2013-14 Report on the Beyond the Border Action Plan Horizontal Initiative
On February 4, 2011, the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States issued Beyond the Border: A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness1. The Declaration initiated a new long-term partnership between the two countries that was built upon a perimeter approach to security and economic competitiveness. Through the perimeter approach, Canada and the U.S. committed to working together, both at and beyond the border, to enhance our security and accelerate the flow of legitimate goods, services, and people. The Beyond the Border (BTB) Action Plan, released in December 2011, embodies this collaboration and engagement between our two countries, and sets out specific initiatives (Appendix A) to secure the Canada-U.S. border and perimeter while facilitating legitimate trade and travel.
The Action Plan sets out joint priorities for achieving a secure and efficient Canada-U.S. border within four areas of cooperation: Addressing Threats Early; Trade Facilitation, Economic Growth and Jobs; Cross-Border Law Enforcement; and, Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security. In total, 32 initiatives are listed under the four areas, with numerous Canadian departments and agencies working to ensure their success. Two additional initiatives provide for the responsible sharing of personal information and centralized oversight of the implementation of the Action Plan.
Canadian departments and agencies have been working closely with their U.S. counterparts in ensuring the success of the Action Plan. The purpose of this report is to provide a Government of Canada-wide perspective on performance in the implementation of the Action Plan and to document the significant progress that has been made on BTB initiatives from the publication of the last Report2 to the end of the 2013-14 fiscal year (FY).
Several departments and agencies are involved in ensuring that each Action Plan initiative is successfully implemented. Information was collected from all participating federal organizations, with Public Safety Canada (PS) coordinating the development of this report. Additional details regarding progress achieved on specific initiatives can also be found in each organization's Departmental Performance Report (DPR). For more information and descriptions of Action Plan initiatives, please consult the Beyond the Border Action Plan3. Moreover, while this report focuses on Canadian progress, joint Canada-U.S. implementation reports4 are released annually.
The figure below illustrates the outcomes to which the 34 Beyond the Border initiatives contribute. The four overarching outcomes will support the achievement of a secure Canada-U.S. border and perimeter, and the facilitation of legitimate trade and travel. This figure also presents the structure which will be used in the report to demonstrate progress on the BTB initiatives.
Beyond the Border Action Plan ultimate outcomes
Image Description
This image illustrates the Beyond the Border Action Plan's desired outcomes. There are five ultimate outcomes and two governance-related outcomes which are all linked to specific Beyond the Border Action Plan initiatives. The outcomes are as follows:
Ultimate Outcomes:
The Canada – United States border and perimeter are secure and legitimate trade and travel are facilitated (all Beyond the Border Action Plan initiatives)
Threats are stopped before they arrive either in Canada or in the United States (Initiatives 1-11)
Legitimate travel and cargo are stimulated and expedited (Initiatives 8, 10, 12-15 and 20-24)
Criminals are prevented from leveraging the Canada-United States border to commit transnational crimes (Initiatives 24-26)
Canada and the United States are prepared for and can respond to threats and emergencies (Initiatives 27-32)
Governance Outcomes:
Governance oversees the successful implementation of the Action Plan to maintain transparency and accountability (Initiative 33)
Privacy principles inform and guide information and intelligence-sharing under the BTB Action plan (Initiative 34)
The following table presents the total planned and actual spending figures under the BTB Action Plan for the 2013-14 fiscal year. A breakdown of these amounts by participating department/agency is also presented under the different Themes in the Report.
BTB Themes | 2013-14 ($ units) |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
New Funding | Internal Reallocation | Total Planned Spending | Actual Spending | |
Theme 1 - Addressing Threats Early (Initiatives 1-11) | $113,923,021 | $58,442,309 | $172,365,330 | $108,068,924 |
Theme 2 - Trade Facilitation, Economic Growth and Jobs (Initiatives 12-24) | $52,029,942 | $6,127,642 | $58,157,584 | $32,649,985 |
Theme 3 - Cross-Border Law Enforcement (Initiatives 25 and 26) | $10,252,557 | $209,123 | $10,461,680 | $6,484,327 |
Theme 4 - Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security (Initiatives 27-32) | $2,913,459 | $1,046,674 | $3,960,133 | $3,908,955 |
Managing our New Long-Term Partnership (Initiatives 33 and 34) | $1,098,139 | $593,738 | $1,691,877 | $1,636,898 |
TOTAL | $180,217,118 | $66,419,486 | $246,636,604 | $152,749,089 |
Total expenditures in 2013-14 amounted to $152,749,089 against $246,636,607 in planned spending. This presents a variance of 38%. Comparatively, in 2012-13 planned spending amounted to $117,343,593 against $49,281,291 in actual spending (58% variance). Although 2013-14 shows a marked improvement in terms of spending, operational constraints (including contracting and staffing delays), as well as delays in the implementation of technology, resulted in the variance observed. Some initiatives also experienced unexpected savings through cost sharing and lower than expected expenses. In most cases, unspent funds will be reallocated to future fiscal years. Where a variance (≥ 25%) is presented by a department/agency under a specific Theme, an explanatory note has been included at the end of the report.
Theme 1 - Addressing Threats Early (Initiatives 1-11):
Addressing threats at the earliest possible point is essential to strengthening the shared security of Canada and the U.S. It will enable both countries to improve the free flow of legitimate goods and people across the Canada-United States border. The Beyond the Border Action Plan will support this goal by developing a common understanding of the threat environment; aligning and coordinating our security systems for goods, cargo and baggage; and supporting the effective identification of people who pose a threat, which will enhance safety and facilitate the movement of legitimate travellers.
Outcomes5:
Image Description
This image illustrates the outcomes of Theme 1 of the Beyond the Border Action Plan. This theme is called Addressing Threats Early. The figure demonstrates the linkages between the Intermediate Outcomes and the Ultimate Outcomes for Theme 1. The outcomes are also linked to specific Beyond the Border Action Plan initiatives.
The Intermediate Outcomes for Theme 1 are:
Canada and the United States share a common approach to effectively identify threats to either country (Initiatives 1-4 and 7)
Also, in dotted lines is an outcome stating that Ports of entry focus on high-risk goods and individuals by expediting low-risk cargo, passenger baggage and individuals entering either country (Initiatives 5, 6, 8-16 and 20, 22, 24). This is an intermediate outcome which is shared between Theme 1 and Theme 2. Theme 2 is called Trade Facilitation, Economic Growth and Jobs.
The Ultimate Outcomes for Theme 1 are:
Threats are stopped before they arrive either in Canada or in the United States (Initiatives 1-11).
Also, in dotted lines is an outcome stating that Legitimate travel and cargo is stimulated and expedited (Initiatives 8, 10, 12-15 and 20-24). This is an ultimate outcome which is shared between Theme 1 and Theme 2.
