ARCHIVED — Vol. 146, No. 50 — December 15, 2012

Regulations Amending the Atlantic Pilotage Tariff Regulations, 1996

Statutory authority

Pilotage Act

Sponsoring agency

Atlantic Pilotage Authority

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Background

The Atlantic Pilotage Authority (the Authority) is responsible for administering, in the interests of safety, an efficient pilotage service within the Canadian waters in and around the Atlantic Provinces. As required by the Pilotage Act, the Authority prescribes tariffs of pilotage charges that are fair and reasonable and consistent with providing revenues sufficient to permit the Authority to operate on a self-sustaining financial basis.

Issue

In accordance with recommendations from the Canadian Transportation Agency (the CTA) and its customers, the Authority strives to be financially self-sufficient on a port-by-port basis, as well as for the Authority as a whole. After analyzing projections for coming years, and consulting with industry, the Authority has determined that 7 of the 17 compulsory pilotage ports would require tariff adjustments to remain financially self-sufficient on a port-by-port basis and provide the service levels required by industry, without cross-subsidization.

The Authority is also adjusting tariffs in non-compulsory pilotage areas to ensure pilots will be available to the customers when requested. The changes to the non-compulsory rates do not have a significant effect on the Authority’s finances, but are meant to ensure that pilots will be willing to take these assignments when industry requests them.

Objectives

The objective of this proposed regulatory amendment is to increase pilotage charges in certain compulsory pilotage areas in order to

  • — maintain the ability of the Authority to meet its mandate to operate, in the interest of safety, an efficient pilotage service within the Atlantic region;
  • — help ensure the long-term financial self-sustainability of the Authority as a whole;
  • — help ensure the long-term financial self-sustainability of each port individually; and
  • — be mindful of the economic realities of the region by ensuring that the tariff increases are within the ability of the shipping industry to absorb while allowing the ports to remain competitive.

Description

Compulsory pilotage ports regular tariffs in the Atlantic Pilotage Tariff Regulations, 1996

This proposed tariff amendment would increase the basic, unit, and minimum charges for the following ports:

  • Halifax 7.0%
  • Strait of Canso 5.0%
  • Bras d’Or 5.0%
  • Humber Arm 3.0%
  • Bay of Exploits 3.0%
  • Sydney 2.0%

For the port of Saint John, the basic and minimum charges would be increased by $165.00. This amendment would also increase the gross tonnage charge from 1.50 cents to 1.75 cents. While the gross tonnage charge applies to all ports with a variable charge, it only affects a small number of vessels in Halifax and Saint John.

The pilotage tariffs in the remaining 10 compulsory pilotage areas will remain at their current levels.

Non-compulsory pilotage tariffs in the Atlantic Pilotage Tariff Regulations, 1996

This proposed amendment would consolidate rates for non-compulsory pilotage ports in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia into a single rate that will apply to all of the applicable port and harbour areas that are non-compulsory pilotage areas. The charge will be $4.02 per pilotage unit for a one-way trip with a minimum of $469.00 per trip and a $291.00 flat charge for any movage.

The overall annual increase in revenues from all measures is estimated to be $817,000, or 3.75%.

Consultation

Consultation in various forms has taken place with the parties affected by these proposed amendments. The parties consulted include the Shipping Federation of Canada, which represents foreign vessels and accounts for 77%–78% of the Authority’s activity and revenue, and the Canadian Shipowners Association. Local committees representing stakeholders in Halifax, Saint John, St. John’s, Placentia Bay, and Cape Breton were also consulted extensively, including presentations made by the Authority in May and in August of 2012. The consultation was in the form of meetings, as well as written, personal, and telephone communications with individuals. Alternatives to tariff increases were presented, where applicable, and participation from the attendees was encouraged. For various ports and districts, an alternative to increased tariff rates would be a reduction in pilot strength. The parties affected have always expressed that their primary concerns are with service levels and they do not want service compromised by pilot reductions. When meeting with customers, the Authority provided an analysis of the situation and solicited responses.

The response of those consulted has been positive, with every indication that the increases are accepted as fair and reasonable.

Rationale

Saint John

The amendment would increase pilotage revenue in Saint John by 8% or $271,000 over the 2013 projected revenues under the current tariff. This assumes 1 592 total assignments in the port for 2013, a 4% increase in activity over the 2012 projections.

