The province is taking the plunge with a draft set of occupational diving regulations it hopes to have on the books within months.

The development process for Nova Scotia's first such regulations began in 1989.

"It's always dangerous to predict time," said Jim LeBlanc, the province's director of occupational health and safety. "If we are able to address the concerns that people have identified to us, it wouldn't be out of the question . . . that by the spring we'd be in a position where we'd be recommending the regulations to cabinet."

But John Scott of Dominion Diving in Dartmouth has concerns with the 63-page draft. He said the province should adopt the Canadian Standards Association Occupational Code for Diving Operations instead.

"It's the best code that's around for occupational diving as far as I'm concerned," said Mr. Scott.

He alluded to sea urchin diver Todd Tudball being swept away from his dive boat in the Digby Neck area Dec. 13, saying adoption of the federal code might have prevented that incident.

"He wasn't tethered by a lifeline to the boat," said Mr. Scott. "That allowed him to be picked up by the current and swept away. In the (CSA) safety code, you're required to be secured by a lifeline."

Mr. Tudball, who was wearing a dry suit that protected him against the elements, was found safe on an island.

Mr. Scott said the province is "rushing to get these inadequate regulations through."

Mr. LeBlanc said a sea urchin diver doesn't have to be tethered under the proposed provincial regulations.

"But if you're not using a lifeline and you're in open water, you have to have an audio or a visual locating device."

Sea urchin diver Paul Budreski of Halifax said it would be dangerous to tether urchin divers.

He said a traditional urchin crew consists of four divers, a boat captain and a deckhand. Each diver attaches his harvesting bag or cage to a buoy by a rope and the captain monitors the buoys.

Mr. Budreski said having four more ropes in play is unthinkable.

"In our industry, if you have two ropes in close proximity . . . (it's) guaranteed they're going to be tangled."

Ken Jardine, owner of the Scuba Tech dive shop in Sydney, said the proposed regulations will make occupational diving safer.

"There are a few things in the draft regulation that . . . could have had (Mr. Tudball) picked up earlier at the very least."

He said if Mr. Tudball had carried a signalling device, he might have been rescued right away.

"It's not like these people are cowboys or crazy; people need direction," said Mr. Jardine.

Mr. Scott said another reason the federal code should be adopted over the provincial draft is that it's stricter when it comes to diving equipment, and the provincial regulations allow scuba gear to be used where the federal code doesn't.

Scuba gear is not safe to use in "certain circumstances such as fast currents, pipelines, intakes."

Mr. Scott said the federal rules require "surface supplied" diving equipment in such scenarios, where the diver wears a helmet and is supplied oxygen via an umbilical tube.

Mr. Budreski doesn't think urchin divers should have to use surface-supplied gear.

He said it's a challenge for the province to create one set of regulations for all occupational diving sectors, comparing it to tractor trailer driver having to meet the same standards as someone driving a car.

Mr. LeBlanc is unsure whether occupational divers will have to obtain a restricted scuba diver certificate or just demonstrate competency. "We'd probably have another look at that issue - should certification be a requirement or not," he said.

Mr. LeBlanc said a copy of the draft may be obtained by calling 424-5400 or 1-800-952-2687.