Department/Agency | 2013-14 ($ units) |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
New Funding | Internal Reallocation | Total Planned Spending | Actual Spending | |
Canada Border Services Agencyi | $74,808,197 | $2,100,000 | $76,908,197 | $32,136,550 |
Canadian Food Inspection Agencyii | $0 | $0 | $0 | $165,500 |
Citizenship and Immigration Canadaiii | $31,354,915 | $0 | $31,354,915 | $21,040,702 |
Immigration & Refugee Board | $869,733 | $0 | $869,733 | $701,809 |
Public Safety Canada | $0 | $265,119 | $265,119 | $267,459 |
Royal Canadian Mounted Policeiv | $5,166,476 | $0 | $5,166,476 | $3,227,252 |
Shared Services Canada | $1,454,200 | $0 | $1,454,200 | $1,454,200 |
Transport Canada | $269,500 | $56,077,190 | $56,346,690 | $49,076,172 |
TOTAL | $113,923,021 | $58,442,309 | $172,365,330 | $108,068,924 |
2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | |
---|---|---|---|
Ultimate Outcome: Threats are stopped before they arrive either in Canada or the United States | |||
Indicator 1: Percentage of annual national security priorities on which action has been taken6 | - | -7 | 100% |
Indicator 2: Percentage of immigration investigations initiated that result in a person being identified as inadmissible to Canada | To be measured in 2014-15 | ||
Indicator 3: Number of enforcement actions taken that were facilitated by targeting (air mode) | -8 | 2003 | 1946 |
Intermediate Outcome 1: Canada and the United States share a common approach to effectively identify threats to either country | |||
Indicator 1: In consultation with U.S. law enforcement, (a) the number of priority sensor gaps identified and (b) the number of priority sensor gaps for which remedial measures have been developed (RCMP) | - | -9 | Technological capabilities assessed in 3 domains (land, air and maritime) in a phased approach: (a) A binational working group has been established to identify sensor gaps. The identification of the gaps and vulnerabilities in capabilities will be carried out as a next step; and, (b) remedial measures to address the gaps identified will follow. |
Indicator 2: Percentage of U.S. strategic-level operations centres connected with the Canadian Government Operations Centre (GOC)10 to facilitate information flow and sharing | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Intermediate Outcome 2: Ports of entry focus on high-risk goods and individuals by expediting low-risk cargo, passenger baggage and individuals entering either country | |||
Indicator 1: Percentage of people examined at ports of entry who are inadmissible and/or arrested | 5% | 3.2% | 3.4% |
Indicator 2: Average passage processing time (from Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) capture to Border Services Officer (BSO) decision, in land mode) in NEXUS lanes vs. conventional lanes | NEXUS: 17 seconds Conventional: 45 seconds |
NEXUS: 13 seconds Conventional: 43 seconds |
NEXUS: 18 seconds Conventional: 37 seconds |
Indicator 3: Time spent at the border by Integrated Cargo Security Strategy (ICSS) pilot trains as compared to standard trains | -11 | Pilot: 19 minutes Standard: 120 minutes |
Pilot: 22 minutes Standard: 77 minutes |
Indicator 4: Percentage of U.S. entry records successfully reconciled against a travel record previously acquired by CBSA (Match rate of records of entry and exit) | -12 | 95% | 97.98% |
Canada and the United States share a common approach to effectively identify threats to either country (Initiatives 1-4 and 7)
Initiatives 1 (Joint Threat Assessments) and 2 (Information/Intelligence Sharing): In 2012-13, Public Safety Canada collaborated with the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and relevant intelligence agencies in both countries to produce a joint inventory of existing intelligence work, thus meeting its commitments for Initiative 1 – Joint Threat Assessments. The resulting gap analysis enhanced the collaborative process used to produce joint intelligence products in both countries. This process has now been incorporated into the day-to-day bilateral cooperative efforts and will continue to inform future collaborative intelligence products. Moreover, under Initiative 2 – Information/Intelligence Sharing, Public Safety Canada and the U.S. DHS also continued to enhance the understanding of each country's legal, policy, and operational frameworks governing information sharing for national security purposes.
The Government of Canada has met its commitments under Initiatives 1 and 2. Collaboration with the U.S. in the areas of joint threat assessments and information/intelligence sharing will continue.
Initiative 3 (Domain Awareness): Canada and the U.S. are developing and implementing processes, procedures and policies to enable an effective, shared understanding of activities, threats and criminal trends or other consequences in the air, land and maritime environments. This is being achieved through intelligence analysis, effective and timely information sharing, a common understanding of the environment, and an inventory of current capabilities.
In 2013-14 a joint Canada-U.S. team composed of representatives from the U.S. DHS, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), PS, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Transport Canada (TC) and the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) convened to create the detailed inventory of U.S. and Canadian land, air and maritime domain awareness capabilities at the border.
As a next step, the U.S. and Canada will work towards completing the additional objectives under the BTB Domain Awareness initiative: 1) identify gaps and vulnerabilities in capabilities; 2) prioritize coverage of gaps; and, 3) establish a process to coordinate the joint procurement and deployment of technology along the border.
Initiative 4 (Countering Violent Extremism): In 2013-14, PS continued to collaborate with its U.S. counterparts to implement the joint Countering Violent Extremism work plan. This entailed the coordination and sharing of research, best practices and tools for law enforcement, and emphasizing community-based and community-driven efforts. During the reporting period, progress was achieved across all of the countering violent extremism commitments. Bilateral collaboration on countering violent extremism initiatives and engagement has strengthened Canada-U.S. relationships and established strong networks that will be sustained in the future. While all commitments have been met for this initiative, Canadian federal departments will continue to work with their U.S. counterparts to address this complex policy issue through other international fora, such as the Five Country Ministerial and the Global Counterterrorism Forum's Working Group on Countering Violent Extremism.
The Government of Canada has met its commitments under Initiative 4. Collaboration with the U.S will continue in the area of countering violent extremism.
Initiative 7 (Joint Food/Plant/Animal Assessments/Audits): In 2013-14, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) worked with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to complete joint assessments of animal health, plant health and food safety threats by jointly addressing offshore risks. Through close collaboration with U.S. regulatory partners, this initiative has increased the confidence in each regulatory agency's assessment processes. It will also enable the future coordination of resources and the effective sharing of results from the assessments to prevent potential risks from entering North America.
Highlights under this initiative for 2013-14 include the completion of joint assessments with the USDA pertaining to food safety in Japan and plant health in China. CFIA and USDA also signed a memorandum of understanding to formalize the information sharing protocol regarding joint animal health assessments, and identified future areas of exchange of information on food safety audits in third countries.
As next steps for this initiative, CFIA and the USDA will work to bilaterally attest that U.S. and Canadian food safety audit processes are equivalent, and publish a report on the joint assessment for plant health that establishes assessment processes and outlines information sharing mechanisms. Furthermore, CFIA and the USDA will continue to share the results of animal health evaluations of third countries to arrive at common risk management decisions.
The Government of Canada has met its commitments under Initiative 7. Collaboration with the U.S will continue in the area of food/plant/animal assessments/audits.
Ports of entry focus on high-risk goods and individuals by expediting low-risk cargo, passenger baggage and individuals entering either country (Initiatives 5, 6, 8-16 and 20, 22, 24)
Initiative 5 (Integrated Cargo Security): Through the Integrated Cargo Security Strategy (ICSS), Canada and the U.S. are developing a joint strategy to address risks associated with shipments arriving from offshore based on informed risk management. Both countries committed to launching a series of pilots to test, validate and shape the full implementation of the ICSS. Through the ICSS, Canada and the U.S. are developing a joint strategy to address risks associated with shipments arriving from offshore based on informed risk management. In 2013-14, the CBSA, along with TC and U.S. CBP, continued work on the marine cargo risk assessment and examination pilots in Prince Rupert (marine-to-rail) and Montreal (marine-to-truck), as well as the Pre-load Air Cargo Targeting (PACT) and Tamper Evident Technology pilots. Canada and the U.S. also continued work on finalizing a feasibility study on Wood Packaging Material (WPM) inspections.
Prince Rupert and Montreal Pilots: Both pilots concluded during the reporting period and entered the evaluation phase. Early indications from these evaluations suggested that, while screening for national security purposes was successfully tested at Prince Rupert, a series of operational impediments prevented either pilot from fully testing the concept of “cleared once, accepted twice” that was set out in the Beyond the Border Action Plan. Detailed evaluations of each pilot were launched in the 2013-14 fiscal year, including an assessment of successes and lessons learned, and specific impacts on the Prince Rupert pilot participant.
PACT Pilot: During the reporting period, seven volunteer air carriers and two freight forwarders sent data to the PACT team prior to the loading of cargo onto aircrafts at foreign ports, allowing the CBSA and Transport Canada to identify threats to national and/or aviation security. Based on lessons learned over the course of the PACT pilot, the CBSA and Transport Canada agreed to extend the pilot for a period of six months (April 1, 2014 to September 30, 2014).
Tamper Evident Technology Pilot: The Tamper Evident Technology pilot was launched in conjunction with the Prince Rupert and Montreal pilots and is designed to secure cargo moving in-transit to the country of destination. Under the pilot, containers examined and released by the CBSA in Prince Rupert and Montreal have been secured with High Security Bolt Seals (HSBS). In the reporting period, no HSBS was detected as broken or tampered with upon arrival at a U.S. port of entry.
Wood Packaging Material Inspections Feasibility Study: Findings from the Canada-U.S. working group, established to identify and address any policy, program or operational changes required to move inspections for WPM to the perimeter, were concluded and work began on finalizing a WPM Feasibility Study. Coordinated risk assessments by the CBSA and U.S. CBP in this area would result in pre-arrival targeting and the identification of WPM shipments of interest.
Initiative 6 (Passenger Baggage Screening): New baggage screening technology, certified by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA), is being deployed at eight Canadian airports. Deployment of the TSA-certified technology will enable the U.S. to progressively lift the requirement to re-screen baggage from Canadian airports where new baggage screening technology is located, prior to the passenger's departure on a connecting flight to another U.S. destination. The elimination of the re-screening requirement is expected to facilitate passenger travel, and result in cost savings for the TSA and U.S. airlines, who own the baggage handling systems and currently have to re-screen the connecting baggage.
As of March 31, 2014, two of eight Canadian airports had been upgraded with the new technology. Four additional airports are scheduled to receive the technology in 2014-15. TC will continue to work with the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA), airports and TSA to complete this initiative.
