1 ic harbours, and NHB harbours and the Department of Public Works, was intended to ensure overall planning and co-ord ination of all ports with significance to transportation locally, reg ionally and nationally. It was found by this committee that of the 2,200 ports, harbours and wharves in Canada, 1,700 were minor and were used mainly for recreation and fishing. A further 500 were found to have significance to commercial transportation and were administered by the Ministry of Transport. These were further broken down into eleven National Harbours Board ports, eleven Harbour Commissions and 475 public harbours. Of the grand total of 500, only about 25 ports were significant to the transport economy and of broad national interest. A National Ports Council was set up this time on a trial basis comprising the members of the NHB, the Chairman of the nine local port authorities of NHB, the Chairman of existing Harbour Commissions and a small group of federal. government official s together with ~ r oincial v government representatives and other port user interests. The Council was to meet

periodically under the Chairmanship of the Administrator, Marine, and was to advise the Minister on the efficiency of Canadian ports, to recommend improvements that could be made to the present ports system, to study future plans and to advise on overall policies with respect to ports and harbours in Canada. After three meetings of this Council, there was a general consensus among the members, and particularly among Provincial representatives, that existing leg islative complexities and reporting procedures inhibited the integration of policies and planning. They suggested that the problem of port reorganization would have to be resolved satisfactorily before any meaningful efforts could be made towards the advising of the Minister on the isues of Canadian ports pol icy. At the request of the steering committee of the National Ports Council, Provincial government representatives submitted position papers with regard to a new federal ports administration structure. The Provinces stated their agreements on the major principles that there is a senior national responsibility for all Canadian ports and harbours and that this responsibility should rest with the federal government's Ministry of Transport. A majority of the Provinces saw the new central ports agency as part of the Ministry's Marine Administration while the Nova Scotia paper explicity recommended against crown corporation status. The steering committee further advised that a single national port authority or agency ought to discharge this national responsibil ity in close consul tation with Provincial and local authorities. It was at this stage that the Scott Committee was appointed, This Report which was handed down in 1974 in essence reaff irmed the Manning-Cavey-deVos Report's philosopy, It continued the momentum in the Ministry of Transport which resulted, first, in Bill C-61 of 1977, then Bill C-6 of 1977 and, most recently,.bill C-50 of 1979. The Committee agreed with the conclusions of the National Ports Council that on balance the existing statutory harbour administration was no longer adequate to achieve present and future national transportation objectives effectively. There was a need perceived for a new structure that would eliminate fragmantation of port policy planning and operations in Canada, TO satisfy this need, the Committee proposed the following broad objectives at the national level for a new ports structure:

\ (a) to function within a well-integrated intermodal national transportation system; ' (b) to serve and facilitate inter-provincial and international trade; (c) to pursue such requirements for national uniformity and central overview as may be appropriate; (d) to contribute as much as possible to the achievement of broader national objectives pursued by the Ministry of Transport and other federal government departments. In order that the new structure might give meaningful participation at the regional and local level, it was to be responsive to private, municipal, prov incial and other interests; it was to be administratively efficient and effective as well as being sufficiently flexible to be applicable and acceptable under widely differing conditions throughout the country. It was to be designed to encourage the fullest possible private, municipal, provincial and other participation both in financial and management matters. The objectives out1 ined above were predicated on a measure of flexibility within the local port entity which could be achieved from a particular kind of semi-autonomous body corporate, not unlike those which had evolved through - the Harbour omm missions system. The Scott Committee Report saw that the effectiveness of the local port entities themselves would depend on the balance of powers and responsibilities vis-&vis the central port authority. Scott saw the responsibilities for the local port authorities as including : (a) the appointment of a Port Manager subject to national port authority approval; (b) carry out design and repairs of harbour works; (c) develop plans and submit proposals for future wharf age within national guide1 ines; (e) negotiate and issue leases and contracts; (f) manage by agreement Provincial or Municipal property as appropriate.

On the question of executive officers and staff, the Scott Committee believed that a blend of the NHB and commission practice would be advisable. The "Port Manager", a1 though not named specifically in the NHB Act, had emerged over the years as a person able to meet the operational needs of the ports under the board's jurisdiction. In a new ports structure, by-laws enacted by each local port entity would state clearly what the delegated authority and day-to-day powers and duties of the ports Chief Executive Officer would be.- It would be expected that such by-laws, while duly allowing for local variations from port to port, would nevertheless 01 low the general pattern a1 ready establ ished in actual practice both for commission and NHB port managers. In the case of existing NHB port managers, the Scott Committee Report saw a fundamental change in the line of the command since they would henceforth be appointed by and would report to the local port entity board rather than the NHB in Ottawa. Even so, however, the Scott Committee did not think that there should be any interference with a continuing flow of consultation and advice between these port managers, their staff and a new national port authority wherever advisable and with the knowledge of the local port entity as is the current practice in the commissions. It was expected that those in the public harbours division could be readily absorbed into the new authority. Indeed, opportunities were seen as opening up as a result of the 'new structure with its emphasis on integrated planning. The following were Committee: the basic recommendations of the Scott "1. the establishment of Local Port Entities as semiautonomous pub1 ic corporate bodies; 2. the delegation to the Local Port Entities of certain powers for making by-laws for expenditure of funds, setting of rates, administration of property, making seizures of vessels and goods, security, etc., and setting rules for the. appointment of their boards of directors, tenures of office and the appointment of a chief executive director; 3. the establishment within the Canadian Marine Transportation Administration, Ministry of Transport, of a National Port Authority to be responsible for the total federal interests in all the ports and harbours of Canada (save and except the responsibility of the Minister of the Environment in harbours used primarily for commercial fishing and recreation) ;

4. the orderly transition of the administration of National Harbours Board, Commission and Pub1 ic Harbours and Government wharves to meet the requirements of the new legislation; 5. the authority of the Minister of Transport with respect to the administration of each Local Port Entity and of other ports, harbours and wharves administered by the Government of Canada through the Ministry of Transport; 6. the delegation to the Minister of Transport of the responsibil ity to program and establish financial arrangements for improvements to and maintenance of all ports and harbours and their facil ities, including breakwaters and dredging along with other way facilities, other than the responsibil ity of the Minister of Environment in harbours used primarily for commercial fishing and reaction; 7. the recognition of the validity of Regional Port Adivsory Boards as may be required to further regional socioeconomic co-ord ination and development; 8. the existing Canadian Ports and Harbours Planning Committee be restructed; 9. a task force be appointed to be chaired by the Administrator, Canadian Marine Transportation Administration, Ministry of Transport, and consisting of representatives of the Department of Justice, and those departments and agencies to be represented on the Canadian Ports and Harbours Planning Committee ( including National Harbours Board) to develop a draft of -this task force to include in-depth economic, financial and organizational studies, using consultants where necessary, and covering, in accordance with terms of. reference to be agreed upon by the departments and agencies represented on it, the following : (a) an examination of the,nature of the existing and complex financial situation of harbours; (b) the financial objectives and framew~rk to be estab- 1 ished for the operation of harbours, including capital transactions; and (c) the measures needed to rationalize the existing financial structure having regard to 1. and 2. ( d) the precise sharing of responsibil ities between the National Port Authority and the Local Port Entities".

Schematically the proposed port structure was to be as set out in Fig. 3.1. The net result of all of these studies and initiatives in Bill form in the House of Commons is that the so-called "new" ports policy which has taken twelve years to come to fruition is not "there" yet. So, despite administrative changes which were implemented as a resul t of anticipatory expectation of passage of the new legislation, we are still in the pre-1968 phase in law regardless of the new dawn which has been so long- in coming, and which may never arrive. Indeed, as will appear in a later stage of this Report, those in control of the pol icy system in Ottawa believe that all of the policy initiatives of the last decade or so were attempts to make large and significant advances in policy too quickly and too dramatically with the result that - no changes have occured during that period. Present Ports Policy in Canada At the present time, the three principal forms of port administration in Canada are still through the National Harbours Board system, the Harbour Commission system or the system of ports administered directly by the Ministry of Transport. Basically, the ports of the National Harbours Board system handle close to ninety percent of the imports and exports of Canada. There are fifteen ports or harbours administered under this system including two grain terminal facilities. Next in order of significance are the Harbour Commission ports of which Toronto, Hamil ton and the Fraser River (Westminster) are the most important. There are eleven Harbour Commission ports at the present time in Canada. Finally, there are the many public harbours which are administered by the Canadian Coastguard (Transport Canada) and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. A fourth form of port administration system which exists in Canada is the private port, e.g. Port Cartier and the proposed Port of Gros Cacuna. The main areas of difference between NHB and Commission ports are those of borrowing powers, liabilities to municipal taxation and powers of the local port entities. NHB has no access to bank loans whereare Commission ports do; NHB ports pay "grants in lieu" of taxes while Commission ports pay taxes and, finally, the NHB local port authority members do not have any legel status with their Chairman being appointed whereas Harbour Commissioners appoint their Chairman. NHB Port Managers report to NHB headquarters in the Department of Transport whereas Commission Managers are appointed by the Commissioners and report to them.

Thus, the Harbour Commission system is one where the ports and those who run them are financially more self-sufficient. No Treasury Board approval is required of Harbour Commission budgets* as is the case with National Harbours Board budgets. The NHB system is, as stated earlier in this report, more rigidly controlled from the centre. Pub1 ic harbours and wharves are looked upon by officials in the Department of Transport and elsewhere as "bailout" operations although more wharfage is most easily provided to a port like the Strait of Canso through this part of the system. It was instructive when data for this report was being collected from various experts and officials that each reflected a view of present ports policy. which was very much a product of the backgrounds which each person had had in port administration in Canada. For example, M. Guy Beaudet saw the expansion and modernization of the NHB system as being the key to ports policy. Bert Cavey believed that the Harbour Commission system was as appropriate today as it had been many decades ago. He noted carefully that Bill C-27 covering crown corporations had no bearing on harbour commissions whereas it had a bearing on the NHB system. Thus, the freedom already existing in the Harbour Commission system would be an even more important feature of that form of port administration in future. In looking at the Canso Superport specifically, both Beaudet and Cavey thought that a Harbour Commission system of port administration would be the most appropriate form for the time being until the dust of the present policy confusion settles. In the case of Beaudet, he suggested that Canso Superport become a Harbour Commission with a view to transferring to the National Harbours Board when and if the NHB Act was amended to provide. for subsidiary corporations. Cavey did not go that far but suggested that a corporate form of a structure was necessary at the local level. He carefully pointed out the necessity under the existing Harbours Commission leg islation that municipal ities were the bodies which would, under the terms of that legislation, make application to the federal government for an Order in Council making Canso Superport a Harbour Commission. The key to getting the Order in Council was that everyone locally had to agree. While the industries which use the Canso Superport would not have to agree formally, needless to say it would be useful not to have them trying to divide the municipalities if that became an option which Canso Superport might choose. * operating budgets

The advantage of the Harbour Commission system was that a general cargo dock could be provided, if this was necessary, on a grant basis if one was a formal Harbour Commission. Pierre Franche, Chairman of the National Harbours Board, when reviewing the situation was strongly of the opinion that there was no possibility that Canso Superport could ever be a member of the NHB system in its present form. All of those consulted were unanimous that whichever part of present ports policy was selected as the route for Canso Superport to go on the short-term that no large scale staff structure should be created. The Commission of New Westminster was held out as an example of how a small scale operation could manage a large throughput. Proposed Policv as of Februarv, 1980 A series of events in recent years motivated the Government of Canada to attempt the formulation of a more adequate pol icy towards pub1 ic enterprises. The Estey inquiry into Air Canada and Parliamentary inquiries into AECL and Polysar all examined questionable business practices which embarrassed the Government of Canada. The Auditor General's report of 1976 was critical of accounting and financial management and control study. The Lambert Royal Commission on Crown Corporations was appointed in order to make recommendations concerning the control of crown corporations. Finally, the privy Council Of ice released a report in 1977 entitled "Crown Corporations: Direction, Control, ~ccountabil ity". All of these pressures led to the introduction on November 26, 1979 of Bill C-27 entitled "An Act Respecting Crown Corporations in Matters Relating or Incidential Thereto.'' A press release issued by the President of the Privy Council on August 18, 1977, said that the government had four basic objectives which it was trying to achieve through the Privy Council report, namely, 1. to clarify the relationship between Crown corporations, the Government and Parliament; 2. to define within the relationship the respective duties and responsibilities of the boards of directors ' and heads of Crown corporations, individual matters, Cabinet and Parliament; 3. to provide to the Government the means whereby ministers may fulfill their responsibilities for Crown corporations to par1 iament; and

4. to ensure that Par1 iarr~ent is provided with sufficient information to hold the Government and Crown corporations accountable for their actions. In section 8 of the proposed legislation, it was declared that every Crown Corporation was constituted: "... an instrument for advancing the national interests of Canada and that such interests are the primary of the - best interests of every Crown corporation". [sic] The mechanism through which the Cabinet was to ensure to this legislation that Crown corporations adopted this role was the power given in section 9 whereby the Cabinet was able, by order, to give any Crown corporation "such directive" as was necessary or desirable for the "better advancement of the national interests of Canada". There was to be a right of consultation of the directors before such directive was sent but no veto power over it. Even though that extensive power exists in the draft legislation, it is obvious that the government does not intend to resort to the use of the directive in a continuous fashion as a mechanism to communicate policy objectives. The directive system is more a "fail-safe" mechanism than a day-to-day management tool. More extensive control over the financial administration of Crown corporations is envisaged by the new legislation with a requirement that budgets of both parents and subsidiaries be presented to Treasury Board for approval in a systematic annual way. Perhaps the most significant and serious technique of control is to be found in section 27 (3) of the proposed legislation which states: "Each director of parent Crown corporation, other than a director who is an executive officer of the corporation, shall be- appointed by the Governor in Council for a term of one year." This leg islation w i l l undoubtedly re-sllrface in the near future in roughly equivalent form. Unless the Bill is significantly changed from the one which was introduced in November, 1977 in the House of Commons, it is unlikely that Canso Superport would be affected by it in the short term. The reason for this is that the Bill will primarily relate to the National- Harbours Board system of ports and is not expected to be extended to cover ports either under the Harbour Commissions system or under the current form of administration in place at the Strait of Canso. For NHB ports, there is a real possibility that each port will be established as a subsidiary crown corporation operating under the aegis of the parent crown corporation.