To achieve the required tariff, the basic and the minimum charges will increase by $165. The primary reason for the increase in Saint John is to pay for the new pilot boat that will be deployed later this year, as well as the cost of a fourth pilot boat crew. After discussions with the customers in the port, it was agreed that the fairest way to address the issue was to have all ships pay the same amount of increase. This was accomplished by increasing the basic charge and minimum charge, while maintaining the unit charge at the current level. Saint John is budgeted to provide about 17% of the Authority’s overall revenue in 2013.

In Saint John, New Brunswick, the Authority is planning to launch the Captain A. J. Soppitt, a new pilot vessel, by the end of 2012. This will be the second of two vessels that are being built for Halifax and Saint John, with the Halifax boat having entered service in mid-2012. These vessels will be the primary vessels in the ports, replacing boats that had been built between 1974 and 1982. The older boats will become secondary or backup pilot boats. The Authority advised the customers that there would be increased costs once the vessels were in service, and the customers accepted this because of the improvements in service reliability that new vessels would provide. These new vessels have much higher amortization, insurance, and carrying costs than the previous primary vessels, approximately $280–$300K per year. The new vessel had been budgeted to arrive at the beginning of the fourth quarter of 2012. The tariff in the port had been increased previously for the year to cover the carrying costs and the operating costs for these three months. For 2013, the new vessel will be in operation for the entire year leading to the area absorbing the full cost of these new vessels, except for any increase in fuel consumption. The combination of the 2012 increase and the 2013 increase are expected to cover the new vessels costs, assuming activity in the port remains near 1 600 assignments annually. If activity were to decrease in the port, these rates may have to be adjusted further to cover the annual carrying costs, but this is not anticipated at this time.

The Authority expects that the new vessels will use more fuel than the older boats, the budgeted consumption contained in the fuel charge formula will not be adjusted until there has been enough experience with the new vessels to determine a reasonable estimate. It is expected that any adjustment in the budgeted consumption will not take place until 2014.

The Authority has also improved the manning of the pilot vessels by adding a fourth crew to cover the 24-hour, seven days per week requirement for pilot boat operations. The addition of the extra crew will eliminate the need for 24-hour shifts and are expected to increase the safety of the crews and the operation by minimizing fatigue. This initiative maintains the service levels in the port of Saint John by ensuring the pilot boat will be manned around the clock with employees working 12-hour shifts.

The Authority developed an operating budget for Saint John to determine the level of the increased costs, and to determine the amount of the tariff adjustment that would be required to cover these increases. Understanding that the port will have a significant change to its cost structure with the addition of the new pilot boat and fourth crew for the entire year, the Authority is not targeting a single year increase to recover the entire shortfall and provide a suitable return. It was determined that an 8% increase in pilotage revenues was required to bring the port to a break-even position in 2013 and that this was the maximum increase that should be sought at this point for the port. Based on information provided by users in Saint John, there is a possibility that traffic will rebound in 2013. This growth could provide a suitable return in future years without further significant tariff increases. The Authority will re-evaluate late in 2013 to see if this growth materialized.

Halifax

For Halifax, the amendment would increase pilotage revenue in the port by 7.5% or $380,000 over the 2013 projected revenues under the current tariff. This assumes 2 942 total assignments in the port for 2013, a 2% increase in activity over the 2012 projections.

The operating budget for Halifax was completed to determine the operating costs for 2013 with the Chebucto Pilot in service for the entire year and with two apprentice pilots added. It was determined that the 7.5% increase in pilotage revenues, based on projected traffic, was required. Approximately 3% of this increase is to cover the remainder of the new pilot vessel costs with 4.5% expected to cover the cost of two additional pilots. To achieve the increase, the basic charge, unit charge, and minimum charge are each being increased by 7%. The Authority is expecting a change to the gross tonnage charge referenced below that will raise the remaining one half of 1% of revenues required in the port. Halifax is budgeted to provide about 25% of the Authority’s overall revenue in 2013.

The Authority launched the Chebucto Pilot, the first of the two new pilotage vessels being constructed, midway through 2012 in the port of Halifax. As discussed above, the carrying and operating costs of the new vessel will increase overall costs for the port as the new vessels have much higher amortization, insurance, and carrying costs than the previous primary vessels, approximately $280–$300K per year. The Chebucto Pilot was estimated to be delivered to the Authority in April of 2012. Tariffs were increased the previous year to cover the cost of operating for nine months. The vessel was actually delivered June 26, 2012. For 2013, the port will begin absorbing the new vessel costs for the full year and a further increase in tariffs is needed to cover the balance of the additional costs not incurred in the previous year due to the delivery date. Again, the Authority will not adjust the budgeted consumption contained in the fuel charge formula until 2014 when there has been enough experience with the new vessel to determine a reasonable estimate. The combination of the 2012 increase and this year’s increase is expected to cover the new vessels carrying costs, assuming activity in the port remains near 3 000 assignments annually. If activity were to decrease in the port, these rates may have to be adjusted further to cover the annual costs.