Initiatives 8 (Electronic Travel Authorization) and 9 (Interactive Advance Passenger Information): Throughout 2013-14, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) continued to develop and implement the Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA). This initiative allows the Government of Canada to screen visa-exempt foreign nationals (excepting U.S. citizens) at the earliest opportunity, before they seek to board a plane to Canada, in order to determine whether or not they pose an admissibility or security risk. Significant progress under this initiative was made in 2013-14. Of note, CIC published a Notice of Intent in the Canada Gazette in December 2013 requesting comments on a proposal to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations to establish the electronic travel authorization13. Key project documents, as well as the concept of operations and business requirements to support eTA system design, were also developed and approved. The implementation phase of the eTA is scheduled to begin in 2015.
In 2013-14, progress was made to establish a common Canada-U.S. approach to screening travellers through CBSA's Interactive Advance Passenger Information (IAPI) initiative, which will be implemented to provide “board/no-board” messages on all travellers flying to Canada prior to departure. Notably a Web page was published on December 6, 2013, to inform and allow all air travellers and air carriers to comment on the IAPI initiative. The IAPI team continued to meet on quarterly basis through 2013-14 with the Airline Industry Working Group (AIWG) to discuss the IAPI initiative and its impacts with commercial airlines. Consultations were also held with other government departments as well as with U.S. CBP, the United Kingdom and Australia to discuss similar programs and best practices.
In 2014-15, the IAPI initiative will proceed to the implementation phase. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner will be consulted to seek guidance on any potential privacy issues. The IAPI team will also work closely with the Entry/Exit team (see Initiative 11, below) to align the two projects toward a single implementation window to facilitate and minimize systems changes for airlines.
Initiative 10 (Immigration Information Sharing): In 2013-14, an Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States for the Sharing of Visa and Immigration Information14 came into force. A Canada-U.S. Implementing Arrangement to support biographic information sharing15 was finalized, and biographic information sharing technology was rolled out to all Canadian missions. In addition, both countries continue to ramp up biometric information sharing on asylum claimants under the Annex Regarding the Sharing of Information on Asylum and Refugee Claims to the Statement of Mutual Understanding on Information Sharing in order to strengthen identity management, bolster program integrity and to support informed decision making.
These achievements permit both countries to share relevant information to improve immigration and border determinations, establish and verify identities of travellers, and provide immigration decision-makers with enhanced information that will facilitate screenings at the earliest possible opportunity. Taken together, these achievements contribute to ensuring that threats are stopped before they arrive in Canada and improving information available for visa determinations.
Initiative 11 (Entry/Exit Information System): Phase II of the Entry/Exit initiative, which established coordinated entry and exit information systems, was implemented successfully in 2013-14. This phase included the exchange of biographic information (e.g. name, citizenship) of third country nationals, permanent residents of Canada and lawful permanent residents of the U.S. at all automated common land border ports of entry, such that entry into one country constitutes an exit from the other. During the reporting period, approximately 98% of U.S. entry records (exits from Canada) received as part of Phase II were successfully reconciled against an existing CBSA entry record. This new source of information also led to the closure of a number of outstanding immigration warrants and the cessation of several ongoing investigations for persons identified as having departed Canada.
Theme 2 – Trade Facilitation, Economic Growth and Jobs (Initiatives 12-24):
The free flow of goods and services between Canada and the United States creates immense economic benefits for both countries. As the two countries work to strengthen the security of the shared perimeter, initiatives to create more openness at the land border for legitimate travel and trade are being pursued. The Beyond the Border Action Plan enhances the benefits of programs that help trusted businesses and travellers move efficiently across the border, introduces new measures to facilitate movement and trade across the border while reducing the administrative burden for businesses, and invests in improvements to the shared border infrastructure and technology.
Outcomes16:
Image Description
This image illustrates the outcomes of Theme 2 of the Beyond the Border Action Plan. This theme is called Trade Facilitation, Economic Growth and Jobs. This figure demonstrates the linkages between the Intermediate Outcomes and the Ultimate Outcomes for Theme 2. The outcomes are also linked to specific Beyond the Border Action Plan initiatives.
The Intermediate Outcomes for Theme 2 are:
Ports of entry focus on high-risk goods and individuals by expediting low-risk cargo, passenger baggage and individuals entering the country (Initiatives 5, 6, 8-16 and 20, 22, 24).
Processes, incentives and infrastructure facilitate cross-border trade (Initiatives 12 -24).
Also, in dotted lines is an outcome stating that Canada and the United States cooperate on national security and transnational criminal investigations (Initiatives 24-26). This is an intermediate outcome which is shared between Theme 2 and Theme 3. Theme 3 is called Cross-Border Law Enforcement.
The Ultimate Outcomes for Theme 2 are:
Legitimate travel and cargo is stimulated and expedited (Initiatives 8, 10, 12-15 and 20-24).
Also, in dotted lines is an outcome stating that Criminals are prevented from leveraging the Canada-United States border to commit transnational crimes (Initiatives 24-26). This is an intermediate outcome which is shared between Theme 2 and Theme 3.
Department/Agency | 2013-14 ($ units) |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
New Funding | Internal Reallocation | Total Planned Spending | Actual Spending | |
Canada Border Services Agencyv | $39,167,365 | $1,441,606 | $40,608,970 | $18,204,223 |
Canadian Food Inspection Agency | $2,570,000 | $0 | $2,570,000 | $1,975,100 |
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commissionvi | $790,000 | $0 | $790,000 | $106,139 |
Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada | $400,000 | $3,238,127 | $3,638,127 | $3,238,373 |
Department of Fisheries & Oceansvii | $300,000 | $0 | $300,000 | $145,779 |
Environment Canada | $1,786,372 | $0 | $1,786,372 | $1,616,349 |
Health Canada | $4,140,000 | $0 | $4,140,000 | $3,598,496 |
Natural Resources Canada | $788,091 | $0 | $788,091 | $797,136 |
Public Health Agency of Canadaviii | $1,316,330 | $0 | $1,316,330 | $719,047 |
Public Safety Canada | $0 | $930,668 | $930,668 | $948,724 |
Transport Canada | $771,784 | $517,241 | $1,289,025 | $1,300,619 |
TOTAL | $52,029,942 | $6,127,642 | $58,157,584 | $32,649,985 |
2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | |
---|---|---|---|
Ultimate Outcome: Legitimate travel and cargo are stimulated and expedited | |||
Indicator 1: Percentage of border wait-time standards that are achieved | - | -17 | 94.6%18 |
Indicator 2: Number and value for duty of imports by Customs Self Assessment (CSA)/Partners in Protection (PIP) members and total for CBSA | -19 | CSA # of imports: 1,181,176 $ value for duty: $88,826,000 PIP: # of imports: 713,660 $ value for duty: $35,779,000 Total for CBSA (by all types of importers): # of imports 13,993,256 $ value for duty: $461,157,000 |
CSA # of imports: 1,210,000 $ value for duty: $89,100,000 PIP: # of imports: 730,000 $ value for duty: $42,100,000 Total for CBSA (by all types of importers): # of imports 14,000,000 $ value for duty: $479,000,000 |
Indicator 3: Number of NEXUS Lanes at Canadian Ports of Entry | 22 | 28 | 33 |
Indicator 4: Percentage of Trusted Traveller passages out of all passages | 7.05% | 7.82% | 8.42% |
Intermediate Outcome: Processes, incentives and infrastructure facilitate cross-border trade | |||
Indicator 1: Number of new applications, change in the number of members and total membership for Trusted Trader programs:
|
PIP:
|
PIP:
|
PIP:
|
Indicator 2: Number of new applications and percentage change in the number of members for:
|
CDRP:
|
CDRP:
|
CDRP:
|
Indicator 3: Percentage of Trusted Trader shipments that are examined | CSA Importer:
|
CSA Importer: 0.27% PIP Importer: 0.81% |
CSA Importer: 0.18% PIP Importer: 0.72% |
Intermediate Outcome: Ports of Entry focus on high risk goods and individuals by expediting low-risk cargo, passenger baggage and individuals entering either country | |||
Indicator 1: Average passage processing time (from RFID capture to BSO decision in land mode) in NEXUS lanes vs. conventional lanes | NEXUS: 17 seconds Conventional: 45 seconds |
NEXUS: 13 seconds Conventional: 43 seconds |
NEXUS: 18 seconds Conventional: 37 seconds |
Indicator 2: Number of new applications and percentage change in the number of members for NEXUS | NEXUS:
|
NEXUS:
|
NEXUS:
|
Indicator 3: Number of total shipments process under expedited customs clearance (i.e. Low-Value Shipments) | 34,802,654 | 34,606,543 | 37,642,481 |
Ports of entry focus on high risk goods and individuals by expediting low-risk cargo, passenger baggage and individuals entering either country (Initiatives 5, 6, 8-16 and 20, 22, 24)
Initiative 12 (Enhancing Benefits for Trusted Trader Programs): Initiative 12 aims to enhance the benefits for trusted trader programs to help trusted businesses move efficiently across the border. In order to do so, a two-tiered approach has been established. Tier I focuses on supply-chain security while Tier II places emphasis on trade compliance and expedited border and accounting processes.