PORTS POLICY I N THE UNITED STArZ'ES OF A!.IERICA As in so may other areas of our development, historically and economically, Canada and the U.S. have had quite a different experience in the establishment and promotion of their ports. For instance, more than sixty percent of all marine terminals in the United States are privately-owned and operated by prof i t-making organizations. This is particularly true in bulk commodity ports. In many cases, port activity is an integral part of a broader corporate function such as coal mining, petroleum refining and distribution or steel production and distribution so that a single corporate entity such as an oil company or a coal company might own all the cargo passing through such a terminal. In contrast, ports which deal in break-bulk cargo or containers tend to be pub1 icly-owned. Ownership and funding of a public port in the United States come in many forms ranging from departments of municipal, county or state governments to quasi-autonomous, local, state and mu1 ti-state authorities. Many have activities which go beyond strictly port matters. For example, some such as the New York Port Authority control airports, tunnels, bridges, ferries, and other transport-associated businesses. Studies in the United States have clearly shown that ports have a great impact on the surrounding community. One port consultant believes that each ton of bulk cargo passing through a port brings $4.00 - $8.00 of revenue to the surrounding community while each ton of general cargo brings in close to $30.00 per ton. Some ports like the Port of Seattle claim that each ton of general cargo in any form creates a gross payroll of $110.80 in the local county. Thus, local communities take a huge interest in development of their ports. In general, the public port is viewed as a utility comparable to the telephone company or the electric power company. Historically in the United States port policy began with the Constitution under Article 1, Section 9, which was drafted in response to the interstate trade rivalry part of the Articles of Confederation in that country. The Constitution reads as follows: "No preference shall. be given by any regulation of commerce on revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: Nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one state, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another. "

This quotation created a crucially important pol icy direction in that it directed governmental policy affecting ports to be free from unfair competitive or discriminatory bias. Most of the subsequent leg islation enacted by Congress since this policy direction has been reflective of that spirit. In the United States a number of institutions exist which irnpinge on port policy which we do not have in Canada. For example, the Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for the planning of waterways and the dredging of harbours. As well, defence and merchant marine pol ic ies are significantly different in the United States than they are in Canada and that has an effect on port policy as well. At the pinnacle of the U.S. system is the Federal Maritime Commission which has an oversight role in order to prevent the unfair competition or favoritism which is prohibited in the U.S. Constitution. Normally, a port agreement with a shipping company in the United States to use part of a port on the preferential basis has to be approved by the F.M.C. If no unfair discrimination (as opposed to simple discrimination) is contained in the agreement then the F.M.C. will approve it. Their authority is based on the Navigation Act of the United States which is an act of Conqress. That is the l i m i t of federal requlatory power except -for the Coast Guard role which is that of a pol iceman. One of the most successful port structures on the east coast of the United States is the Port of New York Authority. There, a high level of co-operation has been attained by an authority having jurisdiction in two separate states and a number of municipalities. However, it is to the west coast of the United States which we must look for more guidance on the scale which is useful to Canso Superport. There are two major forms of port management on the west coast of the United States, namely, the city department system and the State-run system. In the case of the city department system (which is the main one) the Mayor generally appoints five to seven person boards which are comparable to the directorship of a corporaticn. Usually, they are appointed for a five year term with one term expiring each year so that continuity is assured, Whatever authority is needed by this group is given in the best of cases, Sometimes pol itical interference or control is exercised in such a way to cause problems in this system, State port administrations do not significantly differ in their structure from the municipal-run systems,

Seattle is one of the best examples of a port with tnt of powers most ports in the United States try to have. TI)- port has the power to levy taxes within the port district. Through this technique they get support for their bonds which are issued in the United States on a tax exempt basis for bonds of this kind. These bonds form the base of their financing. Because they have a taxing authority, they are independent in the issuing of these bonds which is an important feature of their system. Nor is there any dollar limit on the- number of bonds which may be issued. While every business venture which is dealt with by the port has to be shown to be sound, by the same token the authority to levy taxes cushions the port in case something goes wrong with a particular venture because they may have millions of dollars a year in taxes which they can collect and use in subsidizing both the attracting and the keeping of business. Seattle runs its own airport as well. One prominent American expert told us that the "ideal" in the United States was to have a non-political, local board of businessmen who understood their port and understood business as the structure within which to work. In this "ideal" situation the board involves itself only in setting policy and is not a management board. At the same time, business knowledge on the part of board members will give them an early warning system in case management practices are getting out of hand. The more one examines U.S. ports policy, the more one realizes that one of the main aims of port management is to keep the federal government at arm's length. Very few port managers or boards managing ports want to encourage the federal presence and go to great lengthe to keep it out. The only time ports w i l l generally take monry from the federal government is when the federal government lays down some new rules which will cause the spending of new money. Fo r example, if waste water tanks for ships are required in a port then the port authority will take federal money in order to provide these and to comply with the federal rules. The ports that are involved with LNG tankers have had to become more closely involved with the federal government. On the othe: hand, very few port managers or boards are opposed to the federal involvement through the Army Corps of Engineers. Because there is little 1 ikelihood that Canso Superport will be given taxing authority throughout the port area and hinterland, many of the lessons from the American mcdel are impossible to apply. Also, because of the heavier federal involvement through the National Harbours Board and the Department of Transport in Canadian ports policy, it is impossible to compare or draw significant lessons from U.S. ports policy. One can learn lessons from the way in which many ports are run locally and what rules of management are followed at this level.

EUROPEAN PORTS POLICIES Harbour administration practices in Europe are more comparable to Canada even though they vary from country to counrty. In most countries the central government is heavily involved in the financing of ports. For example, in Belgium, Holland and Germany the central government builds and maintains access channels, canals and river channels without making any charge for these services. Port authorities in these countries are financially responsible only for the piers and wharves. In Belgium, the central government also builds the harbour infrastructures at its own expense and pays two-thirds of the cost of the equipment used there. In Holland, installations are financed with low-interest loans from the central government and in Italy most of the harbour facilities are centrally-owned and supplied with very low user charges. Even in France, where formerly most ports had to 'finance their own installations with the result that harbour charges were high compared. to other harbours in Europe, there has been change. The central government now finances a significant portion of new port works and equipment. These ports have administrative councils ha1 f of which are appointed by local organizations and the other half of which are appointed directly by the central government. Thus, the principle of central government to contribution of port ' development is generally applied in most European countries. On the other hand, decentralization of administration is general ized with local port administrations only submitting capital budgets and their rates to central governments for approval. 0 FENCO

POSSIBLE SYSTEMS SPECIFIED I N THE TERMS OF REFERENCE In the light of the foregoing, the ten possible systems specified in the terms of reference are examined briefly in an effort to narrow down the selection of best possible system for detailed consideration in the next chapter. Thesc a1 ternatives are grouped under the following heads: - Management Under Private Sector Privatization of ownership and operation Present lease management Other variation of lease management - Management Under Pub1 ic Sector as Practiced in Canada Administration under NHB Administration under Harbour Commission's Act of 1964 Administration under Ports and Harbour division of the Ministry of Transport Administration under a new Canadian Port Act as propose6 previously in Bill C-50 Administration under separate or special act - Management Under U.S. or Other Foreign Systems - Any Other Type Management Under Private Sector This type of management was common when ports were established and managed by private companies under concession agreements. The Liberian Port of' Monrov.ia in W e s t Africa is an example of such an arrangement. The Monrovia Port Management Company Ltd. with headquarters in New York was created to administer this particular port under a 1943 agreement between the United States and Liberia for its construction and management. In many cases, port activity under such circumstances is an integral part of a broader corporate function such as coal mining, petroleum refining and distribution, or steel production and distribution. Privatization of ownership and operation is not considered feasible unless it is part of a system with taxing and bond issuing authority or a general financial structure which is capable of generating revenue. This is not feasible in the case of Canso Superport for obvious reasons. Its good features which are a considerable latitude, pol icy-making, may, however, be kept in mind in formulating recommendations for the port.

As stated earlier, lease management system of a facility in the port, popularly known as Terminal Operation System, is basically related to port operation rather than port management, and is therefore, not considered applicable for the entire harbour. Management -- Under Public Sector as Practiced in Canada - NHB : W e do not consider it feasible at this moment, even though possible, for Canso Superport to come under the National Harbours Board. This is due to the fact that at present the scope of development of Canso Superport is oriented mainly towards bulk cargo and related heavy industries and the level of activity-of general cargo is not substantial. HARBOUR COMMISSION: W e believe that the port will be better served by moving in the direction of becoming a Harbour Commission port under the 1964 Act. It will, however, have to go through a number of years of experimentation before applying for this authority. MOT : The port is at present under the administration of the Ports and Harbours Division of the Ministry of Transport. We consider that there are a number of improvements which could be made immediately without recourse to complete change in the systein. These improvements are described in the recommendations as a first step towards eventual transfer to Harbour Commission System. BILL C-50: We believe that Bill C50 and its antecedents are dead and will not be revived in the global sense. However, even if it is revived, the above approach if adopted would be flexible enough to incorporate changes for a move towards greater autonomy as envisaged under the Harbour Commission System. SPECIAL ACT: We are unable to develop a scenario under which a special act could be passed for Canso Super- port. It would certainly be possible for the Province of Nova Scotia to legislate certain aspects of port and industrial development in the Canso area but this would not be necessary except in circumstances which cannot be foreseen at this time.

Management Under US or Other Foreign Systems - Because of different histories and backgrounds of port policy and financing in U.S. and other countries, generalized approaches cannot be learned from these models. However, once in place the harbour commission could examine these other port systems to learn what it can in a specific way from them. Manasement Under Other Tv~es W e cannot envisage any other type of management which should be applicable for Canso Superport than what have been cons idered above.

4, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDAT IONS In this Chapter we are presenting conclusions drawn from Chapter 2, Port Profile and Chapter 3, Applicability Analysis. To an extent, because of the nature of this study, the conclusions are equivalent to a synopsis of the appropriate chapters, and are presented here not only as a summary, but as a lead-in to, or reasons behing the recommendations presented in this chapter. A. CONCLUSIONS FROM THE PORT PROFILE 1. he decision to designate Strait of Canso as a deepwater port is a sound one because it has all the necessary. ingredients for a potentially dynamic industrial port, particularly in the energy and energy related field.

2. 'Tile present administration system is suitable - principle for the present level of activity in the Port. However, some improvements are needed to make it more effective. The existing administration is under the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG), Ports and Harbours Division, MOT, but unlike some other ports run by CCG, there is no port manager at the Strait of Canso. There are two part-time harbour masters, one for each side of the Strait. These harbour masters are not trained marine or port experienced individuals. Their main function is to collect dues from visiting vessels. 3. The present administration system would be inadequate should the level of port activity increase significantly and it would. require a significant modification. This modification would not apply to the following harbour services, which operate adequately. m Vessel Traffic Management r Aids to Navigation o Pilotage o Environmental Control m Canal Operations m Tug Service For the sake of completeness, we enclose at the back of this chapter Table 4.1, listing all usual port functions, applicable to any commercial port, with the identification of most of these functions relevant to the Canso Superport. 4. The Province of Nova Scotia, particularly the Department of Development, has been involved in promotional work for the Canso Superport area. Recently the Strait of Canso Industrial Development Authority (SCIDA) has been put in place for local industryrelated promotional purposes. There appears to be no clear -cut responsibil ity for port promotion between the Department of Development and SCIDA, and furthermore the existing (CCG) does no port promotion. 5. A move has been made by the Atlantic Pilotage Authority to increase the tariffs of pilotage charges for the year 1980. In recent years, the revenues of the Canso Superport have decreased and the new rates are likely to affect the traffic, bringing down the revenues further.