The port of Halifax also has challenges regarding the workforce and possible retirements. After discussions with industry in the port, it was decided that two additional pilots should be budgeted for 2013, dependent on traffic remaining at expected levels.

Cape Breton District

This district contains three compulsory pilotage ports, the Strait of Canso, the Bras d’Or Lakes, and the port of Sydney. The district utilizes a pool of pilots, each of whom is capable of providing service to any of the three ports. Operating as a district is advantageous to the individual ports, as they can draw on resources from the pool to cover peak periods. An individual port that is not part of a district would have to carry more pilots to cover for these periods and at an increased cost to industry. The total costs of the pilots in a district are allocated to the individual ports based on the total time pilots spend working in each port. For 2012, Canso was budgeted to use 75% of the pilot time, Sydney 21%, and Bras d’Or 4%. The port of Canso had always absorbed a much higher portion of the pilot costs, as they always had significantly more assignments than the other two ports and it is a longer pilotage.

As this allocation of usage changes, so do the cost structures of the individual ports in the district. Late in 2011, the Strait of Canso lost a significant amount of business. The area has a transshipment terminal that supplies refineries along the eastern seaboard of the United States. With no new refineries being developed and demand for petroleum products declining, the transshipment terminal has been relying more and more on a few major customers. In the fall of 2011, one of these customers closed leading to a sharp reduction in shipments to and from Canso. This traffic is not expected to rebound in the short or medium term. With this significant decline in Canso, a larger financial burden is placed on Bras d’Or and Sydney to cover the cost of the pilots that service the area. Due to future growth prospects in Sydney, the Authority has decided that it should not reduce pilot strength in the district based on the current decline in Canso.

Strait of Canso

For Canso, the tariff change would increase pilotage revenue in the port by 5.0% or $106,000 over the 2013 projected revenues. This assumes 771 total assignments in the port for 2013, a 4% increase in activity over the 2012 projections, but a 30% decline from 2011 actual traffic levels. With a goal of breaking even in the port, the Authority is increasing the basic, unit, and minimum charges by 5.0%. Canso is budgeted to provide about 11% of the Authority’s revenue in 2013.

For the compulsory pilotage area of the Strait of Canso, the Authority is facing a significant decline in traffic due to a significant reduction in oil tanker activity in the port. The Strait of Canso has a pilot boat service contractor paid on a per-trip basis which adjusts the pilot boat costs automatically based on changes in traffic.

Even though the pilot boat costs will fall with the reduced activity, and a portion of the pilot costs will be transferred to Sydney and Bras d’Or, due to the lost revenue with the 30% decline in traffic, the Authority would still be in a negative financial position in the Strait of Canso without an increase.

Bras d’Or

The port in the district with the least activity is Bras d’Or. The proposed changes would increase pilotage revenue in the port by 5.0% or $7,000 over the 2013 projected revenues. This assumes 38 total assignments in the port for 2013, the same amount as projected for 2012. With a goal of breaking even in Bras d’Or in 2013, the Authority is increasing the basic, unit, and minimum charges by 5.0%. The port is budgeted to provide less than 1% of the Authority’s revenue in 2013.

The Bras d’Or Lakes area will be absorbing more of the district’s resources with the decline in Canso. With Canso’s significant decline, Bras d’Or will utilize a greater percentage of the pilot time, and proportion of costs, even though they will not see an increase in their actual assignments. The pilot boat operation is also shared with another port, and is operated in a very efficient manner. In reviewing the operating statement for the port, it was apparent that the 5% increase was necessary to keep pace with these pressures in the district.

Sydney

For Sydney, the amendment would increase pilotage revenue in the port by 2.0% or $22,000 over the 2013 projected revenues at current tariff rates. This assumes 387 total assignments in the port for 2013, an increase in activity of 26% over projected 2012 levels. The Authority would be increasing the basic, unit, and minimum charges by 2.0%. Sydney is expected to provide 5.2% of the Authority’s revenue in 2013.