Under Tier I, the Canadian Partners in Protection (PIP) and the U.S Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) programs have worked to harmonize their policies, procedures and processing practices to the greatest extent possible. This harmonization enables applicants to apply to both programs using a single application process. It also allows members to have only one site validation performed and have a single point of contact to administer their membership in both programs. By eliminating the duplication of efforts in application processing and account management, eligible members will benefit from both cost and time savings.
Under Tier II, a Joint Stakeholder Consultation Report22, which compared Canada's Customs Self Assessment (CSA) and U.S. Importer Self Assessment (ISA) programs, was published in December 2013. Furthermore, during the reporting period, Canada aligned the benefits of its CSA program with those of the U.S. ISA program. The CSA program also extended membership to allow "non-resident" importers to participate in the program.
Of note, in 2013-14, the CBSA and the CFIA carried out a pilot project with a major food importing company to test the feasibility of allowing the importation of selected low-risk processed, pre-packaged foods from the U.S. into Canada under the CSA program, while continuing to meet or exceed CFIA food safety objectives. The agencies and importing company also conducted food safety exercises that simulated how the parties would respond to a safety incident involving foods imported through the program. As a next step, both agencies will be entering Phase II of the pilot which will further explore permitting non-federally registered food products to be imported in Canada using the CSA expedited clearance option.
Initiative 13 (Increasing Harmonized Benefits to NEXUS Members): This initiative is designed to increase and retain membership of the NEXUS program to support strategic management of the border, by focusing resources at ports of entry more on unknown or higher-risk individuals and less on members of NEXUS. As part of a trusted traveller program, NEXUS members are pre-approved as low-risk travelers who enjoy the benefit of expedited travel. In 2013-14, the NEXUS program held two enrolment blitzes, which resulted in registering approximately 15,000 members. In addition, CBSA and U.S. CBP continued to move forward with a joint marketing campaign and produced a suite of NEXUS educational and promotional videos to encourage participation in the program.
Under this initiative, a pilot was also initiated in November 2013 by CATSA at Terminal 1 in Toronto's Pearson International Airport for pre-board security screening. This pilot utilized screening procedures for NEXUS members that are similar to those used under the TSA's risk-based screening program (TSA Pre✓™). Participants in this pilot were permitted to keep shoes, belts and light jackets on, and leave laptops, large electronics, compliant liquids, aerosols and gels in carry-on bags. Currently, Canadian NEXUS members are eligible to use the TSA Pre✓™ program when booking travel reservations for flights on a participating airline from a participating airport within the U.S. and to select international destinations.
At Montreal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport, a dedicated exit corridor was also introduced in June 2013 for NEXUS members. This new corridor was designed to significantly expedite traveller processing times and improve traffic flow in the international arrivals exit area.
At the North American Leaders Summit (NALS) in February 2014, it was announced that Canada, the U.S. and Mexico would establish in 2014 a North American Trusted Traveller Program, beginning with the mutual recognition of the NEXUS, Global Entry, SENTRI and Viajero Confiable programs.
Processes, incentives and infrastructure facilitate cross-border trade (Initiatives 12-24)
Initiative 14 (Enhancing Facilities to Support Trusted Trader and Traveller Programs): During 2013-14, the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) Sarnia (Bluewater Bridge) pilot's closing report was completed. This report outlined the scope and objectives of the pilot and provided a summary of how the pilot operated. The assessment determined that there would be no negative impact on existing FAST lane users by expanding FAST benefits to Partners in Protection (PIP)-only and Customs Self Assessment (CSA)-only programs. As a result, recommendations for potential FAST lane and booth expansion/modification in Fort Erie, Ontario; Pacific Highway, British Columbia; and Emerson, Manitoba are now being considered. As a next step, the CBSA will explore ways to implement recommendations.
Initiative 15 (Pre-Inspection and Preclearance): In 2013-14, PS continued to advance work on the negotiation with the U.S. of a comprehensive approach to preclearance for all modes of cross-border trade and travel. The Phase I truck cargo pre-inspection pilot project at the Pacific Highway crossing in Surrey, British Columbia, was successfully concluded in November 2013. Phase II of the pilot was officially launched in February 2014 at the Peace Bridge crossing between Fort Erie, Ontario and Buffalo, New York to further test the concept of conducting U.S. CBP primary inspection of U.S.-bound truck cargo in Canada. This phase will continue to explore the potential of this border management approach to expediting the flow of legitimate trade and travel while ensuring border security and integrity.
Initiative 16 (Facilitating the Conduct of Cross-Border Business): The U.S. and Canada committed to specific measures to facilitate the conduct of cross-border business and to propose options for regular stakeholder engagement on cross-border business travel. Consultations were held in Vancouver, British Columbia, and Blaine, Washington, in December 2013. The discussions focused on consistency of decision-making at ports of entry (POE). Moving forward, discussions will continue with stakeholders in order to identify and assess additional ways to facilitate relevant processes in the near and medium terms through administrative, policy, regulatory and operational improvements.
Initiative 17 (Single Window): In 2013-14, as part of the Single Window Initiative (SWI), a pre-arrival Electronic Data Interchange message was designed in order to convert paper permits, licenses and certificates and other import documentation with government regulations to an electronic format, called the Integrated Import Declaration (IID). The IID includes all Government of Canada data required for the importation of commercial goods, enables industry to use product identification methods available within their supply chains, and supports facilitated trade transaction processing.
As of December 2013, the CBSA began receiving and storing the IID from, and sharing relevant data with, the following participating government departments and agencies in a test environment: CFIA, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), Health Canada (HC), Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), and TC. In 2014-15, stakeholders will continue to be engaged in the design and development of SWI, with a particular focus on data collection and process modernization. The CBSA will also coordinate the testing and certification of the Importers/Brokers for the use of the IID and perform end-to-end testing with the partner government agencies.23
Initiative 18 (Harmonizing Low Value Shipment Thresholds): In 2013, the CBSA and CBP concurrently increased their low value shipment thresholds to $2,500 from the existing level of $1,600 in Canada and $2,000 in the U.S., thereby fulfilling an Action Plan commitment. Canada also increased the low value shipment threshold to $2,500 for exemption from North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Certificate of Origin requirements, thus aligning it with the U.S. threshold. At the time that the revised thresholds were announced, it had been estimated that 1.5 million shipments would transition from the regular commercial stream to the Courier Low Value Shipment Program and, in fact, statistical data has proven an even greater number, which has resulted in reduced processing time for businesses and quicker facilitation and entry of goods into the Canadian market.
In the reporting period, CBSA continued to process 98% of all low value shipments on the same day of arrival. This percentage has been in effect since the inception of the Courier Low Value Shipment Program in 1993 and is not expected to change in spite of the increased volume of shipments.
The Government of Canada has met its commitments under Initiative 18.
Initiative 19 (Accountability for Border Fees/Charges): To bring greater public transparency and accountability to the application of border fees and charges, PS and U.S. CBP posted Canadian and U.S. border fee inventories online in December 201324. The inventories set out the purpose and legal basis of these fees and charges, how they are collected, how much is collected, their intended use, and the rationale for collecting them at the border. They include fees that are applied to the entry of goods into the country, mandatory to each and every shipment, established by legal authority (a law, regulation, or statutory authority), and administered by a department or agency of either federal government.
In 2013-14, work also began on the next phase of the initiative, commissioning a third party contractor to conduct an economic impact assessment of border fees. The assessment will focus on the economic impact of border fees and charges included in the inventories on motor vehicle and motor vehicle parts manufacturing, plastic product manufacturing, as well as vegetable and melon farming industries in Canada and the U.S. It is anticipated that the economic impact assessment will be completed in 2014-15.