CONCLUSIONS FROM -- THE APPLICABILITY ANALYSIS 1. Any administrative system devised for the Canso Superport must fall within the framework of the ports policy of the Federal Government. No doubt one can learn lessons from the way in which many ports are run and what rules and principles of management are followed at these ports. It would, however, be completely unreal istic and impractical to design an isolated administration system for Canso Superport contrary to the ~anadian ports policy. The ports policy as set out in Bill C-50 appears to be now dead and any future legislation on ports policy will not take the same form even though it may. borrow in part from it. Everyone agrees that the legislation and policy attempted to take too many steps all at once so that we are now more likely to see a gradual ist or step-by-step approach emerging from Ottawa. Of course, it is always possible that the political level will give a different direction to this matter. Nevertheless, the recommendation from the technical level is likely to pursue a gradualist approach. 3. The Crown Corporation leg islation will undoubtly reemerge with perhaps a few modifications. If it remains in its current form, only NHB ports and the.nhb system will be caught directly by the new legislation. The Harbour Commission system and the Public Harbours and Wharves system will probably remain outside the new legislation. For NHB ports, there is a real possibility that each port will be established as a subsidi.ary crown corporation operating under the aegis of the parent crown corporation. 4. The Canso Superport could in principle be brought under the administration of National Harbours Board by the Order-in-Council as was done in the case of the Port of St. John's on January 1, 1965. This would, hwoever, be very unlikely unless Canso Superport, for some reasons which are not apparent yet, could be attractive for handling of general cargo on national basis. Essentially a port can come under NHB if there is either a substantial existing cargo flow on national basis or a true potential for growth. Recovery of capital expenditures is also a prerequisite for any NHB port. Canso Superport does not come within that category yet.

- 3. One of the first objectives for the Commission should be to get some sort of control suggested informal over land use, particularly in the Melford ar'ea, so that. planning could beg in for the anticipated expansion of Canso Superport operations related to the energy field, and in particular if the proposed gas pipel ine between N. S. and Quebec material ises. In this event we forsee Canso becoming the main supply terminal for offshore natural gas to the Canadian hinterland. Application should therefore be made to the Province of Nova Scotia to obtain control over land use in the port area and its hinterland. 4. Efforts should be made not to raise the pilotage operating costs at Canso Superport so that traffic is not adversely affected. The Atlantic Pilotage Authority should reconsider their proposal to increase their pilotage charges. The recommendations on the improvemefits in the administration system could be implemented in the following three stages, illustrated schematically in Figures 4.1 and 4.2... STAGE 1: - Canso Superport to stay within the present system of port administration under the federal government for the short term. - A full-time port manager to be appointed to Canso Superport in place of the present two part-time Harbour Masters. - The role of SCIDA to be expanded to that of SCIPDA, that is, Strait of Canso Industrial and Port Development Authority, to enable it to carry out locally based port promotion, marketing, research and development.

STAGE 2: - -- - An informal voluntary Port Development Commission modelling a formal Harbour Commission in terms of size and background of appointees. One of the main tasks of the Commission should be to see if financial means can be secured over the next few years to consider a formal application for a commission to be appointed under the 1964 leg islation. This informal commission is perceived as an advisory to SCIPDA and an embryo of the future formal Commission (Stage 3). STAGE 3: - A formal Canso Superport Commission to be formed as and when the circumstances justify such a move. This Commission would take over all functions relating to the harbour operation, promotion and administration. SCIPDA would then revert its present mandate, that is become SCIDA again to address itself to industry - related matters.

1 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 1 I I I I I+ DREE I I I L CANADIAN COAST GUARD (CCG) L I i 1 - I.- I I I I NOVA SCOTIA ( CCG) PROVINCIAL REGIONAL I GOVERNMENT, MANAGER - DEPARTMENT OF TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT. FACILITIES, DARTMOUTH - GENERAL LIAISON + - ---.-------t SCIDA (SCIPDA) - 6 - STRAIT OF CANS0 INDUSTRIAL (AND PORT) DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PORT PROMOTION AND MARKETING DIRECT DAY TO -d. - DAY LIAISON L FULL TIME PORT MANAGER, CANS0 SUPERPORT LOCAL PORT OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION.. fi*. FENCO FIG. 4. 1 CANS0 SUPERPORT PROPOSED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM STAGE I

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT sc I PDA VOLUNTARY COMMISSIONERS I CANADIAN COAST GUARD INDUSTRIAL AND PORT PROMOTION LOCAL PORT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION PORTS AND HARBOURS DIVISION STAFF - PORT PROMOTION AND MARKETING I LIAISON PORT MANAGER STAGE 2 ---- I 1 1 SCIDA I I - AS REQUIRED. I I-_-- -A I L P CANS0 SUPERPORT COMMISSION PORT ADMINSITRATION PORT MARKETING COMMISSION OPERATING UNDER 1964 ACT, OR ANY REVISED LEGISLATION AFTER 1980. STAGE 3 FIG. 4.2 2 *> t FENCO CANS0 SUPERPORT PROPOSED MANAGEMENT SYSTE STAGE 2 AND 3

TABLE 4.1 PORT ADMINISTRATION FUNCTIONS FUNCTION OPERATING AGENCY AT CANS0 SUPEKPORT 1. - Land Ownership and Management Mainly Province and Private 2. Harbour Ownership Fed s 3. Wharf Ownership and Management 4. Provision of Infrastructure/Util ities Feds (CCG) and Private Province ( roads), CN, Municipal i ties, NSPC, MT&T, Feds, etc. 5. Planning Province 6. Construction of Port Facilities 7. Operations of Port Facilities 8. Maintenance of Port Facilities 9. Provision of Investment Funds Feds (CCG) and Private Private CCG/DPW and Private Feds, Province and Pr iva te 10. Formation of Tariff Regulations 11. Licensing of Operations 12. Revenue Collection CCG 13. Port and Harbour By-Laws and Regulations 14, Enforcement of By-Laws and Regulat ions CCG, APA, etc. CCG, APA, etc.

TABLE 4.1 - ( cont'd) PORT ADMINISTRATION FUNCTIONS FUNCTION OPERATING AGENCY AT CANS0 SUPERPORT 15. Provision of police and Security 16. Aids to Navigation, Provision and Maintenance 17. Vessel Movement Control 18. Pilotage - (Municipal, RCMP) CCG CCG APA 19. Berth Assignment 20. Safety 21. - Environment Serv ices 22. Tug Service.23. Stevedoring 24. Port Promotion CCG CCG, Fed. and Prov. Depts. of Environment Pr iva te Private (Province/SCIDA) 25. Research and Developnent 26. Liaison with Port Labour 27. Co-ord ination with Industries Port Advisory Committee (ad hoc) 28. Co-ordination with Regulatory Bodies

APPENDIX I SCHEDULE OF HARBOUR DUES AND PORT CHARGES SCHEDULE HARBOUR DUES Basis of/chafge for Vessel Rate in Cents 1. The charge for a vessel entering a harbour after a voyage from any port or place in North America or any British possession in or bordering on the Atlantic Ocean or Caribbean Sea in the Western Hemisphere is (a) if the.vessel is registered, per ton registered gross tonnage... 3 (minimum charge $1. 00) (b) if the vessel is not registered, based on the area comprised in a rectangle having a length equal to the length of the veseel and a width equal to the greatest breadth of the vessel, per square metre..... 5.4, (minimum charge $1.00) 2. The charge for a vessel entering a harbour after a voyage from any port or place other than a port or place referred to in item 1 is (a) if the vessel is registered, per ton registered gross tonnage... 5 (minimum charge $2.00) (b) if the vessel is not registered, based 07 the area comprised in a rectangle having a length equal to the length of the vessel and a width equal to the greatest breadth of the vessel, per square metre..... lo- 8 (minimum charge $2.00)

SCHEDULE (continued) PART I1 This Part applies to wharves located in areas at or south of 50' North latitude. Wharfage Column I ' Description Column I1 Unit Basis Column I11 Rate in Cents - - _ A l l goods not otherwis,e specified (a) \~ith a cubic content of less than 1 cubic metre per tonne tonne 69 (b) with a cubic content equal to or greater than 1 cubic metre per tonne cubic metre 55 Asbestos, crude Auto;nobiles, farm tractors tonne each "eer - Boats : (a) not over 6 metres in. length (b) over 6 metres., but not over 10 metres in length. (c) over 10 metres in length 4 Cement (a) in bulk %-,,. b in containers -. --. ". Coal >rums (containers) empty tonne each each each tonne tonne tonne each tonne - Fertilizers tonne 25

.SCHEDULE (Continued Column I - Description Column I1 Unit Basis Column I1 Rate in CE( - 2-4 1. Fish, whole or processed 2. Grain, grain products, hay. 3. Liquors, spirits, alcoholic 4. Livestock (a) horses, mules, colts (b) cattle, calves (c) sheep and swine tonne tonne tonne each each each -- 15. Lumber, timber, except plywood cubic metre. 16. Metals, unfabricated? (ingots, pigs, etc. tonne 50 Motorcycles, motorised toboggans Newsprint Oil, petrol-eum products and other liquid commodities (a) Gasoline (i) in bulk, any quantity (ii) in containers (b) Other petroleum products (i) in bulk, any quantity (ii) in containers (c) A l l other liquid commodities, N.O.S. (i) in bulk, any quantity (ii) in containers Ores, alum, barytes, sulphur, salt cake, rock salt, soda ash, calcium chloride Ore concentrates Plywood Potatoes and other root vegetables each tonne kilolitre 32 205 litre drum 1C kilolitre 22 205 litre drum 10 kilol.itre 32 205 litre drum 10 tonne tonne tonne tonne * See Note on Page 21 concerning this item.

SCHEDULE (Continued) Column I -- Column I1 Column I1 Description Unit Bas is Rate in Ce - ',. 24. Pulpwood, firewood cubic metre 4 - -- 25. Salt <. (a) (b) for fish curing other tonne tonne 26. Sand, stone, gravel 27. Scrap metals 28. Trucks, trailers (except mobile homes), buses tonne tonne metre of length p. 29. Wines tonne tonne 31. 'Minimum charge per shipment or consignment each I.- Storage Charges Column I Column I1 --. Description -- Rate in Cents 32. Storage charge for goods and rent for floor *. space allotted in sheds other than frost- & proof sheds, per square metre per day. 33. Storage charge for vegetables and roots in w-, PL frost-proof sheds (a) unheated sheds, (i) first 10 days from initial entry T 'i into a shed for the purpose of adrr consolidating a shipment (ii) subject to subparagraph (iii) from P the expiration of free time, per a. square metre for each 10 days or part thereof free - d

SCHEDULE (Continued) Storage Charge Column I -.-Description - Column I1 Rate in Cents (b) (iii) where a shipment is moved from the shed prior to.the 16th day calculated from initial entry, per square metre for the period heated sheds (no free storage period) (i) for first 5 days or part thereof, from initial entry into the shed for the purpose of consolidating a shipment, per square metre 108 (ii) second 5 day period or part thereof, per square metre 86 (iii) each additional 5 day period or part I thereof, per square metre 54 4. Storage charge for goods other than vegetables and roots and rent for floor space in frost-. proof sheds where that space is not required for vegetables or roots, per square metre per day 5. Storage charge for goods on wharf, per square metre per day 6. Storage charge for goods on wharf lands or approaches, per square metre per day 7. Minimum charge for storage. 50 Column I Description - Column I1 --- Rate in Cents \, 5. Berthage for mooring a licensed Canadian commercial fishing vessel, per metre of length (a) on holidays, per day or portion thereof.? (b) on other days, per day or portion thereof (c) ' per month x -

SCHEDULE (Continued ) Column I Description Column I1 Rate in Cents Berthage for mooring a commercial vessel other than a licensed Canadian fishing ' vessel, per metre of length (a) ferry vessel or vessel engaged in the coasting trade of Canada (i) not over 45 metres (A) per hour or portion thereof IB) maximum per 24 hours (ii) over 45 metres but not over 100 metres (A) per hour or portion thereof 3.3 (B) maximum per 24 hours 33 (iii) over 100 metres (A) per hour or portion thereof (B) maximum per 24 hours (b) other commercial vessel, per day or portion thereof " 40. Berthage for mooring a pleasure craft per metre. &,. of length per day 33!:. 41. Minimum Derthage on a vessel described in Item 39 500 Wintering Column I Column I1 A. Description Rate in Cents.-5.-.. _* 5 2. Wintering charge for mooring a vessel described 1.n item 38 or 39 per metre of length (a) engaged in storage of cargoes or other goods, per day