The port of Sydney is facing cost increases as part of the Cape Breton district as resources are shifted from Canso. It is the growth prospects in Sydney that has made keeping pilot numbers stable for the district a priority. As this business grows in Sydney, costs will increase for the port. This new business is estimated to begin late in 2013 and grow through 2014 and 2015. To cover for this eventual business, it was determined that removing pilots in the district was not prudent at this time. But to cover the costs until this business is fully running, the Authority was encouraged by customers in the area to increase the tariff slightly as the project may run behind schedule.

As traffic increases in Sydney more of the district’s pilot resources will be used there, and the costs for the area will increase. Even though revenues are also expected to rise with the new activity, the new revenues will not peak for several years. Pilot boat resources are also being shifted to provide the port easy access to a back-up vessel in preparation of this traffic growth. When these factors were considered and the operating statement for the port budgeted, it was apparent that a 2% increase was necessary to keep pace with this growth.

Central/Western Newfoundland District

Similar to the Cape Breton District, Central/Western Newfoundland encompasses three ports, Humber Arm, Bay of Exploits, and Stephenville, which share pilot resources. This district has had a dramatic decrease in assignments due to the decline of the paper industry over the years. The compulsory pilotage ports in this district are served by a complement of three pilots, reduced from four in previous years. Due to the large geographic area covered by the pilots (more than 400 km from one extremity to the other), it is impossible to reduce the number of pilots below the current level. The Authority is proposing an increase in tariff for Humber Arm and Bay of Exploits to cover general inflationary increases in costs for the region. There is very little activity in Stephenville, and rates would not be adjusted at this time. The central and western coast of Newfoundland is planned to contribute 2% of the total revenue for the Authority in 2013.

Humber Arm

For Humber Arm the proposed change would increase pilotage revenue in the port by 3.0% or $13,000 over the 2013 projected revenues at current tariff rates. This assumes 184 total assignments in the port for 2013, the same activity that is projected for 2012. The Authority would be increasing the basic, unit, and minimum charges by 3.0%.

Bay of Exploits

The amendments for the Bay of Exploits would increase pilotage revenue in the port by 3.0% or $10,000 over the 2013 projected revenues at current tariff rates. This assumes 167 total assignments in the port for 2013, a 2% increase in activity over the projected 2012 levels. The Authority would be increasing the basic, unit, and minimum charges by 3.0%.

Gross tonnage charge

The gross tonnage charge was established for 2010 as the Authority continued its initiative to address inequities that have developed over time in the tariff system. The Authority amended its variable charge to have the greater of the unit charge or gross tonnage charge apply to all ships. By basing the variable charge on a formula that considers the greater of the unit charge or gross tonnage charge, the Authority is addressing anomalies in how certain categories of vessels (primarily cruise ships; auto-carriers and roll on, roll off vessels) are measured. The Authority has consulted with industry regarding this charge, and an agreement was made to increase the charge over time to more fully address the tariff discrepancies while cushioning the impact to the vessels affected. The original target of this initiative was to reach 1.75 cents per gross ton to minimize the discrepancies. This proposed amendment is the final stage of the increase and will bring the gross tonnage charge from 1.50 cents to 1.75 cents per gross ton.

While the proposed amendment applies to all ports with a variable charge, it will only affect a small number of vessels in Halifax and Saint John. Only those ports have the combination of vessel categories (as noted above) and lower unit rate that will occasionally cause the gross tonnage charge to be greater than the unit charge. In all other ports, the unit rate calculation on the projected vessel traffic is greater than the gross tonnage calculation. The proposed amendment is expected to have a negligible impact overall, with a total increase in tariff of approximately $62,000, or an overall increase of 0.28%.

Non-compulsory pilotage tariffs in the Atlantic Pilotage Tariff Regulations, 1996

Schedule 6 of the Regulations has two categories — one for “Belledune, NB,” and one for “any other port or harbour area.” The proposed amendment will create only one category in the schedule of “port and harbour areas that are non-compulsory pilotage areas”. The current Belledune rate will be used for this category. This applies to non-compulsory pilotage ports in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia.

A listing of the non-compulsory pilotage ports for which the Authority has licensed pilots in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia, with their budgeted assignments for 2013, is as follows:

Non-compulsory
Pilotage Ports

2013 Budgeted
Assignments

Belledune, N.B.

140

Summerside, P.E.I.

21

Pictou, N.S.

27

Sheet Harbour, N.S.

30

Shelburne, N.S.

4

Bridgewater, N.S.