Initiative 20 (Expanding and Upgrading Infrastructure at Key Crossings): In spring 2013 the Government of Canada announced up to $127 million in funding to expand and modernize facilities at the ports of entry in Lacolle, Quebec; Lansdowne, Ontario; Emerson, Manitoba; and North Portal, Saskatchewan25. Improvements will increase capacity for commercial traffic, reduce wait times and strengthen border security. Upgrades and improvements to the four funded points of entry are currently in the initial stages and are scheduled to be completed in the 2016-17 and 2017-18 fiscal years. The above-mentioned POEs were identified as initial priority border crossings in the Canada-U.S. Border Infrastructure Investment Plan26.
Initiative 21 (Coordinating Investments at Small and Remote Ports of Entry): In May 2013, the CBSA announced plans to pilot remote traveller processing starting in April 2015 at two locations: Piney, Manitoba and Morses Line, Quebec. The objectives of the pilot are to test the viability and potential benefits of implementing remote traveller processing at select small and remote POEs as a way to increase efficiency, while maintaining border integrity and access to needed border services. During the reporting period, CBSA developed the necessary supporting project management framework, as well as the business requirements related to the technological solution and associated infrastructure in support of remote traveller processing. Prior to the commencement of the pilot, CBSA plans to engage stakeholders in the communities around the pilot locations to ensure travellers are aware of the services being offered and understand their obligations when reporting to the CBSA via the technology.
Initiative 22 (Deploying Border Wait-Time Technology and Establishing Wait-Time Service Levels): Canada and the U.S. committed to implement border wait-time (BWT) measurement systems at 20 high-priority border crossings. To date, these systems have been implemented at six crossings (four in British Columbia and two in Ontario). Funding has been identified for the deployment of BWT measurement technology for the remaining border crossings. CBSA and TC officials began preliminary negotiations with border provinces and other stakeholders regarding the BWT measurement.
Initiative 23 (Installing RFID Technology): To align with the U.S., Canada has committed to installing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology in two conventional passenger lanes at 11 ports of entry, for a total of 22 lanes. Employing such technology at POEs should expedite traveller processing, and contribute to reducing border wait times.
Initiative 24 (Organizing Bi-National Port Operations Committees): To date, 28 Bi-National Port Operations Committees (BPOC) have been established. Eight of these committees are present at each of the Canadian airports which provide U.S. preclearance, while the remaining 20 were established at land border POEs. BPOCs were put in place to ensure cooperation and partnering to enhance collaboration on overall port management, coordinate emergency response and preparedness, integrate enforcement efforts, and to improve the efficiency of the mitigation strategies for border wait times. These committees play an important role in improving how the Government of Canada manages travel and trade flows and expedites the processing of travellers and goods.
The Government of Canada has met its commitments under Initiative 24. Each of the 28 BPOCs will continue to meet at least four times per year while also implementing their individual action plans.
Theme 3 – Cross-Border Law Enforcement (Initiatives 25 and 26)
Canada and the United States have developed successful models for preventing criminals from crossing the border to escape justice. The Shiprider program, for example, employs cross-designated officers to patrol the maritime areas between our two countries, while bi-national law enforcement cooperation and Border Enforcement Security Task Forces support joint investigations and law enforcement action at and between ports of entry. The Action Plan moves forward with new initiatives that build on these successful law enforcement programs.
Outcomes:
Image Description
This image illustrates the outcomes of Theme 3 of the Beyond the Border Action Plan. This theme is called Cross-Border Law Enforcement. This figure demonstrates the linkages between the Intermediate Outcome and the Ultimate Outcome for Theme 3. The outcomes are also linked to specific Beyond the Border Action Plan initiatives.
The Intermediate Outcome is Canada and the United States cooperate on national security and transnational criminal investigations (Initiatives 24-26).
The Ultimate Outcome is Criminals are prevented from leveraging the Canada - United States border to commit transnational crimes (Initiatives 24-26).
Department/Agency | 2013-14 ($ units) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
New Funding | Internal Reallocation | Total Planned Spending | Actual Spending | |
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutionsix | $571,784 | $0 | $571,784 | $348,086 |
Public Safety Canada | $0 | $209,123 | $209,123 | $203,256 |
Royal Canadian Mounted Policex | $9,680,773 | $0 | $9,680,773 | $5,932,985 |
TOTAL | $10,252,557 | $209,123 | $10,461,680 | $6,484,327 |
2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | |
---|---|---|---|
Ultimate Outcome: Criminals are prevented from leveraging the Canada-U.S. Border to commit transnational crimes | |||
Indicator 1: Percentage of border covered by radio interoperability systems | -27 | 14.3%28 | 28.6%29 |
Indicator 2: Number of kilometres of the shared Canada-U.S. maritime border which are covered by Shiprider operations | - | -30 | Pacific Region: 250 km Windsor: 468 km |
Indicator 3: Number of arrests and seizures as a result of Shiprider and Next Generation operations | - | -31 | 1 Canadian Criminal Code Charge |
Indicator 4: Percent of partners who strongly agree or agree with the statement "The RCMP is a valuable partner in protecting Canada's border" | 84%32 | 79% | -33 |
Intermediate Outcome: Canada and the U.S. cooperate on national security and transnational criminal investigations | |||
Indicator 1: Number of Canadian officers who have completed training for Shiprider and Next Generation operations during the fiscal year34 | 21 | 14 | 14 |
Indicator 2: Number of officers who are cross-designated for Shiprider and Next Generation operations35 | -31 | 66 | 8336 |
Indicator 3: Number of regularized Shiprider teams deployed | -31 | 2 | 237 |
Indicator 4: Total hours of Shiprider Patrols | - | -38 | 300 |
Indicator 5: Number of Shiprider boardings of Canadian & U.S. vessels | - | -39 | 105 |
Canada and the United States cooperate on national security and transnational criminal investigations (Initiatives 24-26)
Initiative 25 (Pursuing National Security and Transnational Criminal Investigations – Shiprider/Next Generation):
Shiprider is a bi-national initiative between the RCMP and the USCG that authorizes Canadian and U.S. law enforcement officers to work together to enforce the law on both sides of the shared border in shared waters. Through this initiative, Shiprider officers have been actively enforcing laws and regulations on both sides of the maritime border and are responding to search and rescue calls. In 2013-14, more than 300 patrol hours were conducted and approximately 105 vessels were boarded (50 vessels boarded in Canada, approximately 55 in the U.S.) through Shiprider operations in British Columbia/Washington and Windsor/Detroit.
In 2013-14, 14 additional Canadian police officers completed the training for Shiprider Operations, for a total of 83 Canadian officers being cross-designated for Shiprider. The program architecture and standard operating procedures for Next Generation pilot operations were largely finalized by September 2012. However, deployment has been postponed pending bilateral resolution of key outstanding legal and operational issues. Next Generation pilot projects are meant to create integrated teams in areas such as intelligence and criminal investigations, and an intelligence-led uniformed presence between ports of entry.
Initiative 26 (Radio Interoperability):
A bi-national radio interoperability (BNRI) system between Canadian and U.S. border enforcement personnel was introduced to permit law enforcement agencies to coordinate effective bi-national investigations, to allow for timely responses to border incidents, and to improve both officer and public safety. In 2013-14, an additional interconnect dispatch location was successfully connected to increase “between the ports” communication (Windsor to Detroit). As of March 31, 2014, the RCMP and U.S. CBP have connected two of seven divisional locations40 (Washington-Vancouver and Detroit-Windsor). The Canadian BNRI team also conducted outreach with the remaining five divisional locations to refine operational requirements. In 2014-15, the BNRI will continue working with U.S. CBP to complete radio interconnections.
In addition to establishing interconnectivity with U.S. partners the RCMP will leverage radio interoperability by interconnecting Ontario and Quebec radio systems in order to start East/West interoperability connectivity within Canada.
Theme 4 – Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security (Initiatives 27-32)
Canada and the United States are connected by critical infrastructure — from bridges and roads to energy infrastructure and cyberspace. The Beyond the Border Action Plan includes measures to enhance the resilience of shared critical and cyber infrastructure and to enable the two countries to rapidly respond to and recover from disasters and emergencies on either side of the border.
Outcomes:
Image Description
This image illustrates the outcomes of Theme 4 of the Beyond the Border Action Plan. This theme is called Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security. This figure demonstrates the linkages between the Intermediate Outcomes and the Ultimate Outcome for Theme 4. The outcomes are also linked to specific Beyond the Border Action Plan initiatives.
The Intermediate Outcomes for Theme 4 are:
Canada and the United States share a common approach to protect Critical Infrastructure and Cyberspace (Initiatives 27-29).
Canada and the United States can rapidly respond to and recover from disasters and emergencies on either side of the border (Initiatives 30-32).
The Ultimate Outcome is Canada and the United States are prepared for and can respond to threats and emergencies (Initiatives 27-32).