SCHEDULE (Continued Column I Description Column I1 -.-.-.- Rate in Cents -- (b) not engaged in any commercial activity per month (i) not over 30 metres 39 (ii) over 30 metres 4 9 (iii) minimum charge per vessel 900 Summer lying-up Column I Description - Column I1 Rate in Cents 1.3. Summer lying-up charge for mooring a vessel per metre of length per day Utilities and Other Services - - - - -- - 5 - Column I Description Column I1 Rate in Cents It- 4;. Electricity and water supply, garbage removal A t cost, plus 10% i C_. b Miscellaneous services, not otherwise specifie.j - A t cost, plus 10%

SCHEDULE (Continued) NOTE: On and after April 1, 1978, item 19 of Part 11 of this schedule shall read as follows: I -.-..- Wharfage - 19. Oil, petroleum products and other liquid cornmodities Column I Column I1 Column 11. Description Unit Basis Rate in Cer - (a) Gasoline (i) in bulk, any quantity (ii) in containers kilolitre 205 litre drum (b) Other petroleum products (i) in bulk, any quantity (ii) in containers kilolitre 205 litre drum (c) A l l other liquid commodities, N.O.S. (i) in bulk, any quantity (ii) in containers kilolitre 44 205 litre drum. 14

APPENDIX 11 I I CHAPTER N-8 CHAPITRE N-8 An Act respecting the National Harbours Board Loi concernant le Conseil dti ports narionaux Shon ~itle 1. This Act may be cited as the National 1. La prcsente loi peut Ptre citie sous le Ti're Harbours Board Act. R.S., c. 187, s. 1. titre: Loi sur le Cmeil des pods nationam. S.R., c. 187, art. 1. "member" - numbre. "owner".pmpriilain. "raft".mdrou. 2. In this Act "Board" means the National Harbours Board incorporated under this -4ct; "Corporations" means the Corporations constituted to administer the harbours of Halifax, Saint John, Chicoutimi, Quebec, Trois-RiviGres, Montreal and Vancouver by the Acts set out in Schedule A to chapter 42 of the Statutes of Canada, 1936; "goods" includes all personal property and movables other than vessels; "member" means any member of the Board appointed by the Governor in Council under this Act; "Minister" means the Minister of the Crown named by the Governor in Council to administer this Act; "owner" includes, in the case of a vessel, the agent, charterer by demise or master of the vessel, and, in the case of goods, the agent, sender, consignee or bailee of the goods, as well as the carrier of such goods to, upon, over or from any property under the administration or jurisdiction of the Board; "raft" includes any raft, crib, dram or bag boom of logs, timber or lumber of any kind, end logs, timber or lumber in boom or being towed ; "vessel" includes any ship, boat, barge, raft, dredge, floating elevator, scow, seaplane on the water or other floating craft. R.S., c. 187, s. 2; 1953-54, c. 60, s. 1; 1963, c. 37, s. 1. 2. Dans la prcsente loi Diiinitiom ~Conseil- signifie le Conseil des ports natio-.&~i'. "Boars' naux constitui en corporation sous le rcgime de la prisente loi ; ~corporations~ signifie les corporations cons- urorporc~ioru" -m~ora'iom. tituces pour administrer les ports dlhalifax, Saint-Jean, Chicoutimi, Quebec, Trois- Rivikres. Montreal et Vancouver sous le rcgime des lois Cnoncies B I'annexe A du chapitre 42 des Stacuts du Canada de 1936; ~marchandises~ comprend tous les biens -marchandunpersonnels et mobiliers autres que des " e d " navires ; Mmembre- signifie tout membre du Conseil -membm. "-&r" nommc par le gouverneur - en conseil en vertu de la prisente loi ; *Ministre# signifie le ministre de la Couronne.hfinutrc. ".\finutn" design6 par le gouverneur en conseil pour exgcuter la prisente loi ; ~navirep comprend tout bitiment, bateau ou --vim. "d' canot, chaland, radeau, drague, ClCvateur flottant, gabare ou pcniche, hydravion sur I'eau ou toute autre embarcation; ~propriitaire* comprend, dans le cas d'un -propriillueg.'d navire, I'agent, I'affrCteur par bail ou le capitaine du navire, et, dans le cas de marchandises, l'agent, I1espCditeur, le consignataire ou le dipositaire des marchandises, de mpme que la personne qui transporte ces marchandises' B destination ou en provenance de towe proprictc relevant de I'administra~ion ou de la juridiction du

Chap. S-8 Conseil des PL Board con9111u1ed Corporation Capacrry Board Full lime Sslaricl 3. (1) There shall be, under the direction of the Minister, a Board to be known as the ~v'arional Harbours Board consisting of four members, namely, a Chairman, a Vice- Chairman and two other members, who shall be appointed by the Governor in Council to hold office during good behaviour for ten years. (2) The Board is a body corporate and politic and, for the purposes of this Act, is and shall be deemed to be an agent of Her Majesty in right of Canada. (3) The Board has the capacity to contract and to sue and be sued in the name of the Board. (4) Each member shall devote his.whole time to the business of the Board. (5) Each member shall be paid such sum.for his services as the Governor in Council may from time to time determine. (6) Three members constitute a quorum Consell, ou sur ou par-dessus une ~ellr propr~e~e ; -radeau= cornprend IOUI radeau, bossel,.~~de~u. " m/r" coupon. brelle, traln ou estacade d'arrel de billes, de bo~s d'cmuvre ou de bois de consrructjon de foul genre, ainsi clue les billes, le bois d'euvre ow le bois de construction en estacade ou i la remorclue. S.R., c. 187, art. 2; 1953-54, c. 60, art. 1. 3. (1) Est etabli, sous la direction du Co~lilutiondu CONCII Ministre, un conseil appelk ~Conseil des ports nationauxm, lequel se compose de quatre merbres, savoir : un president, un vicepresident et deux autres membres, qui sont nommks par le gouverneur en conseil el occupent leur charge, durant bonne conduite, pour dix ans. (2) Le Conseil est un corps constitue et Corporarion politique, et, pour les fins de la presente Ioi, il esr et est cense 6tre mandataire de Sa Majest6 du chef du Canada. (3) Le Conseil est habile B passer des C*P~C'~' contrats ainsi qu'i ester en jusrice en son propre nom. (4) Chaque membre doit consacrer tout son Aple]nlempr temps aux affaires du Conseil. (5) Chaque membre touche, pour ses servi- Trnilemcn~ ces, la somme que le gouverneur en conseil peut i I'occasion determiner. (6) Trois membres constituent un quorum. Quorum Presiding officer (7) The Chairman, and in his absence the (7) Le president ou, en son absence, le vice- Quiprnidc Vice-Chairman, shall preside at the meetings president preside les reunions du Conseil. of the Board. Majority to (8) In all proceedings of the Board the (8) Dans toutes les deliberations du Conseil, L.ma~oril' govern decision of a majority of the members present la decision d'une majoriti des membres prcvsur is the decision of the Board, and in the event presents constitue la dccision du Conseil. En of a tie the presiding member has a casting cas d'cgalit.6 de voix, le membre qui preside vole. dispose d'un vote prgpondprant. Vacancy (9) A vacancy on the Board does not impair (9) Une vacance au Conseil ne porte pas Vacanm the right of the remaining members to act. atteinte au droit d'agir des aurres membres. Temporary (10) UThere any member, by resson of any (10) Lorsque, par suite d'une incapacite Incsphcll( incapacily or de,e,a,ion,, temporary incapacity or temporary delegation ternporaire, ou d'une delegation temporaire ~~~~~~u ofher dutier to 0the.r duties by the Governor in Council, is par le gouverneur en conseil b d'autres d.au~lm u~able at any time to perform the duties of fonctions, un des membres est dans I'impossihis office, the Governor in Council may bilite, i quelque moment, d'accomplir les appoint a temporary substitute member upon devoirs de sa charge, le gouverneur en conseil such terms and conditions as the Governor in Council prescribes. peut lui substituer un membre suppleant temporaire aux termes et conditions que le gouverneur en conseil prescrit.

-. II-.\-atior~al Harbours Board Chap. 5-8 3 vrrmsnrn' (11).A mrmber ceases to hold offlce on (11) Ln rnernbie cesse d'exercer ses foncllons mnd becomlng prrrnbnrn[ly incapac~tated, In the dks clu'11 esl frappe d'lncaptlc~tp ~~rnl' optn~on of the Governor in Council, or on selon I'avis du gouverneur en conseil, ou reachtng the age of seventy years. lorsqu'il atteint I'ige de so~xante-dix ans... nrspsr~~y permanenre, ~ ~~:~ ~,..ppo~n~ment (12) A member, on the explrat~on of hls (12) A ]'expiration de la durie de ses Scondc term of office, and if not disqual~f~ed by age, nornlnatlon fonc~~ons, un membre peut irre nomm6 de is eligible for re-appo~ntment. nouveau s'il n'en est pas empichc par I'ige. I! lrlhololflcr (13) Before any member enters upon the (13) Avant de commencer i exercer ses Sermcnt d'olllcr execution of his duties, he shall take and fonctions, tout rnembre doit priter et souscrire, subscribe, before the Clerk of the Privy en prisence du greffier du Conseil privc, un Council, an oath, which shall be filed in the office of the said Clerk, in the following form : I...-... aolemnly and sincerely awear that I will serment selon la forme suivante, lequel est diposi au bureau dudit greffier: Je,..., jure rolennellemenr el sinc(.rcmcn~ clue faithlully and honestly fulfil the duties which devolve upon me m a member of the Na~ional Harbours Board. So help me Cod. j'exercerai fid6lemen1 et honni~emen~ Ics fonc~ions qui m'incomben~ en quali~e de rncmbre du Conaeil des poris na~ionaux. Ainsi D~eu me soil en aide. - HCS~ oli~cr (14) The head office of the Board shall be (14) Le siige du Conseil est en la ville sl&gc in the city of Ottawa, but meetings of the d'ottawa; mais le Conseil peut tenir des Board may be held at such other places as reunions aux autres endroits qu'il diterrnine. the Board may decide. R.S., c. 187, s. 3; 1953- S.R., c. 187, art. 3; 1953-54, c. 60, art. 2; 1955, 54,c.60,s.2; 1955,~.4,s. 1. c. 4, art. 1. - ' f 4. (1) The Board may employ such proies- 4. (1) Le Conseil peut employer les fonc- fon~'~~n~~~es..d cmplovm cornmu et sional, technical and other officers, clerks and tionnaires, commis et priposis professionnels, pripojb employees as it may deem necessary for the techniques et autres, nicessaires i son bon,i e proper conduct of its business and fix their fonctionnernent, et fixer leur rcrnuniration, remuneration, but in the employment of such mais dans I'emploi de ces fonctionnaires,.. officers, clerks and employees under this cornmis et priposis aux termes du prisent subsection, other qualifications being equal, preference shall be given to persons who have been on active service overseas in the military forces, or being resident or domiciled in paragraphe, en cas d'igalitp quant aux autres qualitks requises, la prifirence doit Ptre accordie aux personnes qui ont CtC en activiti de service outre-mer dans les forces militaires -.. Canada at the outbreak of the war served in His Majesty's forces, or who have served on ou qui, risidant ou itant domicilikes au Canada li I'ouverture des hostilitb, on1 servi Rr the high seas in a seagoing ship of war in the dans les forces de Sa MajestC, ou qui ont servi I - naval forces of His Majesty during the war, and who have left any of such services with en haute mer sur un navire de guerre prenant la rner dans les forces navales de Sa hlajesti -.. an honourable record or who have been honourably discharged. pendant la guerre, et qui ont quitti le service avec d'honorables &tats de service ou qui ont I '!. it6 honorablernent lib0rcs. 1 urrnmo~ (2) The Government Employees Compensa- (2) &a Loi sur l'indemnisafion des ernployr:~ b l u r Lmployw i - I;&mnGalim Gmvalim fim Act applies to the members and to the de /'Eta[ s'applique aux rnembres et aux du rmpb,,,idr t01pp1~ officers, clerks and employees of the Board fonctionnaires, cornmis et prcpos6s du Con- 121al r.appiiquc and for the purposes of that Act the members seil; et, pour les fins de certe loi, les rnernbres, ~- and such officers, clerks and employees shall ainsi que les fonctionnaires, cornmis et be deemed to be "employees" as defined'by prkposks, sont censps des ern ploy is^ au sens k! that Act. R.S., c. 187, s. 4. de cette loi. S.R., c. 187, art. 4. 1:~ :. 15: *ictcon~l*blcl 5. (1) Anjr superior court judge within 5. (1) Tout juge d'une cour superieure, bent~de pol1= whose jurisdiction property under the adrninis- dans la juridiction de qui des biens sous trarion of the Board is situated may, upon I'administration du Conseil sont situis, peut, 1: &; application 10 him by the Board, appoint any sur demande i lui faite par le Conseil, i i' LbC... person as a police constable for the enforcement of this Act and the by-laws and for the 5311 nommer une personne agent de police en vue de I'exPcution de la prcsente loi et des