0

Liverpool, N.S.

0

Total

222

Summary

The following tables indicate the current charges and the amendments in the compulsory pilotage tariffs.

Major ports

Basic Charge

Unit Charge

Minimum Charge

Cancellation Charge

Estimated Fuel Charge (see footnote 1) (see footnote 2) (see footnote 3)

Cost
for an Average Ship
(see footnote 4) (see footnote 5) (see footnote 6)

Strait of Canso, N.S.

2012

$825

$3.05

$1,130

$825

$276

$2,822

2013

$866

$3.20

$1,187

$866

$276

$2,948

Halifax, N.S.

2012

$577

$2.25

$1,281

$577

$126

$1,684

2013

$617

$2.41

$1,371

$617

$126

$1,794

Saint John, N.B.

2012

$583

$3.36

$1,171

$583

$82

$1,892

2013

$748

$3.36

$1,336

$748

$82

$2,057

Other ports

Basic Charge

Unit Charge

Minimum Charge

Cancellation Charge

Cost for an Average Ship (see footnote 7) (see footnote 8) (see footnote 9) (see footnote 10)

Sydney, N.S.

2012

$909

$5.42

$1,865

$900

$3,260

2013

$927

$5.53

$1,902

$900

$3,325

Bras d’Or, N.S.

2012

$1,410

$8.76

$1,980

$900

$3,470

2013

$1,481

$9.20

$2,079

$900

$3,644

Humber Arm, N.L.

2012

$649

$8.80

$1,680

$649

$1,919

2013

$668

$9.06

$1,730

$668

$1,975

Bay of Exploits, N.L.

2012

$925

$9.74

$1,898

$900

$2,221

2013

$953

$10.03

$1,955

$900

$2,288

The gross tonnage charge is also proposed to go from $0.01500 to $0.01750.

“One-for-One” Rule

The “One-for-One” Rule does not apply to this proposal, as there is no change in administrative costs to business.

Small business lens

The small business lens does not apply to this proposal.

Implementation, enforcement and service standards

Section 45 of the Pilotage Act provides an enforcement mechanism for these Regulations in that a pilotage authority can inform a customs officer at any port in Canada to withhold clearance from any ship for which pilotage charges are outstanding and unpaid. Section 48 of the Pilotage Act stipulates that every person who fails to comply with Part 1 of the Act, other than section 15.3, or with the actual Regulations is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars.

Contact

Captain R. A. McGuinness
Chief Executive Officer
Atlantic Pilotage Authority
Cogswell Tower, Suite 910
2000 Barrington Street
Halifax, Nova Scotia
B3J 3K1
Telephone: 902-426-2550
Fax: 902-426-4004

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given, pursuant to subsection 34(1) (see footnote a) of the Pilotage Act (see footnote b), that the Atlantic Pilotage Authority, pursuant to subsection 33(1) of that Act, proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Atlantic Pilotage Tariff Regulations, 1996.

Interested persons who have reason to believe that any charge in the proposed Regulations is prejudicial to the public interest, including the public interest that is consistent with the national transportation policy set out in section 5 (see footnote c) of the Canada Transportation Act (see footnote d), may file a notice of objection setting out the grounds for the objection with the Canadian Transportation Agency within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. The notice of objection must cite the Canada Gazette, Part Ⅰ, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the Canadian Transportation Agency, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N9. The notice of objection must also be filed with the Minister of Transport and the Atlantic Pilotage Authority in accordance with subsection 34(3) (see footnote e) of the Pilotage Act (see footnote f).

Halifax, December 5, 2012

CAPTAIN R. A. MCGUINNESS
Chief Executive Officer
Atlantic Pilotage Authority

REGULATIONS AMENDING THE ATLANTIC PILOTAGE
TARIFF REGULATIONS, 1996

AMENDMENTS

1. The description of TC in section 5 of the Atlantic Pilotage Tariff Regulations, 1996 (see footnote 11) is replaced by the following:

TC = the tonnage charge of $0.0175 per gross ton, and

2. The description of TC in section 8 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

TC = the tonnage charge of $0.0175 per gross ton,

3. The portion of item 3 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations in columns 2 to 4 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 2


Minimum Charge ($)

Column 3

Unit Charge
($/pilotage unit)

Column 4

Basic Charge ($)

3.

1,955.00

10.03

953.00

4. The portion of item 5 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations in columns 2 to 4 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 2


Minimum Charge ($)

Column 3

Unit Charge
($/pilotage unit)

Column 4


Basic Charge ($)

5.

1,730.00

9.06

668.00

5. The portion of items 9 to 12 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations in columns 2 to 4 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 2


Minimum Charge ($)

Column 3

Unit Charge
($/pilotage unit)

Column 4


Basic Charge ($)

9.

1,902.00

5.53

927.00

10.

2,079.00

9.20

1,481.00

11.

1,187.00

3.20

866.00

12.

1,371.00

2.41

617.00

6. The portion of item 3 of Schedule 4 to the Regulations in columns 3 to 7 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 3




Minimum Charge ($)

Column 4

Unit Charge, No Pilot
Boat Used
($/pilotage unit)

Column 5


Basic Charge, No Pilot Boat Used ($)

Column 6

Unit Charge,
Pilot Boat Used ($/pilotage unit)

Column 7


Basic Charge, Pilot Boat Used ($)

3.

1,760.00

8.02

762.00

9.03

858.00

7. The portion of item 5 of Schedule 4 to the Regulations in columns 3 to 7 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 3




Minimum Charge ($)

Column 4

Unit Charge,
No Pilot
Boat Used ($/pilotage unit)

Column 5


Basic Charge, No Pilot Boat Used ($)

Column 6


Unit Charge, Pilot Boat Used ($/pilotage unit)

Column 7


Basic Charge, Pilot Boat Used ($)

5.

1,557.00

7.25

534.00

8.15

601.00

8. The portion of items 9 to 12 of Schedule 4 to the Regulations in columns 3 to 7 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 3




Minimum Charge ($)

Column 4

Unit Charge,
No Pilot
Boat Used ($/pilotage unit)

Column 5


Basic Charge, No Pilot Boat Used ($)

Column 6


Unit Charge, Pilot Boat Used ($/pilotage unit)

Column 7


Basic Charge, Pilot Boat Used ($)

9.

1,712.00

4.42

742.00

4.98

834.00

10.

1,871.00

7.36

1,185.00

8.28

1,333.00

11.

1,068.00

2.56

693.00

2.88

779.00

12.

1,234.00

1.93

494.00

2.17

555.00

9. The portion of items 1 to 3 of Schedule 5 to the Regulations in columns 3 and 5 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 3

Minimum Charge ($)

Column 5

Basic Charge ($)

1.

1,336.00

748.00

2.

1,202.00

673.00

3.

1,202.00

598.00

10. Schedule 6 to the Regulations is replaced by the Schedule 6 set out in the schedule to these Regulations.

COMING INTO FORCE

11. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

SCHEDULE
(Section 10)

SCHEDULE 6
(Sections 9 and 10)

PORT AND HARBOUR AREAS — ONE-WAY TRIPS AND MOVAGES

Item

Column 1



Port or Harbour Area

Column 2

Minimum Charge,
One-way Trip ($)

Column 3


Unit Charge,
One-way Trip ($/pilotage unit)

Column 4



Movage Charge ($)

1.

Any port or harbour area that is a non-compulsory pilotage area

469.00

4.02

291.00

[50-1-o]

  • Footnote a
    S.C. 1998, c. 10, s. 150
  • Footnote b
    R.S., c. P-14
  • Footnote c
    S.C. 2007, c. 19, s. 2
  • Footnote d
    S.C. 1996, c. 10
  • Footnote e
    S.C. 1996, c. 10, s. 251(2)
  • Footnote f
    R.S., c. P-14
  • Footnote 1
    The 2013 fuel charge is based on the latest 2012 average fuel price of $0.95 and 290 L per trip.
  • Footnote 2
    The 2013 fuel charge is based on the latest 2012 average fuel price of $0.97 and 130 L per trip.
  • Footnote 3
    The 2013 fuel charge is based on the latest 2012 average fuel price of $1.09 and 75 L per trip.
  • Footnote 4
    Based on a ship of 564.4 units for the Strait of Canso.
  • Footnote 5
    Based on a ship of 436 units for Halifax.
  • Footnote 6
    Based on a ship of 365.25 units for Saint John.
  • Footnote 7
    Based on a ship of 433.72 units for Sydney.
  • Footnote 8
    Based on a ship of 235.12 units for Bras d’Or.
  • Footnote 9
    Based on a ship of 144.3 units for Humber Arm.
  • Footnote 10
    Based on a ship of 133.1 units for the Bay of Exploits.
  • Footnote 11
    SOR/95-586