Department/Agency | 2013-14 ($ units) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
New Funding | Internal Reallocation | Total Planned Spending | Actual Spending | |
Canada Border Services Agency | $0 | $98,734 | $98,734 | $104,472 |
Public Safety Canada | $2,913,459 | $854,940 | $3,768,399 | $3,747,359 |
Transport Canada | $0 | $93,000 | $93,000 | $57,124 |
TOTAL | $2,913,459 | $1,046,674 | $3,960,133 | $3,908,955 |
2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Ultimate Outcome: Canada and the United States are prepared for and can respond to threats and emergencies | ||||
Indicator 1: Critical Infrastructure Resilience Score41 | - | -42 | 51.91 | |
Intermediate Outcome: Canada and the United States share a common approach to protect Critical Infrastructure and Cyberspace | ||||
Indicator 1: Percentage of stakeholders that have taken risk management action following site assessment | To be measured in 2014-15 | |||
Indicator 2: Number of training sessions conducted through Initiative 27 - Enhancing Cross-Border Critical Infrastructure and Resilience | 4 | 5 | 8 | |
Indicator 3: Percentage of critical infrastructure sectors represented at the National Cross Sector Forum | 100% | 100% | 100% | |
Indicator 4: Joint (Canada/U.S.) communication products developed (cyber security) | -43 | 5 | 3 | |
Indicator 5: Number of joint or coordinated engagements with the private sector and external stakeholders, including joint briefings and presentations (cyber security) | -44 | 3 | 7 | |
Intermediate Outcome: Canada and the United States can rapidly respond to and recover from disasters and emergencies on either side of the border | ||||
Indicator 1: Development of planning guides, communications and information-sharing protocols, and delivery of a table-top exercise to validate concepts and mechanisms in the maritime context | 1 region in progress | 1 of 3 regions completed45 | 1 of 3 regions completed | |
Indicator 2: Percentage of priority land border crossings that are covered by a regional plan and validated through an exercise | 0% | 15% | 25% |
Canada and the United States share a common approach to protect Critical Infrastructure and Cyberspace (Initiatives 27-29)
Initiative 27 (Enhancing Cross-Border Critical Infrastructure and Resilience):
In 2013-14, PS continued to implement the Canada-United States Action Plan for Critical Infrastructure46 to deliver an integrated cross-border approach to critical infrastructure protection and resilience. In partnership with DHS, PS delivered the cross-border Regional Resilience Assessment Program (RRAP). The RRAP was implemented in an effort to bring together regional officials and private sector stakeholders to assess infrastructure of bi-national importance, analyze interdependencies and risks, and address identified gaps. The pilot cross-border RRAP in the Maine/New-Brunswick region was completed in December 2013 and a second cross-border RRAP was launched in the Alaska-Yukon region.
PS also began expanding the RRAP program domestically. Working with provinces, territories and critical infrastructure owners/operators, PS conducted site assessments of vital assets and systems in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island.
In addition, PS continued to implement the Virtual Risk Analysis Cell (VRAC) to undertake joint risk management activities with DHS. The VRAC is an interagency organization that was established to conduct joint risk analyses, develop collaborative cross-border analytical products and share methodologies and best practices to enhance critical infrastructure resilience. In particular, over the last year, work was conducted by VRAC to identify cross-border cyber dependencies.
Initiative 28 (Government and Digital Infrastructure):
In 2013-14, PS and DHS continued to deliver joint briefings and Industrial Control System workshops to the private sector given that many entities have assets and interests in both the U.S. and Canada. In addition, joint communications products were developed to notify public and private sector partners of potential, imminent or actual cyber threats. Examples included the Cyber Flash CF13-003 Malicious Activity against Government and Private Sector Entities, and the US-CERT TA14-017A / CCIRC Alert Al14-002: UDP-based Amplification Attacks awareness products.
In 2013-14, joint engagement with the private sector was done through critical infrastructure sector networks to reinforce shared responsibility of cyber security and to develop public-private partnerships. PS also provided, on an as-needed basis, cyber-based exercises to clients and stakeholders. The RRAP program was also expanded to include a cyber-component, which provides gap analysis capability to stakeholders. Both the exercises and expanded RRAP are important engagement mechanisms that offer valuable awareness tools for Canadian cyber-based critical systems.
The Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERT) of both nations, U.S.-CERT, Industrial Control Systems (ICS-CERT) and the Canadian Cyber Incident Response Centre (CCIRC) also started to communicate regularly to share threat information and strategies aimed at improving cyber resilience of critical infrastructure. Protocols have also been aligned to be effective when responding to reported cyber-attacks and joint products have been disseminated to stakeholders in both countries to identify best practices and increase awareness of cyber security issues.
Initiative 29 (Expanding Joint Leadership on International Cybersecurity Efforts):
PS international outreach on cyber security continues to reflect the objectives of maintaining an open, safe and trusted cyberspace that is essential to Canada's competitive advantage in the global marketplace. In 2013-14, Canada participated in several international activities to advance joint leadership on international cyber security efforts. Canada bolstered its contribution within the Organization of American States and increased outreach to the Western Hemisphere. Canada was also an active participant at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Working Group on Information Security, as well as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum Cyber Confidence Building Measures Workshop.
Canada and the United States can rapidly respond to and recover from disasters and emergencies on either side of the border (Initiatives 30-32)
Initiative 30 (Mitigating the Impacts of Disruptions on Communities and the Economy):
Canada and the United States are developing, on a regional basis, a joint cross-border approach to expedite maritime commerce recovery after a major disruption. TC leads the marine component of this initiative, while PS leads in the land border domain.
Marine: In 2013-14, TC and the USCG identified lead bi-national organizations in the Atlantic and Great Lakes regions to facilitate the development and implementation of regional maritime commerce resilience planning guides, as well as communications and information-sharing protocols. To support this initiative in the Great Lakes region, TC and USCG finalized a workplan and held an initial webinar with regional stakeholders. Next steps will include the development of a workplan for the Atlantic region and holding a series of bi-national workshops in both the Great Lakes and Atlantic Regions.
Land: During the reporting period, PS continued to work with CBSA, U.S. CBP and regional stakeholders to develop border traffic management plans and conduct exercises. In Ontario, an overarching corporate border traffic management plan was finalized in December 2013. Planning efforts are now underway to develop accompanying border crossing incident traffic management plans for the central, western, northern and eastern cross border regions. Through this initiative, a consultative exercise was conducted in Saskatchewan in October 2013 to examine emergency border traffic management processes. Building on this, a workshop was held in February 2014 to facilitate development of a plan. A draft Road Border Traffic Management Plan for the province, along with a draft North Portal Point of Entry Emergency Traffic Management Plan, was finalized in March 2014.
Initiative 31 (Enhancing Preparedness for Health Security Threats):
In 2013-14, the Health Security Working Group (HSWG) led the development of health security-related activities to enhance bi-national efforts to build capacity for cross-border engagement. In particular, a strategic work plan was established to further collaborate on issues such as: building a shared understanding of the Canada-United States health security environment, gaining a greater understanding of the information sharing processes required to facilitate the management of health emergencies, and identifying challenges in deploying public health and medical personnel and medical countermeasures. As this initiative is in its final phase, the HSWG also explored future health security collaboration opportunities.
Initiative 32 (Emergency Management - Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive (CBRNE), and Interoperability):
Through this initiative, two working groups were created to jointly improve the ability of Canada and the U.S. to prepare for and respond to bi-national disasters. The CBRNE Working Group and the Canada-United States Communications Interoperability Working Group were put in place to explore ways to bolster cross-border situational awareness and the sharing of alerts and warnings, as well as to facilitate the movement of emergency responders across the border. In July 2013, a joint Canadian and U.S. report and video on a cross-border technology demonstration, called the Canada-U.S. Enhanced Resiliency Experiment, was released47. The report and video provide an overview and lessons learned from the demonstration, which successfully tested the interoperability of the Canadian Multi-Agency Situational Awareness System48, the American Integrated Public Alert and Warning System49 and the Virtual USA Platform50. In addition, the Canadian Defense Research and Development Canada Centre for Security Science and the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency signed a memorandum of understanding which now allows each country to automatically receive alerts from the other's systems.