Chap. h'-8 Cciruc11 ues ports nal~onau~ r ]en of ~OIICC *" c ~~tbir enforcement oi rhe 1nu.s of Canadn or an!. provlnce In so far as the enforcrmen~ of such laws rela~es lo the pro~rct~on of property under the adminis~ration of the Board or to the pro~ection of persons present upon, or property situated upon, premises under the. adminis~ration of the Board, and for that purpose every such police constable is deemed to be a peace officer within the meaning of the Criminal Code and to possess jurisdiction as such upon property under the administration of the Board and in any place not more than twenjy-five miles distant from property under the administration of the Bnard. (2) A police constable appointed under subsection (1) may take any person charged with any act or omission punishable by fine or imprisonment under this Act or any law referred to in subsection (I) before any court possessing jurisdiction in such cases over any area withln which any property under the administration of the Board is located, whether or not the person was taken or the act or omission occurred or is alleged to have occurred within such area, and the court shall deal wlth such person as though he had been teken and as though the act or omission had - - occurred within the area of the court's jurisdiction, but no court shall so deal with such person if the act or omission is alleged to have occurred outside the province or at a place more than twenty-five miles distant from the place where the court is sitting. : A- m i d of k-.icc corulable (3) Any superior court judge referred to in subsection (1) or the Board may dismiss any police constable appointed under that subsec- I '.. tion, whereupon all powers, duties and,. I- privileges belonging to or vested in such i - constable by virtue of this section are terminated. 3953-54, c. 60, s. 3.....,. C;~IS~N~CC*C[ 6. Any member or employee of the Board, Lnefilr I 'hrrved who at the time of his appointment or I, employment under or pursuant to this Act, held a position in the civil service, or was an employee within the mezning of the Civil! Service.4ct, continues to rerrin and is eligible :! to receive all the benefits, except salary as an,, employee in the Public Service, that he would. 1 have been eligible to receive had he remained I ri.giemenrs, el de I'executlon des 101s du Canada ou d'une province, dans ltc mesure ou I'executlon de ces 101s se rarrache a la pro~ect~on de biens sous I'administra~~on du Consejl ou B la protection de personnes ou de blens se trouvant en des lieux relevant de l'administration du Conseil. A cette fin, chaque semblable agent de police est rcput6 un agent de la paix au sens du Code criminel et avoir juridiction I ce titre sur les biens relevant de I'administration du,conseil et dans tout endroit situp i vingt-cinq milles au plus d'une propri6tp relevant de I'administration du Conseil. (2) Un agent de police nommc aux termes Pouvoind'un du ~aragraphe (1) peut amener toute personne inculpie d'un acte ou d'une omission punissable d'amende ou d'emprisonnement selon la prcsente loi ou quelque loi dont fait mention le paragraphe (I), devant toute cour ayant jur-idiction, en I'espPce, en une region dans les limites de laquelle est situ6e quelque proprictc relevant de I'administration du Conseil, que la personne ait 616 apprchend6e ou non dans cette rcgion, ou que I'acte ou I'omission s'y soit produite ou non, ou qu'il soit ou non allpguc que I'acte ou I'omission s'y est produite; et la cour doit traiter cette personne comme si elle avait CtC apprphendce dans la rcgion soumise i la juridiction de la cour et comme si I'ecte ou I'omission sly Ptait produite; mais aucune cour ne doit traiter ainsi cette personne s'il est allcguc que I'acte ou I'omission s'est produite hors de la province ou i un endroit situc i plus de vingt-cinq milles du lieu oh la cour si6ge. agent dr polrce (3) Tout juge d'une cour supcrieure men- Deslltullond'un agent dc polrm tionnc au paragraphe (1) ou le Conseil peut destituer un agent de police nomm6 en vertu dudit paragraphe, et, d6s lors, prennent fin tous les pouvoirs, devoirs et privilpges que poss6de cet agent de police, ou qui lui sont attribues, en raison du prpsent article. 1953-54, c. 60, art. 3. 6. Tout membre ou empjoyc du Conseil Stu~estrdedc~ n\.an!ser: de la qui, au moment de sa nomination ou de son emploi en vertu ou en conformit6 de la dew ~o~o'o.rr!;on pr6sente loi, occupait une position dans le ~J*'~~' service civil ou Ptait un employ6 au sens de la Loi iur le service civil, con~inue de retenir et a droit de recevoir tous les avantages, sauf le traitement h titre d'employ6 dans la Fonction publique, qu'il aurait eu droit de

,Ya!~onal Harbours EoorS Chap. 3-8 rru'.oi lcr hsrboun d propcny I ' tin ernplo!,ee ln rile Publ~c Ser1.1ce. R.S. c. 167, s. 5; 3953-54. c. 60. S. 4. 7. (1) The Board, lor the purpose ol and as provided for in this Act, has jurisdiction over the following harbours : Halifax, Saint John, Chicoutimi, Quebec, Trois-Riviires. Montreal and Vancouver, and likewise has administration, management and control of (a) all works and property that on the 1st day of October 1936 were administered, managed and controlled by any of the Corporations ; (b) all other harbours and works and property of Canada that the Governor in Council may transier to the Board for administration, management and control. (2) The boundaries of the harbours of Halifax, Saint John, Chicoutimi, Quebec, Trois-RiviPres, Montreal and Vancouver are as described in the schedule, or as may be determined from rime to time by order of the Governor in Council and any such order shall be published in the Canada Gazette. R.S., c. 187, s. 6; 1963, c. 37, s. 1. 8. Unless otherwise specifically provided for in this Act, nothing in section 7 shall be deemed to give the Board jurisdiction over or control of private property or rights within any of the harbours under the jurisdiction of the Board. R.S., c. 187, s. 7. 9. The Governor in Council may at any time transfer to the Board for administration, management and control any harbour, work or property of Canada, and from and after the date of such transfer this Act applies to such harbour, work or property. R.S., c. 187, s. 8. 10. The Board may, with the approval of the Governor in Council, establish at any time a limit in the waters of any harbour under its jurisdiction beyond which construction from the shore may not be extended and shall designate such limit as the "harbour hendline" for any part or the whole of such harbour. R.S., c. 187, s. 9. rere1,olr s'll eta11 derneure un ernpio!.e dan: lh Foncrion publ~que. S.R..c. 18;. art. 5; 1953-54, c. 60. art. 4. 7. (1) Aux lins de la presen~e ~oi er selon Foncllo~du C0nrc'l qu'il y est prevu, le Conseil a juridiclion sur les ports suivants : Halifax, Saint-Jean. Chicoutimi, Quibec, Trois-Riviires. AlonrrCal er Vancouver; et il administre, gire et r6git de la meme maniire a) tous les ouvragcs et biens qui, le ler octobre 1936, itaient administris, gircs er regis par I'une des corporations; 6) tous autres ports, ouvrages et biens du Canada que le gouverneur en conseil peut transfirer au Conseil pour qu'il les administre, gire et rigisse. (23 Les limites des ports d1halifax, Saint- Llmllm Jean, Chicoutimi, QuCbec, Trois-Riviires, Montrial et Vancouver sont celles. que dicrit I'annexe, ou celles que ditermine, b I'occasion, un dicret du gouverneur en conseil, lequel dicret doit itre public dans la Gazette du Canada. S.R., c. 187, art. 6. 8. Sauf disposition expresse de la presente Proqrlglb loi, rien ii I'article 7 n'est censi confirer au pr~ven Conseil la juridiction ou la rigie sur des droits ou biens privis dans les limites de l'un quelconque des ports relevant du Conseil. S.R., c. 187, art. 7. 9. Le gouverneur en conseil peut, b l'occa- Tramfen d'autm ports. el sion, transfkrer au Conseil, pour qu'il les blelv administre, gire et rigisse, tous ports, ouvrages ou biens du Canada, et, ii comprer de la date dudit transfert, la prisente loi s'applique h ces ports, ouvrages ou biens. S.R., c. 187, art. 8. 10. Le Conseil peut, avec I'approbation du Lignedc dimsrcatioo du gouverneur en conseil, Ctablir, b toute ipoque, une limite dans les eaux d'un port sous sa juridiction, au deli de laquelle toute construction ne peut itre prolong6e de la rive, et il doit disigner cette limite comme ~ligne de dimarcations pour une partie ou la totalit6 dudit port. S.R., c. 187, art. 9. sul 01 11. (1) When previously authorized by the 1 1.. (1) Le Conseil, avec I'au torisat ion prca- Aquk'lionde ope' I L Governor in Council, the Board may acquire, lable du gouverneur en conseil, peut acyuirir, bleru. hold, possess, sell, dispose of, or lease real and ditenir, possider, vendre, alicner ou louer des personal, movable and immovable property; biens rcels et personnels, mobiliers et immo- I :

.>* : L ' 6 chol,. h-s Coriseil des por!s na!ronc:uz and may either by lrself or in cooperar~on with others construct, ma~ntain and operate roads, railways. ve~sels. plant and equipmen1, and generall?. do such things and exerclse such powers as it deems necessary for the efficien~ administration, management and control of the harbours, works and other property under its jurisdiction. Propeny verttd (2) All property acquired or held by the ia Hrr Jla,r~ty Board is vested in Her Majesty in right of r - - Canada. R.S., c. 187, s. 10. ".. 7 i -......-.. Aquultlon or 12-71) When previously authorized by the.-< I.'. Ian&. rtc. r Governor in Council the Board may acquire,. and take lands or a limited estate or interest $. in lands without the consent of the owner under the Ezpropnation.4ct, and the provir sions of that Act, including the provisions.. thereof relating to the abandonment of lands. apply mufatis mutandis to the acquisition or taking of lands or limited estate or interest in r - - : lands or the abandonment of lands by the L Board. Compensalion (2) Any plan and description deposited under the Ezpropnation Act shall be signed by one of the members on behalf of the Board and the land so shown and described shall thereupon be and become vested in Her Majesty unless the plan and description indicate that the land taken is required for a limited time only or that a limited estate or interest therein is taken; and by the deposit in such latter case, the right of possession for such limited time or such limited estate or interest shall be and become vested in Her Majesty. (3) The compensation payable in respect to the taking of any lands so vested in Her Majesty, or of any interest therein, shall be ascertained and paid in accordance with the Erpropnatim Act, and for that purpose the Attorney General of Canada may file an information in the Exchequer Court on behalf of the Board to all intents and purposes as if such lands, or a limited esrate or interest therein, had been expropriated by and vested in Her Majesty under that Act. R.S., c. 187, s. 11. biliers; er il peut, soil par lui-meme. :oil en collalor311on avec d'aulres, conslrulre, enrrererllr et exploiter des route:, voies ferree:, navires, outillage er materiel; et, d'une manikre genkrale, accomplir les choses el exercer les pouvoirs qu'il juge nkcessaires i I'administration, a la gestion et ii la r6gie efiicaces,des ports, oujrrages et autres biens sous sa juridiction. (2) Tous biens acquis ou dctenus par le B1en~divoluli SI hiaje9ti Conseil sont dcvolus B Sa Majest6 du chef du Canada. S.R., c. 187, art. 10. 12. (1) Avec autorisa:ion pr6alable du Aqul>lliondt terraits, etc. gouverneur en conseil, le Conseil peut acqucrir et prendre des terrains, ou un droit de propri6ti IimitC, ou en intcrct limit;, dans des terrains, sans le consentement du propriitaire, en vertu de la Loi sur les ezpropnations; et les dispositions de ladite loi, y compris celles qui ont trait ii I'abandon de terrains, s'appliquent mutatis mutandis li I'acquisition ou i la prise de terrains, ou d'un droit de propriit6 limit6, ou d'un intprpt limit6 dans des terrains, ou k I'abandon de terrains, par le Conseil. (2) Tous plans et devis dcpos6s en exicutjon Blen3dkvolus6 S& hfaje,li de la Loi sur les erpropnations doivent Ptre signcs, pour le compte du Conseil, par I'un des membres, et dps lors, le terrain ainsi design6 et dccrit appartient et devient d6volu B Sa Majesti, A moins que les plans et devis n'indiquent que le terrain obtenu n'est requis que pour un temps limit6 ou qu'il n'y est pris qu'un droit de propripte ou un intcrpt limit6; et, par le fait du d6p6t dans ce dernier cas, le droit de possession pour ce temps limit6 ou le droit de propriitk ou int6rct limit6 appartient et devient dcvolu B Sa MajestP. (3) La compensation payable B I'6gard de Compenstion la prise de terrains ainsi dcvolus B Sa Majesti ou de tout int6ri.t dans ces biens, doit Ctre itablie et acquittpe conformcment 1 la Loi sur les ezpropnaliom, et, B cette fin, le procureur genifal du Canada peut dcposer B la Cour de I'Echiquier, pour le compte du Conseil, une requ6te B toutes flns et intentions comme si ces terrains, ou un droit de proprictc limit6 ou un intcrit limit6 dans ces terrains, avaient CtC expropriis par Sa Majest6 et lui appartenaient en vertu de ladite loi. S.R., c. 187, art. 11. - Trnden 13. (1) Whenever any works are to be 13. (1) Quand des ouvrages doivent Ptre Sournuri0~ - 5314. [:

~ward~ng conlrscll.yat;onal Harboun Board Chap. S-8 execuled under the d~recrion of the Board, executes sous la direcrion du Consell. cr the Board shall call renders by public dernier dolt demander, par annonce publ~c~ue. adver~isernent for the execurlon of such WO~KS, des soumissions pour I'ex6curlon desd~ls except in cases ouvrages, except6 (a) of pressing emergency in which delay would be injurious to the public interest ; (b) in which from the nature of the work it can be more expeditiously or economically executed by the officers and servants of the Board or of Her Majesty; or (c) where the estimated cost of the work a) dans le cas d'extrime urgence, alors qu'un retard serait prijudiciable i I'intPrir public; b) dans le cas oi! la nature des travaux est telle que ceux-ci peuvenf s'exkcuter avec plus de cplprit.6 et d'iconomie par les fonctionnaires et prcposcs du Conseil ou de does - not exceed fifteen thousand dollars. Sa Majest6; ou C) dans ies cas oi! le cobt estimatif de l'entreprise n1exc6de pas quinze mille dollars. 01 (2) Whenever tenders are required by sub- (2) Lorsque le paragraphe (1) exige que des Ad~udlc8"0ndc C00lrmII section (1) to be called, the Board shall, after soumissions soient demandces, le Conseil doit, having given to the tenderers reasonable apr6s avoir donni aux soumissionnaires un notice of the time and place of the opening avis raisonnable des temps et lieu de I'ouverof the tenders, open them in public, and may ture des soumissions, les ouvrir en public, et within a reasonable time thereafter award the il peut, dans un dplai raisonnable, par la contract. suite, adjuger le contrat. Approvml 01 (3) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (Z), (3) Nonobstant les paragraphes (1) et (2), -4ppmbm'iondU Governor In gouverneur en no contract for the execution of any work aucun contrat pour 11ex6cution de quelque Council shall be awarded by the Board, without the entreprise ne doit itre adjug6 par le Conseil, approval of the Governor in Council, for an sans l'approbation du gouverneur en conseil, amount in excess of fifteen thousand dollars, pour un montant supprieur 21 quinze mille unless dollars sauf (a) tenders are called by the Board by public advertisement for the execution of the work, and not less than two such tenders are received by the Board; (b) the person to whom the contract is to be awarded is the person who submitted the lower or lowest such tender; and (c) the amount of the contract as indicated by the tender of the person to whom the a) si des soumissions sont demandies par le Conseil, au moyen d'annonce publique, pour I'exPcution de l'entreprise, et si au moins deux soumissions de ce genre sont recues par le Conseil; b) si la personne b qui le contra1 doit ttre adjugp est celle qui a prisenti la soumission la moins PlevPe des deux ou la plus brsse de toutes; et contract is to be awarded does not exceed C) si le montant du contrat, indiquc par la fifty thousand dollars. R.S., c. 187, s. 12; 1953-54, C. 60, S. 5. soumission de la personne h qui le contrat doit itre adjugi, n'exc6de pes cinquante mille dollars. S.R., c. 187, art. 12; 1953-54, c. 60, art. 5. BX-lava 14. (1) The Governor in Council may make by-laws, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, for the direction, conduct and government of the Board and its employees, and the administration, management and control of the several harbours, works and property under its jurisdic:ion including (a) the regulation and control of each and every matter in connection with vessels and aircraft navigating the harbours and their 14. (1) Le gouverneur en conseil peut Rc~;e"e"[s Ptablir des riglements, non incompatibles avec les dispositions de la prpsente loi, pour la direction, la conduite et la gouverne du Conseil et de ses employps, ainsi que pour I'zdministration, la gestion et la rigie des divers ports, ouvrages et biens SOUS sa juridiction, y compris a) la reglementation et la rigie de toute mati6re concernant les navires et IesaCronefs

Chap. P-8 Coruc11 drs ports nat~onour rnoorlng, berthing, dlsrharg~ng or loading or anyth~ng incidentnl thereto, (b) the use of the harbours, harbour property or other property under the administration of the Board by vessels and aircraft and the owners thereof, the leasing or allotment of any harbour property or other property under the administration of the Board, and the purchase or sale by the Board, subject to such limitations and conditions as the by-laws may prescribe, of any property orher than real property; (c) the regulation of the construction and maintenance of wharves, piers, buildings or any other structures within the limits of the harbours, and anything incidental thereto; (d) the imposition and collection of tolls for any use of any bridge under the administration, management and control of the Board ; (e) the imposition and collection of tolls on vessels or aircraft entering, using or leaving any of the harbours; on passengers; on cargoes; on goods or cargoes of any kind brought into or taken from any of the harbours or any property under the administiation of the Board, or landed, shipped, transhipped or stored at any of the harbours or on any property under the administration of the Board or moved across property under the administration of the Board; for the use of any property under the administration of the Board or for any service performed by the Board ; and the stipulation of the terms and conditions (including any affecting the civil liability of the Board in the event of negligence on the part of any officer or employee of the Board) upon which such use may be made or service performed ; (/) the transportation, handling or storing upon any property under the administration of the Board or any'private property within any harbour under the jurisdiction of the Board of explosives or other substances that, in the opinion of the Board, constitute or are likely to constitute a danger or hazard to life or property; (g) the regulation of all plant, machinery or appliances, \vhether floating or not, for loading or unloading vessels, including the power to prescribe that none shall enter any harbour or remain in it without the permission of the Board, and power to levy qui nav~guenr dans les ports. ainsi que leur mouillage, amarrape. dechargement ou chargement, ou tout ce qui s'y rattache; b) I'usage des ports, des proprictis de port ou d'autres biens ressortissant au Conseil, par des navires et des aironefs et par leurs proprietaires, le louage ou la ripartition des proprictis de port ou d'autres biens assujettis k I'administration du Conseil, et I'achat ou la vente, par le Conseil, de biens quelconques autres que des biens immobiliers ou reels, sous reserve des limitations et conditions que les rkglements peuvent prescrire ; C) la reglementation de la construction et de l'entretien des quais, jeties, bitisses ou autres constructions dans les limites des ports, et de tout ce qui s'y rattache; d) I1imposition et la perception de taxes et droits pour I'usage dlun pont assujetti B I'administration, k la gestion et li la rigie du Conseil; e) ]'imposition et la perception de droits sur les navires ou aironefs qui entrent dans les ports, en font usage ou en sortent; sur les passagers; sur les cargaisons; sur les marchandises ou cargaisons de toute nature qui ont Cti introduites dans I'un des ports ou I'une des propriptps relevant de I'administration du Conseil ou qui en ont it6 prises, ou qui ont 6ti dcbarquces, expcdiies, transbordkes ou emmagasinies dans l'un des ports ou sur I'une des propriitcs ressortissant au Conseil, ou qui ont 136 dbplacies i travers des proprietks dont I'administration relkve du Conseil; pour I'usage de tout bien ressortissant au Conseil ou pour tout service rendu par le Conseil; et la stipulation des termes et conditions (y compris toute modaliti visznt la responsabiliti civile du Conseil en cas de negligence de la part d'un fonctionnaire ou employc du Conseil) ausquels un tel usage peut Etre fait ou un tel service rendu; j) le transport, la manutention ou I'emmagzsinage, en des proprictcs dont I'administration relpve du Conseil ou en toute proprieti privee dans les limites d'un port sous la juridiction du Conzeil, d'explosifs ou autres substances qui, de I'avis du Conseil, constituent ou sont de nature B constituer un danger ou risque pour la vie ou les biens; g) la riglementation de I'outillage, des

a rare or sum ot monry thereon Tor the privilege ot operatln~ In the harbours, and to regulate and control charges for such services ; (h) the granting of pensions or the making of contributions to pension or insurance funds and the providing of annuities for employees of the Board ; (I) the prescribing of penalties that may be imposed on any person violating or not observing any by-law that the Governor in Council is authorized to make under this Act,but no such penalty shall exceed five hundred dollars or sixty days imprisonment, or in default of payment.of a pecuniary penalty and of the costs of conviction, imprisonment for a period not exceeding thirty days; and the doing of anything necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act within their true intent and meaning, and generally for the administration, management and control of the harbours, works and properties under the jurisdiction of the Board. machlnes ou apparellc, florlanls ou non, pour le char~ement ou le dechargemenl des navires, y cornpr~s le pouvolr de prescrlre que, sans la perrniss~on du Conseil. nu1 ne dolt entrer dens un port ou y derneurer, et I1autontC de prblever une taxe ou somlne d'argent i cet Cgard pour le privilege d'exercer des opkrations dam les ports et de rcglementer et rcgir les charges pour ces services ; h) I'allocation de pensions ou I'itablissement de contributions i des caisses de pension ou d'assurance, et la crpation de rentes pour les employcs du Con-eil ; 1) I'Ctablissement de peines pouvant Ptre impos6es t.oute personne qui enfreint ou n'observe pas un rkglement que le gouverneur en conseil est autoris6 it Ctablir en vertu de la prksente loi, mais aucune de ces peines ne doit dbpasser cinq cents dollars ou soixante jours d'ernprisonnement, ou, b d6faut du paiement d'une peine p6cuniaire et des frais de condamnation, I'emprisonnement pour une p6riode d'au plus trente jours; et 1) l'accomplissement de tout ce 'qui est nicessaire b I'exCcution des dispositions de la prcsente loi selon leurs intenrion et signification vkritables, et, d'une maniire gpnprale, i I'administration, la gesrion et la rigie des ports, ouvrages et biens places sous la juridiction du Conseil. L. -~- Publlcsllon ID Canoda Ga~rffr May be binding,. OD Her Majer~y Copy of by-lsr - u evidract c - L..k e.. i-.--.:-2 -.--., Board mav ux rcuonsblc force. ' Io enforce (2) By-laws made in accordance with this (2) Les riglements itablis en conformit6 de Galtfftdu Act, when published in the Canada Gazette, la pr6sente loi ont, dps leur publication dans Cn~da have the same force and effect as if enacted la Gazette du Canada, la mcme vigueur et le herein. mime effet, que s'ils Ptaient Cdict6s aux prisentes. (3) Any by-law may be made binding upon (3) Tout rpglernent peut Ptre rendu obliga- Peuletrc Her Majesty in right of Canada or any toire pour Sa Majest6 du chef du Caneda ou ~ $ ~ a ~ ~ > p O u province. d'une province. (4) A copy of any by-law certified by the (4) Un exemplaire de tout r;glement, certi- ~ t ~ c ~ p l ~ des Secretary of the Board under the seal of the rislcmrnu fit5 par le secritaire du Conseil, sous le sceau,,,, f,i Bozrd shall be admitted in evidence as du Conseil, doit Ptre admis comme preuve conclusive proof of the provisions of such by- ppremptoire des stipulaiions de ce rkglement law in any court in Canada. R.S., c. 187, s. devant toute cour au Canada. S.R., c. 187, 13 ; 1953-54, c. 60, s. 6. art. 13 ; 1953-54, c. 60, art. 6. 15. Where the violation or non-observance 15. Si la violation ou I'inobservation d'un kc~n.=~il peu' emplojer dcl of any by-law is attended with danger or rpglement enlraine quelque danger ou incom-,,,,, annoyance to the public or hindrance to the modit6 pour le public ou entrave le Conseil rlisonr.abln Board in the lawful use or operation of any dans I'usage ou I'esploi~ation 1Pgitime de I'un yur I app1ita:ion dcs of the harbours, works or property under the des ports, ou\-rages ou biens rele~ant de son riclemed,r administration, management and control of administration, de sa gestion et de sa rpgie, il

L l'egnrd dr ces marchnndlses cu non,.11urr and (2) The Eoard ma!.. as pro~,idrd ~n sect~on (2) Le Conseil peul. 5elon clue le pri.ro~t s l ~ ~ ~ ~ orlrnllon of 19, selzr and detaln en!. ~oods In any case poaa where, (a) the goods are subject to the general llen referred to In subsection (1); (b) any amount is due to the Board for tolls in respect of such goods and has not been paid, whether or not title to the goods is, at the time of the seizure, vested in the person by whom the tolls were incurred ; (c) any penalty has been incurred by reason of any violation of this Act or the by-laws by ihe person in whorn title to such goods is vested, whether or not such violation occurred in respect of those goods and whether or not title there10 is, at the time of the seizure, vested in the person by whom the penalty was incurred ; or (d) the goods are perishable goods or goods in respect of which the amount of tolls accruing thereon is, in the opinion of the Board, likely to become greater than the amount thar could be realized by the sale c*; such goods ; arc? any goods so seized and detained shall, throughout the period of detention up to a meximurn of thirty days, incur Board tolls in the same manner and to the same ex-tent as if volun~arily left or srored with the Board by the owner of the goods during such period. 1953-54, C. 60, S. 9. risk. mat md 19. (1) Every seizure and detention made largcx of owner under this Act shall be at the risk, cost and charges of the owner of the vessel or goods seized until all sums due or penalties incurred, together with all costs and charges incurred in the seizure and detention and the costs of any conviction obtained for the violation or non-observance of any of the provisions of this Act, or of any by-law in force under this Act, have been paid in full. dc~cni,on dr, I'arr~cle 19, salslr er deten~r loules marchnn- mmrrh,nd,,r, d~ses en tout cas ou a) les marchand~ses sont sujertes au privi- 1Pge giniral mentionni au paragraphe (I); b) une somme est due au Conseil pour des droits concernant ces marchandises er n'a pas kti payce, que le rirre aux rnarchandises soit divolu, ou non, 101s de la saisie, a la personne engagie i pager les droits; c) une peine a CtC encourue, pour quelque infraction I la presente loi ou aux reg'ements, par la personne k qui est divolu 1e titre ices marchandises, que cette infraction ait eu lieu relativement a ces marchandises ou non, et que le titre i ces marchandises soit divolu ou non, lots de la saisie, H la personne qui a encouru la peine ; ou 4 les marchandises sont des denries pcrissables ou des rnarchandises i I'igard desquelles le montant des droits en provenant deviendra, selon le Conseil, vraisemblablement supcrieur au montant qui pourrait Etre rialis6 par la vente de-sdites marchandises; et toutes rnarchandises ainsi saisies et derenues doivent, pendant toute la. piriode de detention, jusqu'h un maximum de trente jours, etre sujet~es aux droits du Co~seil de la m6me rnani'ere et dans la rneme rnesure que si elles itaient volontairement confi6es ou ernrnagasinies au Conseil, par leur proprjitaire, durant ladite piriode. 1953-54, c. 60, art. 9. 19. (1) Toute saisie ou dirention exicutie " x r h ~ ~. Irru CI charrc en vertu de la prisente loi est aux risques, du propricln,rt frais et dcpens du propriiteire des marchandises ou nevire saisis jusqu'i ce qu'aient 616 payis intcgralernent toutes les sornrnes dues ou amendes encourues, ainsi que rous les frais et dkpens subis dans la saisie et la dctention, et les frais de toute d6claration de culpabilitc obtenue pour violation ou inobservat ion de I'une quelconque des dispositions de la prcsente loi ou d'un r6glernent en vigueur sous le rcgime de la prisente loi.....*. i t., r Tlnrorreizurc (2) The seizure and detention may take (2) La saisie et la dctention peuvent Qu%ndl*="ie - i or drlrnlion.-.->j place either at the commencement of any s'effectuersoit aucommencement d'uneaciion I action or proceeding for the reco\.ery of any ou proc6dure en recouvrement de toutes I sums of money due, penalties or damages, or eornmes dues, d'amendes ou de domrnages- I, pending such suit or proceeding,or as incident intirits, ou au cours de cette action ou thereto, or ~.ithouthe institution of any suit procidure, soit cornme procedure affcrente, pru! ~'cllccruer

(c) u,!~rre O ~ S I ~ U C Ito I O the ~ perforrnancr of any duly or funcrron of rhr Ronrd or II! ofircers or cmpio\.ee~ has been rnadt or offered b~ rile vessri or rhrou~h the faul~ or ncgirpencr of a member of the crew thereol acting in the course of his ernployment or under the orders of a superior officer, as a result of which obstruction damage or other loss has been sustained by the Board; (4 where the owner of the vessel has in respect of the vessel committed an offence under this Act or the by-laws, punishable upon summary conviction by a penalty payable under section 22 to the Board ; (e) where judgment against the vessel or the owner thereof has been obtained in any case described in paragraph (a), (b) or (c); or (n where conviction of the owner of the vessel has been obrained, in any case described in paragraph (4, and a penalty imposed payable under section 22 to the Board. ;?- n o! (2) in any case described in paragraph Yt2f:l :..:cc (l)(a), (b), (c) or (4, the Board may detain any vessel seized pursuant to subsection (1) i until the amount owing to the Board has, been received by it or, if liability is denied, until security sarisiactory to the Board has been deposited with it. : = ~en~~oo lod sale of revel in ccnain c a ~ s r I 1. Board 10 have a %. Iten (3) In any case described in paragraph (l)(e) or 0, the Board may detain the vessel until the amount owing to the Board has been paid and, in any such case, if the amount so owring is nor paid within thirty days after the date of the judgment or the conviction the Board may apply to any court of competent jurisdiction for an order authorizing -the sale of the vessel, and upon the making of the order the Board may sell the vessel upon such terms and conditions and for such price as to the Board seems proper, and to the extent that the amount realized from the sale exceeds the amount owing to the Board together with all expenses incurred by the Board in connection with the sale, the Board shall remit the amount so realized to the former o\vner of the vessel. (4) In any case mentioned in subsection (I), whether or not the vessel hzs actually been. i. seized or detained, the Board has at all times C) un empbchement a l'accomplrssrrnen~ dr U U V ~ ~ Jdevoir U ~ ou fonctron du Conhe~i ou de 5es ioncrlonnarres ou ernplo?,es a el& suscite ou renre par le navrre ou par la faure ou la nigligence d'un rnernbre de son equipage, agissant dans le cours de son ernploi ou sous les ordres d'un officier supkrieur et oh, par suite de cet ernpichernent, le Conseil a subi un dommage ou une autre perte; 4 le propriitaire du navire a cornmis, i I'Cgard du navire, une infraction tombant sous le coup de la prbsente loi ou des rpglernents et punissable, sur diclaration somrnaire de culpabiliti, d'une peine payable, suivant l'article 22, au Conseil ; e) jugement contre le navire ou son proprietaire a Pti obtenu dans un casmentionni i l'alinia a), b) ou c); ou une dcclaration de culpabilitb a it6 obtenue contre 1e proprietaire du navire, dans un cas rnentionni i I'alinia 4, et og a it6 imposie une amende payable, suivant l'article 22, au Conseil. (2) En tout cas mentionni 21 I'alinia (])a), E ~ ~ : b), C) ou 4, le Conseil peut dc~enir un navire E"'1Ct'b13a saisi coniormernent au.paragraphe (I) jusqu'a ce qu'il ait rep la somrne qui lui esr due ou, s'il y a dknigation de responsabiliti, jusqu'l ce qu'ait CLC dkposce auprks du Conseil une garantie qu'il juge satisfaisante. (3) En tout ca rnentionnk 21 I'alinCa (1)e) Eqencmnef ou A, le Conseil peut detenir le navire jusqu'a ce que la somme qui lui est due ait 616 payie et, en pareille occurrence, si la somme ainsi due n'est pas payie dans les trente jours qui suivent la date du jugement ou de la diclaration de culpabilitc, le Conseil peut demander, i toute cour compitente, une ordonnance autorisant la vente du navire. D:s que I'ordonnance est rendue, le Conseil peut vendre le navire aux rermes et conditions et au prix qui lui semblent appropriks et, dans la rnesure oh le montant rialisi par la vente excpde la sornme qui lui est due, avec tous les frais qu'il a subis relativement H la vente, le Conseil doit remettre le montant ainsi rialisi 21 I'ancien propriitaire du navire. vcnlc du navi CCrl,,N EL. (4) En tout cas rnentionni au paragraphe kcc.=jau (I), que le navire ait PtC ou non rceilement p"'~';'fe saisi ou dctenu, le Conseil poss6de i tout

I a llen upon the vessel nnd upon thp ~I~DCVY!~:C moment un pr~vilr~e 5ur It nfivlre el sur It of an? sale or other d~spostt~~n thrrrol ior produll de toute venle ou autre altena~lon the nmounl ouslnp to the Board, which lren qur en esi fajte pour la somme due au Consell. has prior~~y over all other r~ghts, inreresrs, et ce priviltge a priorlie sur tous les aurrez claims and demands whaiever, excepting onl~. droits, interp~s, rpclarnations et exigences, claims for wages of seamen under the Conadn quels qu'ils soient, B la seule exception des Shipping Act. rpclamations pour gages ae marins en vertu de la Loi sur la marine morchandr du Conado. I II, (5) The rights of the Board under subsec- (5) Le Conseil peur exercer les droits h lui E~trclcrdcl ~rablr by dro~u par lc tions (2). (3) and (4) are exercisable by the confircs par les paragraphes (2), (3) e! (4), que j, Board whether or not title to or possession of le titre au navire ou la possession de ce navire, the vessel is, at the time of the exerclse of lors de l'exerc~ce de I'un quelconque de ces any such right, in the same person as the droits, appartienne ou non hla mcme personne person-who held such title or possess~on at que celle qui direnait ce titre ou avait cette the time when, in the opinion of the Board, possession i 1'Cpoque og, de I'avis du Consril, the amount owing to the Board first became est devenue due en premier lieu la somme due. revenant au Conseil. Unl wng (6) For the purposes of subsections (2), (4) c I? -d and (5), the amount owing to the Board in respect of any case described in paragraph (l)(a), (b), (c) or (4 is the amount fixed by the Board as owing to it together with all expenses incurred by the Board in searching for, follou.ing, seizing and detaining the vessel, and for the purposes of subsections (3). (4) 2nd (5) the amount owing to the Board in respect of any case described in paragraph (l)(e) or 0 is the amount of the judgment and costs, or the amount cf the penalty incurred and costs, as the case may be, together with all expenses incurred by the Board in searching L. er remedie3.ii&tt- rn rd for, following, seizing and detaining the vessel. (7) Whether or not all or any of the rights of the Board under this section are esercised by the Board, the Board may, in any case described in subsection (I), proceed against.. the owner of the vessel in any court of competent jurisdiction for the amount owing 1 to the Board (or for the balance thereof in >. 1 the event of any sale contemplated by subsection (3)) and may also exercise against the owner of the vessel any other right or remedy available to the Board at law. 1953-54, c. 60, s. 8. (6) Aux fins des paragraphes (2), (4) et (j), Sommesdur31u CDNCII la somrne due au Conseil en ce qui regarde tout cas mention116 h I'alin6a (I)a), b), c) ou d) est le montant fix6 par le Conseil comme lui Ctan: dii, ainsi que tous les frais qu'il a subis pour chercher, suivre, saisir et dcrenir le navire; et, aux fins des paragraphes (3), (4) et (j), la somme due au Conseil h 1'Cgard de tout cas mentionni a I'alin6a (1)~) ou est le rnontant du jugernent et des frais, ou le montant de I'amende encourue et des frais,, suivant le cas, ainsi que toutes les dcpenses que le Conseil a subies pour chercher, suivre, saisir et ditenir le navire. (7) Que le Conseil exerce ou non la totaliti Aulre3remun nccaibies au ou IJun quelconque des droits dccoulant du Gpxil prisent article, il peut, en tout czs mention116 eu paragraphe (I), procider contre le propriitaire du navire devznt toute cour cornp6tente pour r6clamer la somrne qui lui est due (ou le solde de cette somme dam le cas djune vente privue au paragraphe (3)), et il peut aussi exercer contre le propriitaire du navire tout autre droit ou recours qui lui est accessible en droit. 1953-54, c. 60, art. 8. crdi hayea 18. (I) The Board has a general lien in 18. (1) Le Conseil a, sur toutes marchan- hcomrillun crel llcn preference to all other rights, interests, claims dises en sa possession, un privilege gkneral pri"i''8e Ei"irL' [ and demands whatever upon all goods in its par prpfprence h tous autres droits, intcrcts, posseszion for the pa~.ment of any debt oiving riclama~ions et esigences qu~lconqi~es, pour I. to the Board by the person in whom title to I'acquitte'rnent de toutesornme due au Conseil such goods is vested, whether ornot rhe debt par la personne invesrie du titre auxdites I I [. was incurred in respect of those goods. marchandises, que la dette ail kt6 contractee : 1.. 5320 -

Sal~ono! h'oroou:s bl<;,- Chnp. 3-8 - a I'crard dt. ces marchnnd1se5 ou nvrl,.,zurr snd (2) The Board ma!. as pro\r~ded in sectlor: (2) Le Consell peut, selon clue le prevo~r salllrrl go001 19, selze and dera~n any goods In any case I'art~cle 19, salslr er de~enjr toufes marchan- m,rch,ndl,q where, dlses en tout clts 01; (a) the goods are subject to the general lien a) les marchand~ses son1 sujer~es au privireferred to ln subsection (1); lkge general mentionni au paragraphe (1); (b) any amount is due to the Board for tolls b) une somme est due au Conseil pour des in respect of such goods and has not been droits concernant ces marchandises et n'a paid, whether or not title to the goods is, at p2s 416 payee, que le titre aux marchandises the time of the seizure, vested in the person soit divolu ou non, lors de la saisie, 6 la by whom the tolls were incurred; personne engagie 6 payer les droits ; (c) any penalty has been incurred by reason c) une peine a 6tC encourue, pour quelque of anfviolation of this Act or the by-laws infraction a la presente loi ou aux rbg'eby the person in whom title to such goods ments, par la personne 6 qui esr divolu le is vested, whether or not such violation titre Ices marchandises, que certe infracrion occurred in respect of those goods and ait eu lieu relativement h ces marchandises whether or not title thereto is, at the time ou non, et que le titre 6 ces rnarchandises of the seizure, vested in the person by whom soit dcvolu ou non, lors de la saisie, I la the penalty was incurred ; or personne qui a encouru la peine ; ou (6) the goods are perishable goods or goods 4 les rnarchandises sont des denries pcrisin respect of which the amount of tolls sables ou des marchandises 6 l'igard accruing thereon is, in the opinion of the desquelles le montant des droits en prove- Board, likely to become greater than the nant deviendra, selon le Conseil, vraisernamount that could be realized by the sale blablernent supcrieur au montant qui pourof such goods ; rait itre rinlisi par la vente desdites and any goods so seized and detained shall, marchandises ; throughout the period of detention up to a et toutes marchandisesainsi saisies et ditenues maximum of thirty days, incur Board tolls in doivent, pendant toute la' piriode de ditenthe same manner and to the same extent as if tion, jusqu'i un maximum de rrente jours, voluntarily left or stored with the Board by itre sujetres aux droits du Conseil de la mime the owner oi the goods during such period. manibre et dans la mime rnesure que si elles 1953-54, C. 60, S. 9. itaient volontairement confiies ou emmagasinces au Conseil, par leur propriitaire, durant ladite piriode. 1933-54, c. 60, art. 9. drtcnllon 01 dclrnllon d r~ ;. I rilk.~~ll and 19. (1) Every seizure and detention made i., large3 of owner I. under this Xct shall be at the risk, cost and -. charges of the owner of the vessel or goods seized until all sums due or penalties incurred, 1 -., together with all costs and charges incurred : b - in the seizure and detention and the costs of 1. any conviction obtained for the violation or c. 1 non-observance of any of the provisions of > I this Act, or of any by-law in force under this Act, have been paid in full,.* 1 i :.~, --- -"-,... -.. 1 2% Time of,cilurr (2) The seizure and detention may take or dcrco~ion place either at the commencement of any,.. - ; I - ;. -. 1 action or proceeding for the recovery of any >. \ 1 : sums of money due, penalties or damages, or pending such suit or proceeding, or as incident.:. I ' thereto, or without the institution of anjr suit : I 19. (1) Toute saisie ou detention exicutie Aux rkua. fr.13 el chgr en vertu de la presente loi est aux risques, du propricia,re frais et dppens du propriitzire des marchandises ou nzvire saisis jusqu'h ce qu'aient it6 payis intpgralement toutes les sommes dues ou amendes encourues, ainsi que rous les frais et depens subis dans la saisie et la detention, et les frais de toute dklaration de culpabilit6 obtenue pour violation ou inobservation de I'une quelconque des dispositions de la prcsente loi ou d'un r6glement en vigueur sous le rcgime de la presente loi. (2) La saisie et la detention peuvent Q~ar,Jlp""r prur ~'ciircruer s'efiectuer soit au commencement d'une action ou procidure en recouvrement de toutes sommes dues, d'amendes ou de dommagesintirets, ou au cours de cette action ou procedure, soit comme proccdure afiirente,

nrt~u'rordrr t~urr rllrr~rz (3) Tile seizure and de~ent~on mrly be efiec~ed upon the order of (a) any judge, (b) any magistrate having the power of two, justices of the peace, or (c) the chief officer of customs ar any port in Canada. lnmppllc~llon I Bomrd. I (4) An order under subsection (3) may be made on the application of the Board or any officer thereof, or the Attorney General of Canada, and may be executed by any constatjle or bailiff, or officer 01 the Board, and such constable, bailiff or officer, is hereby empowered to take all necessary means and demand all necessary aid to enable him to execute the order. R.S., c. 187, s. 18. %WICC of 20. Service of any warrant,summons, writ, a 'nt, e~c. order, noticeor other document, when personal service cannot be effected, may be made upon the owner or upon the masrer or other person in charge of any vessel by sh'owing the original to and leaving a copy with any person found on board the vessel and appearing to be one of her crew, or by affixing a copy thereof to I some conspicuous part of the vessel. R.S., c. 187. s. 19. ; ofgooh 21. (1) The Board may sell at public wiled auction or by private tender the whole or any I, part of the goods seized or detained under secrion 18, L _.. -. - (a) at any time after the date of such seizure, in respect of goods of the kind described by paragraph 18(2)(d); or (b) at any time after the expiration of thirty days from the date of such seizure, in respect of any other goods; and out of the proceeds of any such sale the Board may retain any debt, tolls, penalty or other amount referred to in section 18, together with all expenses incurred by the Board in connection with the seizure, detention and sale, and shall pay the surplus, if any, to the former owner of the goods. o:: d r l L J'ouvrr~i~rr d'crl: pnursu~te ou r)ror$durr quelcon~lu~ (3) La sarsrp el la de~en~~on peuvenl 6tr~ oppr6es sous I'autor116 de I'urdonr~snce,.I,Ir a) d'un juge, b) d'un magistrat ayanl le pouvoir de deux juges de paix, ou C) du prppos6 en chef des douanes dans un port quelconque du Canadh. (4) Une ordonnance en verru du paragraphe du (3) peut Ptre dpcern6e ii la demande du Conseil ou de I'un de ses fonclionnaires ou du procureur gcn6ral du Canada, et elle peur Prre exccutie par tout consrable. huissier ou fonctionnaire du Conseil; et ledit constable. huissier ou fonctionnaire est par les prisentes autoris6 B prendre tous les moyens nbcessaires et B solliciter route I'aide requise pour lui permettre dlexpcuter I'ordonnance. S.R., c. 187, art. 18. Q~ldo"'"~"" 1 ordonnmntr dr Alademnnd* COWII. rtt. 20. Lorsque la signification personnelle est Slrnifl~all~ndu impossible, la significarion de tout mandar, mandn''e'c. assignation, bref, ordonnance, avis ou autre document peut se iaire aux propriitaires ou au capitaine ou b une autre personne ayant la direction d'un navire en en montrant I'original et en en rernertant une copie li une personne qui se trouve i bord du navire er qui semble faire partie. de I'Cquipage, ou en affichant une copie de l'un des susdits dans un endroii en vue sur le navire. S.R., c. 187, art. 19. 2 1. (1) Le Conseil peut vendre, i I'enchPre venlrd~ marchandun publique ou par soumission privce, la totalit6 ou une partie des marchandises saisies ou dptenues aux termes de J'article 18 a) h tout moment apr6s la date de certe saisie, i 1'Pgard de rnarchandises de J1esp6ce dccrite i I'alinia IS(2)d); ou b) i tout moment aprks I'expirarion des trente jours qui suivent la date de cette saisie, li I'Cgzrd de toutes autres marchand ises ; et retenir, sur le produit de toute semblable vente, le monrant de quelque dette, droit, peine ou autre somme mentionnee B l'article IS, ainsi que le montant des dipenses subies par le Conseil relati\-ement li la saisie, la ditention et la \-ente, et doit verser I'excCdent, s'il eh est, 5 l'ancien propri6raire des marchandises.

.Yal:oria! h'urboura Board Chnp..\.e )lhrrrrnrc8r* (2) )\'),elher or not all or an?. of the r~chls oi the Bonrd under srctlon 19 and under subsection (I) of th~ secrlon arr exercised b?. the Bonrd, the Board ma)., 1n any csst described In ~ectlon IS, proceed agalnst the owner of the goods in any court of competent jurisdiction for the recovery of any debt, tolls, penalty or other amount referred to in section IS (or for the balance thereof in the event of any sale contemplated by subsection (1) of this section) and may also exercise against - the owner of the goods any other right or.. remedy atailable to the Board at law. 1953-.. -.. - 54, c. 60, s. 10. Pe~filuer~obe 22- Every pecuniary penalty recovered for prd u, Boerd any violation or non-observance of this Act or of any by-law in force under this Act shall be paid over to the Board by the court or magistrate before whom the penalty has been.- recovered. R.S., c. 187, s. 21. 23. Every person who contravenes any of the provis~ons of this Act or the by-laws IS - guilty of an offence and, except as otherwise provided in the by-laws, is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term Oflenccs rnd,, pennll~er not exceed~ng sixty days, or to both. 1953-54, c. 60, s 11. (2) QUP le Conseil exercr ou non In 101alr16 Aulfr*1rcoun ou I'un quelconque des dro~ts a iur conferes par I'article 19 er le paragraphe (I) du present artjclr, il peut, en tour cas mentlonne ii I'article IS, proceder contre le propriira~re des marchandises devant toute courcompirente pour le recouvrement de toute derte, de tou~ droit, de Loute peine ou autre sornn;e mentionn6e k I'article 18 (ou pour le solde de quelque dette, droit, peine ou autre somrne de ce genre, dans le cas d'une vente prevue au paragraphe (1) du prisenr article), et il peut aussi exercer contre le propriitaire des rnarchandises tout autre droi~ ou recours qui lui est accessible en droit. 1953-54, c. 60, art. 10. 22. Toute peine picuniaire recouvree Ir la blemcndel do~ven~ ilre suite d'une violation ou inobservation de la perccr prcsente loi ou de tout r6glernent en vigueur ~orueil sous le rigirne de la prpsente loi, doit Ptre versce au Conseil par le tribunal ou le magistrat devant lequel la peine a 6tP recouvrie. S.R., c. 187, art. 21. 23. Quiconque viole quelque disposition de Infrrclio~c~ pei~n la prpsente loi ou des r6glernents est coupable d'une infraction et, h moins d'une disposition contraire dez rgglements, passible, sur declaration sornrnaire de culpabiliti, d'une arnende d'au plus cinq cents dollars ou d'un emprisonnement d'au plus soixante jours, ou h la fois de I'amende et de I'emprisonnement. 1953-54, c. 60, art. 11. k Spcclal Account 24. -411 moneys received by the Board from whatever source derived shall be paid to the credit of the Receiver General through such -. banks as the Minister of Flnance from time to time directs; such moneys shall be credited to a special account designated the National Harbours Board Special Account hereinafter called the "Special Account". R.S., c. 187,. s. 23. :.%.*. Expendilureof 25- ATot\vithstanding the Financial Ad- * moocy3 minis~ration Act, the Minister of Finance may,,...., subject to this Act, authorize disbursem'ents % \... from the Special Account on the requisition,.-. a of the Board or its authorized officers, for the folloa.ing purposes, or any of them : (a) the pament of all necessary expenses...*. incurred in the administration, management and control of the harbours, works, and. -., properties under the jurisdiction of the 24. Tous les deniers que le Conseil a requs Comp'e~pCcial de quelque source que ce soit doivent itre verses au credit du receveur giniral par I1intermPdiaire des banques que le minisrre des Finances indique, i I'occasion ; ces deniers doivent itre portps au cridit d'un compte special disigni comrne Cornpte special du Conseil des ports nationaux, ci-apris appeli -1e Compte zpiciala. S.R., c. 187, art. 23. 25. Konobstant la Loi sur l'adminisiraiion DCpensefde denien jinancikre, le ministre des Finances peut, sous reserve de la prisente loi, autoriser des dpbours6s i m;me le Compte spccia1, h la dernande du Conseil ou de ses fonctionnaires autorisis, pour les objets suivants ou I'un d'entre eux: a) le paiement de routes les depenses nicessaires faites dans I'adrninistration, la gestion et la rcgie des ports, ou\.rages et