Managing our New Long-Term Partnership (Initiatives 33 and 34)
Department/Agency | 2013-14 ($ units) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
New Funding | Internal Reallocation | Total Planned Spending | Actual Spending | |
Privy Council Office | $1,098,139 | $0 | $1,098,139 | $994,424 |
Public Safety Canada | $0 | $593,738 | $593,738 | $642,474 |
TOTAL | $1,098,139 | $593,738 | $1,691,877 | $1,636,898 |
Governance to oversee the successful implementation and to maintain transparency and accountability
Initiative 33 (BTB Governance and Oversight):
A joint Canada-U.S. Executive Steering Committee met again in 2013-2014 to oversee and monitor progress on the implementation of the Action Plan initiatives and to identify areas of further work. The Border Implementation Team established in the Privy Council Office (PCO) continued to oversee the implementation of initiatives for Canada. To do so, regular monthly meetings at the Deputy Minister and Assistant Deputy Minister levels were held with implicated departments and agencies to monitor overall progress and special meetings took place to advance specific issues. To support transparency and accountability, the second-annual joint Beyond the Border Implementation Report to Leaders was released in December 2013 in collaboration with U.S. partners. In addition, numerous stakeholder engagements in Canada and the U.S. were used as a supplementary mechanism to communicate and consult on Action Plan initiatives.
Privacy principles to inform and guide information- and intelligence-sharing under the BTB Action Plan
Initiative 34 (Developing a Statement of Privacy Principles and Practices):
Responsible sharing of personal information between Canada and the U.S., in accordance with the domestic laws of both countries, is a cornerstone of the Action Plan. An early deliverable under the Plan was the Canada–U.S. Joint Statement of Privacy Principles51, released in June 2012. The 12 principles cover the provision, receipt, and use of personal information exchanged by Canada and the United States pursuant to any information-sharing arrangements and initiatives under the Action Plan, are consistent with domestic privacy laws in both countries, and were inspired in part by international standards and guidelines on privacy (OECD, EU-U.S.)52.
To date, the principles have been applied to a number of arrangements, including Phase I and Phase II of Entry/Exit53 and the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for the Sharing of Visa and Immigration Information54. In addition, tools were created to assist lead departments in determining whether and how to apply the Principles in cross-border information sharing arrangements under the Action Plan.
Appendix A – List of Beyond the Border Action Plan Initiatives
Initiative | Lead and Contributing Department(s) / Agency(ies) |
|
---|---|---|
1 | Joint Threat Assessments | Public Safety Canada |
2 | Information/Intelligence Sharing | Public Safety Canada
|
3 | Domain Awareness | Royal Canadian Mounted Police
|
4 | Countering Violent Extremism | Public Safety Canada |
5 | Integrated Cargo Security | Canada Border Services Agency
|
6 | Passenger Baggage Screening | Transport Canada |
7 | Joint FPA Assessments/Audits | Canadian Food Inspection Agency |
8 | Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA) | Citizenship and Immigration Canada |
9 | Interactive Advance Passenger Information (IAPI) - Board/No Board | Canada Border Services Agency |
10 | Immigration Information Sharing | Citizenship and Immigration Canada |
11 | Entry/Exit Information Systems | Canada Border Services Agency
|
12 | Enhancing Benefits for Trusted Trader Programs | Canada Border Services Agency |
13 | Increasing Harmonized Benefits to NEXUS Members | Canada Border Services Agency
|
14 | Enhancing Facilities to Support Trusted Trader and Traveller Programs | Canada Border Services Agency |
15 | Pre-Inspection and Pre-Clearance Initiatives | Public Safety Canada
|
16 | Facilitating the Conduct of Cross-Border Business | Citizenship and Immigration Canada
|
17 | Single Window | Canada Border Services Agency |
18 | Harmonizing Low Value Shipment Thresholds | Canada Border Services Agency
|
19 | Accountability for Border Fees/Charges | Public Safety Canada |
20 | Upgrading and Expanding Infrastructure at Key Crossings | Transport Canada
|
21 | Coordinating Investments at Small and Remote Ports of Entry | Canada Border Services Agency |
22 | Deploying Border Wait-Time Technology and Establishing Wait-Time Service Levels | Transport Canada
|
23 | Installing RFID Technology | Canada Border Services Agency |
24 | Organizing Bi-National Port Operations Committees | Canada Border Services Agency |
25 | Shiprider / Next Generation - Pursuing National Security and Transnational Criminal Investigations | Public Safety Canada
|
26 | Providing Radio Interoperability for Law Enforcement | Public Safety Canada Royal Canadian Mounted Police |
27 | Enhancing Cross-Border Critical Infrastructure and Resilience | Public Safety Canada |
28 | Government and Digital Infrastructure - Strengthening Cyber Security | Public Safety Canada |
29 | Expanding Joint Leadership on International Cyber Security Efforts | Public Safety Canada |
30 | Mitigating the Impacts of Disruptions on Communities and the Economy | Transport Canada (Marine) Public Safety Canada (Land) |
31 | Enhancing Preparedness for Health Security Threats | Public Safety Canada |
32 | Emergency Management CBRNE and Interoperability | Public Safety Canada |
33 | BTB Governance and Oversight - Executive Steering Committee | Privy Council Office |
34 | Developing a Statement of Privacy Principles and Practices | Public Safety Canada
|
Note: Shared Services Canada is a key partner to both lead and contributing departments/agencies in supporting Beyond the Border information technology infrastructure requirements.
Endnotes
- 1
- 2
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/dprtmntl-prfrmnc-rprt-2012-13/btb-eng.aspx
- 3
http://actionplan.gc.ca/en/page/bbg-tpf/beyond-border-action-plan
- 4
The 2013 Beyond the Border Implementation Report can be found at - http://actionplan.gc.ca/en/page/bbg-tpf/beyond-border-implementation-report-december-2013
- 5
Action Plan initiatives, other than those listed under this theme, also contribute to the outcomes enclosed within the dotted line box.
- 6
This indicator measures whether Public Safety Canada is taking action to address its priority national security items - as defined in its annual Reports on Plans and Priorities
- 7
Performance metric implemented in 2013-14
- 8
Performance metric implemented in 2012-13
- 9
Performance metric implemented in 2013-14
- 10
The GOC provides an all-hazards integrated federal emergency response to events (potential or actual hazards, natural or human-induced, either accidental or intentional) of national interest. It provides 24/7 monitoring and reporting, national-level situational awareness, warning products and integrated risk assessments, as well as national-level planning and whole-of-government response management.
- 11
Performance metric implemented in 2012-13
- 12
Performance metric implemented in 2012-13
- 13
http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2013/2013-12-07/html/notice-avis-eng.html
- 14
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/laws-policy/agreements/can-usa-agreement.asp
- 15
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/laws-policy/agreements/visa-info-sharing.asp
- 16
Action Plan initiatives, other than those listed under this theme, also contribute to the outcomes enclosed within the dotted line box.
- 17
Performance information was not available for 2011-12 and 2012-13.
- 18
The estimated wait times for reaching the primary inspection booth is 10 minutes on weekdays and 20 minutes on weekends and holidays. The performance target for border wait times requires that these times be met 95% of the time; if these times have been reached between 90% and 94.99% of the time it is deemed to be within the tolerance zone.
- 19
Performance information not available for 2011-12 due to system constraints.
- 20
Due to the nature of the carrier industry it is not uncommon for companies to restructure, merge or go out business, resulting in removal from the program. For the 2014-15 PMF, the target has been revised to reflect growth in new members, as opposed to overall growth.
- 21
Measurement of shipment examination rates was limited to CSA in 2011-12.
- 22
- 23
Canadian federal departments and agencies participating in the Single Window Initiative include: the Canada Border Services Agency, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Health Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, and Transport Canada.
- 24
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/brdr-strtgs/bynd-th-brdr/_fls/brdr-fs-eng.pdf
- 25
In 2013, up to $127M was announced for key border crossings: $47M for Lacolle QC; $60M for Lansdowne ON; $10M for Emerson MB; and, $10 for North Portal, SK
- 26
http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/mediaroom/BIIP-Eng-Final.pdf
- 27
Data not available as the implementation of interoperable infrastructure under Initiative 26 – Providing Radio Interoperability for Law Enforcement started in 2012-13.
- 28
1 of 7 - In 2012-13, the RCMP's Border Integrity Operations Centre (BIOC) and the U.S. border law enforcement facilities in Blaine, Washington were interconnected. The number of divisional locations to be interconnected was reduced from eight to seven in 2013-14 since there is no U.S. CBP sector along the Alaska/Yukon border region. Accordingly, the seven Canadian RCMP divisions to be connected to U.S. CBP partners are: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick.
- 29
2 of 7 - In 2012-13, the Windsor and Detroit dispatch locations were successfully interconnected. The number of divisional locations to be interconnected was reduced from eight to seven in 2013-14.
- 30
Performance metric implemented in 2013-14.
- 31
Regularized Shiprider operations did not begin until 2013-14 and the Next Generation initiative is currently in abeyance. Accordingly, there were no arrests or seizures in 2012-13 under these initiatives.
- 32
The survey was conducted every 2 years; figure for 2010-11 presented.
- 33
Data no longer collected as the RCMP Survey of Policing Partners is no longer being conducted.
- 34
The Next Generation initiative is currently in abeyance.
- 35
The Next Generation initiative is currently in abeyance.
- 36
Number of officers who are cross-designated comprises both the ones trained and those that were designated. In accordance with the bi-national standard operating procedures, trained and designated Shiprider members (both RCMP and USCG) are required to be recertified every two years. The variance between the total number of Canadian officers who were cross-designated in 2013-14 (83), and the sum of those trained in 2013-14 (14) added to the number of cross-designated in 2012-13 (66) is due to the fact that some trained members were never designated and some have not been re-certified.
- 37
Target of deploying at least two Shiprider teams by summer 2012, as identified in the BTB Action Plan was reached. Two additional teams are expected to be deployed in 2015-16.
- 38
Regularized Shiprider operations did not begin until 2013-14.
- 39
Regularized Shiprider operations did not begin until 2013-14.
- 40
The seven Canadian RCMP divisions that were selected to be connected to U.S. CBP partners are: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. The number of divisional locations to be interconnected was reduced from eight to seven in 2013-14 since there is no U.S. CBP sector along the Alaska/Yukon border region.
- 41
The Critical Infrastructure Resilience Score measures the ability of critical infrastructure sectors to withstand disruptions and recover quickly in the event of a disaster. The overall score represents a weighted average across critical infrastructure sectors and allows for monitoring progress towards improving critical infrastructure resilience over time.
- 42
Performance metric implemented in 2013-14
- 43
Performance metric implemented in 2012-13
- 44
Performance metric implemented in 2013-14
- 45
Canadian-U.S. Pacific Region was completed in 2012-13. Joint Canada-U.S. committees have been identified and established for the development of similar guides and protocols to support the recovery of maritime trade following an emergency in the Atlantic and Great Lakes regions.
- 46
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/cnd-ntdstts-ctnpln/cnd-ntdstts-ctnpln-eng.pdf
- 47
http://www.science.gc.ca/mwg-internal/de5fs23hu73ds/progress?id=9wYvQNTc9K
- 48
The Canadian Multi-Agency Situational Awareness System project makes it possible to share location-based situational awareness information and alerts between authorities using open standards and an open architecture.
- 49
The American IPAWS provides public safety officials with an effective way to alert and warn the public about serious emergencies using the Emergency Alert System (EAS), Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Weather Radio, and other public alerting systems from a single interface.
- 50
VirtualUSA is a more user-driven interface which is a separate service from IPAWS.
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- i
CBSA variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 1 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 5 – Integrated Cargo Security and Initiative (ICSS)
Certain initiatives within the ICSS, such as the Marine Container Examination Facility (MCEF), have experienced delays in their implementation at the Port of Vancouver. Moreover, the lack of an automated system and information sharing constraints have contributed to delays encountered throughout the course of the Pre-Load Air Cargo Targeting (PACT) initiative. It is anticipated that the PACT pilot will be extended through March 2015; a proposal to develop an automated solution is underway.Initiative 9 – Interactive Advanced Passenger Information
The variance between IAPI's planned spending and actual spending is due to contracting and human resources delays which added pressures on the project. However, initial commitments were met for the 2013-14 fiscal year and the project is still advancing toward its objective.Initiative 11 – Entry/Exit Information Systems
$10M in expenditures and related activities under entry technology (handheld devices and network connectivity) were delayed pending approval of a wireless fidelity policy, expected to be complete by the end of the 2014-15 fiscal year. Moreover, Treasury Board expenditure authority to implement the $18M in Exit Phase III & Phase IV components of the project is outstanding; authority will be sought via a Treasury Board Submission which is expected to be brought forward in 2014. - ii
CFIA variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 1 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 5 – Integrated Cargo Security and Initiative 7 – Joint FPA Assessments/Audits
Given budget pressures, CFIA was unable to confirm planned internal funding expenditures for 2013-14. Accordingly, $0 in planned spending for 2013-14 is presented in the Financial Table for Theme 1. - iii
CIC variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 1 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 8 - Electronic Travel Authorization
A $1.5M variance under this initiative is primarily due to delayed staffing, changes to communications products, and unused contingency funding
Initiative 10 - Immigration Information Sharing
CIC did not have to access $2.2M of contingency funds set aside for unforeseen expenditures.
There were lower than expected IM/IT costs of $2.65M mainly explained by the fact that the requirements gathering for the Canadian Immigration Biometric Identification System (CIBIDS) modifications were delayed, resulting in a delay in expenditures. Sufficient funds were identified the following fiscal year without requiring a reprofile, therefore funds were lapsed.
$1.1M remained unspent in 2013-14 due to delays in staffing. These funds will be disbursed in 2014-15 as appropriate candidates for deployment are identified and necessary positions are created.
There were lower accommodation costs of $1.28M due to heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) costs being lower than anticipated for CIC's Centralized Processing Regions 24/7 requirements.
- iv
RCMP variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 1 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 10 – Immigration Information Sharing
The difference between the planned and actual spending figures is being carried forward and is expected to be fully spent by the end of the Initiative. - v
CBSA variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 2 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 12 – Enhancing Benefits for Trusted Trader Programs;
Initiative 13 – Increasing Harmonized Benefits to Nexus Member; and,
Initiative 14 – Enhancing Facilities to Support Trusted Trader and Traveller Programs.
The variance for these initiatives is primarily due to delays in implementing nine additional Nexus lanes and the corresponding IT equipment, as well as funds not being spent on FAST expansion (membership and infrastructure) and PIP/C-TPAT harmonization and revalidations.Initiative 17 – Single Window
The variance for the Single Window Initiative (SWI) is due to the resultant workaround to accommodate delivery of the Integrated Import Declaration (IID, the Single Window delivery solution). The commercial transformation for both the CBSA and industry that is currently being introduced by major projects is a significant, multifaceted release for the CBSA. As a result, the schedule for implementation has been reconfigured to allow for the most prudent and effective delivery of major projects which had resultant impacts on SWI.Initiative 21 – Coordinating Investments at Small and Remote Ports of Entry
Delays in the procurement process prevented the planned procurement and purchase of video cameras, monitoring consoles, and the conducting of site surveys at Piney (MB) and Morses Line (QC). Accordingly, delays in procurement and associated delays in staffing resulted in a variance of $1.2M.Initiative 22 – Deploying Border Wait-Time Technology and Establishing Wait-Time Service Levels
The CBSA has fully implemented border wait-time technology for six sites. The variance between planned and actual spending for this initiative is due to delays in implementing the technology at the 14 remaining sites.Initiative 23 – Installing RFID Technology
The variance between planned and actual spending is due to the funding and project authority being received later than expected. Based on this, contracting for the RFID technology was impacted. A reprofile request for this initiative has been requested to reallocate funds to later fiscal years.Ongoing program development work, including negotiation with the United States and the provinces, has also been delayed in order to align with other government of Canada RFID document initiatives, such as the Citizenship and Immigration (CIC)-led Enhanced Documentary Entry Requirements (EDER) initiative that will prescribe documents that demonstrate right of entry to Canada.
- vi
CNSC variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 2 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 17 – Single Window
The variance between the planned and actual spending figures is due to delays in the hiring of staff. Due to these delays, only the incubation phase of the Single Window initiative was completed in 2013-14. - vii
DFO variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 2 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 17 – Single Window
The variance between the planned and actual spending figures is due to operational constraints. Hiring of staff was delayed, thus impacting the program's ability to proceed with planned consultations in 2013-14. - viii
PHAC variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 2 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 17 – Single Window
The variance is due to selection processes taking longer than initially anticipated, thus resulting in unused salary dollars. Additionally, savings were realized in the area of core solution development through cost sharing between HC and PHAC. The collaboration between the two departments was not anticipated at the time that new funding was requested. - ix
ODPP variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 3 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 25 – Shiprider/Next Generation
The variance between the planned and actual spending under Initiative 25 is due to Shiprider operations being regularized later in the fiscal year (i.e. June 2013). - x
RCMP variance between Total Planned Spending and Actual Spending in Theme 3 is primarily due to the following:
Initiative 25 – Shiprider/Next Generation
The variance between the planned and actual spending under Initiative 25 is due to being unable to fully ramp up resources as quickly as initially estimated and cost savings due to relocation.
- Date modified: