Canada Border Services Agency
Symbol of the Government of Canada

ARCHIVED - Clearance of Commercial Passenger Vessels Evaluation Study

Warning This page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Final Report

Program Evaluation Division
Internal Audit and Program Evaluation Directorate
May 2011

This document is also available in PDF (442 KB) [help with PDF files]


Table of Contents

Executive Summary

The Canada Border Services Agency's (CBSA) mandate is twofold: facilitate the movement of legitimate travellers and goods, and intercept those travellers and goods that pose a threat to Canada. The CBSA fulfills this mandate by providing integrated border services in the air, land and marine mode of transportation. The CBSA clears marine vessels, their crews, passengers and supernumeraries in accordance with the provisions set out in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and the Customs Act.

Approximately 1,000 cruise ship calls are made in Canada every year[1], and just over one million cruise ship passengers entered Canada at Cruise Ship Operations (CSO) sites in fiscal year (FY) 2009–2010.[2] Between 2003 and 2008, there was a 24% increase in cruise passenger arrivals in Canada.[3] This represents an increase of more than 378,000 passengers over five years. The Pacific Region, led by Victoria, B.C., accounts for 71% of cruise passenger traffic, while the Atlantic Region, led by Saint John, N.B., accounts for 21% of cruise ship passengers.

Border services officers (BSOs) board cruise ships upon arrival to ensure that all documentation has been completed and submitted. BSOs conduct examinations to verify the vessel's required safety and inspection certificates at the time of its initial arrival, monitor the gangway(s) while the ship is in port, collect completed E311 declaration cards, ensure that all persons and goods meet the requirements for entry, conduct secondary examinations as required, and collect applicable duties and taxes. These services are provided at designated sites. The CBSA currently services 24 CSO sites for the authorized disembarkation of passengers and crew of all types of cruise ships. Services outside normal operating hours at a designated site or services at a non-designated site are provided under pre-approved cost-recovery agreements.

In addition, there are 12 authorized ports of entry (POEs) for the disembarkation of passengers and/or vehicles arriving by ferry and tour boat. In FY 2009–2010, 757,244 and 26,145 passengers entered Canada by ferry and tour boat, respectively.

Reported expenditures for activities related to the clearance of commercial passenger vessels were just over $7.6M[4] for FY 2009–2010.

Evaluation Purpose and Scope

This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the CBSA's clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities. The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the relevance (i.e. ongoing need for the activities and their alignment with the priorities of the Government of Canada and the CBSA) and program performance (i.e. effectiveness and efficiency) in achieving expected results.

The evaluation of the Clearance of Commercial Passenger Vessels was identified as a priority for FY 2009–2010 in the 2009–2011 CBSA Risk-Based Multi-Year Evaluation Plan, approved by the Executive Evaluation Committee in July 2009. The evaluation research was carried out between February and September 2010.

Evaluation Methodology

The CBSA Program Evaluation Division in the Internal Audit and Program Evaluation Directorate conducted this evaluation. Main lines of evidence included a review of documents; analysis of program data; observations made during site visits and in-depth interviews with key CBSA management at National Headquarters (NHQ) and in the regions, other government departments and with private sector stakeholders, including ferry and cruise ship authorities. Focus groups with BSOs were also conducted in the regions visited.

Return to Top of Page

Summary of Findings and Recommendations

There is a current and ongoing need for a CBSA presence at marine POEs to clear commercial passenger vessels. The CBSA's activities are aimed at facilitating the entry of legitimate travellers and goods and at preventing inadmissible people and goods from entering Canada. The Agency's authority is derived from the CBSA Act, the Customs Act and the IRPA as they pertain to the international movement of travellers and goods, including passengers and crew arriving in Canada by cruise ships, ferries and tour boats. The activities support and are aligned with the Government of Canada's economic stimuli and national security priorities. For example, the Government has invested significantly over the last two years in the construction of cruise ship terminals and infrastructure to boost the economy and create jobs. In addition, the CBSA receives a total of $11.5M annually through marine security investments; however, the percentage dedicated to the clearance of commercial passenger vessels is not known.

Cruise ships of more than 250 passengers and crew are not fully cleared at their first point of arrival.[5] BSOs may clear individuals from an immigration perspective by interviewing some passengers and crew based on pre-arrival information upon arrival. Customs clearance, on the other hand, takes place when passengers (and some crew) disembark. This process creates ambiguities as to the extent of the CBSA's authority when the cruise ship proceeds inland to other ports – especially when pre-arrival targeting conducted prior to the next port of call finds inadmissible individuals who have already been admitted to Canada.

Aligning the clearance of large cruise ships with other modes (i.e. air, highway and cruise ships with less than 250 passengers and crew) would decrease the need to monitor gangways; conduct compliance checks of ship stores, bars, casinos, waste and provisions and examinations several times on one voyage; and rationalize targeting activities. Once fully cleared at a CSO site, the cruise ship could stop at other ports within Canada without requiring further processing by the CBSA.[6] This would also reduce the number of cost-recovery agreements.

The CBSA does not have a commercial passenger vessels targeting program and has no legislative authority to require cruise, ferry and tour operators to provide the CBSA with Advance Personal Information/Passenger Name Record (API/PNR). Some advance information is provided voluntarily by cruise ship operators; however, because it is not a legislative requirement, the information is not always received. When it is received, it is not always timely, complete or in a useable format. Furthermore, with each region doing their own targeting of passengers and crew, there is duplication of effort as targeting results are not communicated to staff at subsequent ports. In addition, only a portion of cruise ship passengers and crew are screened prior to arrival at any one port. As of April 1, 2010, a new functional authority for targeting was created to consolidate targeting activities within the CBSA. The CBSA is currently pursuing the expansion of API/PNR in the marine and rail modes of transportation.

Facilities vary from port to port in terms of physical structure, tools and systems, and these differences impede the CBSA's ability to interdict inadmissible people and goods. While the air mode uses the Facilities Operating Requirements and Planning Guide as a baseline for facilities, there is currently no framework stipulating the minimum standards required for a marine port servicing cruise ships.[7] Ferries and tour boats are covered under the Land Border Facilities Design Guide, which is currently being revamped. Where some commercial passenger vessel facilities are equipped with clearance halls and secondary examination areas, others are located in garages, warehouses or in public areas.

In light of these findings, the evaluation recommends that:

Recommendation 1:

The Programs Branch develop options and an implementation plan for streamlining the processes for the clearance of large commercial passenger vessels (including passengers and crew) to enhance efficiency and effectiveness; strengthening pre-arrival targeting efforts to avoid duplication; assessing feasibility of targeting 100% of passengers and crew; and aligning physical facility, tool and systems requirements with the preferred option.

The CBSA collects considerable data and information on activities in the marine mode. However, the data required to make a determination on the extent to which the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities are achieving expected results are either not broken down or categorized by vessel, activity, region or in some cases not available.

It was noted that although there are national Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and manuals for the processing of passengers and crew in the marine mode, these are not always adhered to in the regions. For example, the People Processing Manual clearly states that the gangway is to be monitored the entire time a ship is in port. Some ports have implemented a roving approach, which results in the gangway not being monitored for periods of time. While cruise ships are provided with the same services from port to port, the level to which these services are provided varies.

Regional fora are in place for the CBSA and private stakeholders to discuss issues regarding the cruise industry. National committees, on the other hand, have been inactive for the last one to two years. Within the CBSA, regional management and BSOs stated that there is little communication between National Headquarters (NHQ) and the regions regarding activities and the sharing of best practices.

In light of these findings, the evaluation recommends that:

Recommendation 2:

The Programs Branch enhance the delivery of the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities by:

  1. Improving the collection of performance and financial information needed to manage and monitor the activities;
  2. Monitoring regional compliance with national SOPs and D-Memoranda; and
  3. Improving the communication between NHQ and regions by re-establishing a national forum.

The CBSA receives many requests for new and enhanced services[8] from various corporate stakeholders.[9] Specifically, there is much pressure from the cruise ship industry to add designated sites in the Arctic and Newfoundland and Labrador. In addition, traffic statistics show that there is an increasing demand for CBSA services at non-designated sites and that a number of non-designated sites received considerable cruise traffic in 2009–2010.[10] While there is increasing demand for CBSA services and designation of sites, the evaluation found that in 2009–2010, ten CSO sites received no cruise ships.

In light of these findings, the evaluation recommends that:

Recommendation 3:

The Programs Branch review existing CSO sites with the intent to align locations with current and anticipated future demands.

Return to Top of Page

1. Introduction and Context

The Canada Border Services Agency's (CBSA) mandate is twofold: facilitate the movement of legitimate travellers and goods, and intercept those travellers and goods that pose a threat to Canada. The Agency administers and enforces the Customs Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and other government departments' requirements as they pertain to the international movement of travellers and goods, including passengers and crew arriving in Canada by cruise ships, ferries and tour boats. Approximately 1,000 cruise ship calls are made in Canada every year[11], and just over one million cruise ship passengers entered Canada at Cruise Ship Operations (CSO) sites in fiscal year (FY) 2009–2010.

In its early days, the cruise industry involved transatlantic voyages on ocean liners. Over the last several decades, it has evolved into full-service, tourism-oriented cruises. These floating resort-style hotels offer a realm of activities both onboard and onshore, ranging from daily excursions in a different country every day to swimming pools, spas, mini-golf, theme parks and even rock climbing. In fact, cruise ships have become the largest passenger conveyance in the world, with some ships carrying more than 6,200 passengers and 2,300 crew on a single voyage.

The three highest-volume ports of entry (POEs) for cruise ships are Vancouver and Victoria in British Columbia, and Saint John in New Brunswick (Exhibit 1). A 2007 study[12] conducted by Business Research & Economic Advisors (BREA) on behalf of Canadian cruise ship associations showed that there was a 24% increase (378,000 passengers) in cruise passenger arrivals in Canada between 2003 and 2007.

Exhibit 1: Number of Cruise Ship Passengers and Crew Processed in Canada by Cruise Ship Operation (CSO) Site, FY 2009–2010
Cruise Ship Opearations Total passengers and crew
Halifax (NS) 77,346 (6%)
Saint John (NB) 157,178 (12%)
Montreal (QC) 32,814 (2%)
Quebec (QC) 79,862 (6%)
Prince Rupert (BC) 54,728 (4%)
Victoria (BC) 466,786 (36%)
Vancouver (BC) 412,788 (31%)
Other  
Charlottetown (PE) 7,836 (1%)
Corner Brook (NL) 9,915 (1%)
St. John's (NL) 5,827 (0%)
Toronto (ON) 70 (0%)
Thunder Bay (ON) 818 (0%)
Sydney (NS) 10,503 (1%)
Total 1,316,471

Source: CBSA G11, Cruise Ships roll-up, FY 2009–2010

In FY 2009–2010, 757,244 passengers arrived in Canada by ferry, down from 836,952 passengers in 2008–2009 (Exhibit 2). Forty-three percent of international ferry passengers arrive in Victoria, B.C. The Blackball ferry terminal in Victoria receives the greatest number of passengers. Yarmouth, N.S., received five percent of ferry passengers in 2009–2010 (39,977); however, this ferry service was closed before the 2010–2011 season started, with no indication that the ferry service will resume.

Exhibit 2: Number of Passenger and Crew Processed in Canada by “FERRY” Operation Site, FY 2009–2010
“FERRY” Operation Site New Numbers
Deer Island (NB) 8,344 (1%)
Fortune (NL) 6,862 (1%)
Yarmouth (NS) 39,977 (5%)
Point Alexandria (ON) 23,814 (3%)
Pelee Island (ON) 4,253 (1%)
Sombra (ON) 169,378 (22%)
Walpole Island (ON) 102,774 (14%)
Prince Rupert (BC) 14,001 (2%)
Victoria (BC) 324,363 (43%)
Dawson City (YT) 3,552 (0%)
Sidney (BC) 59,926 (8%)
Total 757,244

Source: CBSA G11, Ferry roll-up, FY 2009–2010

Only two POEs are available for the clearance of tour boats. In 2009–2010, the CBSA processed 8,148 passengers and crew in Rockport, Ont. and 17,997 passengers and crew in Gananoque, Ont. The tour boat traffic to these sites decreased by 25% and 7% respectively, compared to the previous fiscal year.

Return to Top of Page

Overview of the CBSA Clearance of Commercial Passenger Vessels Activities

The clearance of commercial passenger vessels takes place at designated sites.[13] CSO sites are the authorized disembarkation sites for cruise ship passengers and crew, while “FERRY” sites are the authorized disembarkation sites for passengers and/or vehicles arriving aboard ferries. The CBSA currently services 24 CSO sites and 12 “FERRY” sites.

Border services officers (BSOs) board cruise ships upon arrival to ensure that all documentation has been completed and submitted.[14] They verify the required safety and inspection certificates, monitor the gangway(s) while the ship is in port, collect completed E311 traveller declaration cards[15], ensure that all persons and goods meet the requirements for entry into Canada, conduct secondary examinations as required and collect applicable duties and taxes. In addition, BSOs are required to conduct various inspections to fulfill other government departments (OGD) requirements. For example, BSOs inspect waste storage and removal and verify compliance with the Health of Animals Regulations and the Plant Protection Act and Regulations. Depending on the results of examinations, BSOs may issue an Administrative Monetary Penalty (AMP) or take an enforcement action.

As large cruise ships are not fully cleared at the first POE, they are subject to reporting requirements and examination at all subsequent ports of call in Canada. Standard practice is to fully clear small cruise ships of 250 passengers and crew or less[16] at the first POE.[17] If they are not, then they are subject to the same reporting and examination requirements at subsequent ports of call.

Cruise ships representatives[18] must submit a Pre-Arrival Notice[19] to the CBSA a minimum of 96 hours before the cruise ship's arrival at the first POE. The information is sent either by e-mail or by fax to the CBSA office responsible for the clearance of the cruise ship. The cruise ship representative may submit passenger information seven days in advance.[20] They must also submit a conveyance report as well as cargo reports in accordance with Advance Commercial Information regulations for any commercial cargo imported.

Services outside normal operating hours at a designated site or services at a non-designated[21] site are provided under cost-recovery agreements. The authority to enter into cost-recovery agreements is derived from section 13(2) and section 167(1) of the Customs Act, which provide the CBSA with the ability to charge for such special services.

Passengers and goods disembarking from ferries and tour boats are subject to regular reporting requirements.[22] Ferries and tour boats must file one inward and one outward report (A6 General Declaration) with the CBSA at the close of each day of operation. Each report must specify the number of trips made during the day and the total number of passengers carried.

Governance, Roles and Responsibilities

At the CBSA National Headquarters (NHQ), three areas are responsible for commercial passenger vessel activities:

  • The Traveller Border Programs Division within the Border Programs Directorate of the Programs Branch develops policies and procedures, and provides functional direction to the regions in support of the movement of people and goods on cruise ships, ferries and tour boats.
  • The Designation Services Unit within the Border Programs Directorate of the Programs Branch provides guidance on requests for new or enhanced border services, and reviews and negotiates applications for cost-recovery services.
  • The Border Operations Directorate within the Operations Branch provides operational support and guidance to the regions. It is also the NHQ link with the regions. Regional staff, under the direction of Regional Director General, is responsible for the delivery of program activities. BSOs are responsible for the clearance of cruise ships, ferries and tour boats and their passengers and crew.

Evaluation Purpose and Scope

The evaluation of the Clearance of Commercial Passenger Vessels activities was identified as a priority for completion in fiscal year 2010–2011 in the 2009–2011 CBSA Risk-Based Multi-Year Evaluation Plan, approved by the Executive Evaluation Committee in July 2009. The purpose of the evaluation was to examine the relevance and performance of the CBSA's commercial passenger vessel clearance activities. The CBSA's Program Evaluation Division carried out the evaluation research between February and September 2010.

The evaluation focused only on those activities delivered by the CBSA. The scope of the evaluation is summarized in Exhibit 3.

Exhibit 3: Scope of the Evaluation
Included in the Evaluation Excluded from the Evaluation
Processing of crew and passengers of cruise ships and ferries and tour boats (CSO, FERRY) Processing of crew and passengers of commercial cargo vessels (C/VESS[23])
Clearance of cruise ships, ferries and tour boats and related cargo Processing of Recreational Boats (pleasure crafts) (TRS/M[24], DRS/M[25])
Monitoring of gangways  
Transmission and quality of pre-arrival information  
Pre-arrival targeting activities  
Designation and cost-recovery services  

In consultation with key CBSA stakeholders, the evaluation team developed a logic model for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities. The following immediate and intermediate outcomes were identified:

  • Service delivery in accordance with prescribed standards and agreements (Immediate Outcome)
  • Identification and interdiction of inadmissible people and goods (Immediate Outcome)
  • Compliance of travellers, goods and conveyances/vessels with CBSA and OGD requirements (Immediate Outcome)
  • Enhanced border services and client satisfaction through the availability of extended service agreements, i.e. cost recovery (Intermediate Outcome)

The evaluation questions are provided in Exhibit 4.

Exhibit 4: Evaluation Questions
Evaluation Issue Evaluation Questions
  To what extent do the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities address a continued need and is aligned with federal and CBSA priorities, roles and responsibilities?
Relevance Is the rationale for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities valid and do they address an ongoing need?
Are the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities aligned with Federal Roles and Responsibilities and with CBSA priorities?
  Are the activities achieving the expected results?
Performance
-
Achievement of Expected Outcomes
How effective are the management and delivery of the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities?
To what extent have the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities contributed to the identification and interdiction of inadmissible people and goods?
To what extent do the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities ensure compliance for travellers, goods and conveyances/vessels with CBSA and OGD requirements?
To what extent do CBSA activities enhance border services and client satisfaction through the availability of extended service arrangements (cost recovery)?
  Demonstration of efficiency and economy
Efficiency and Economy Are the commercial passenger vessels clearance activities cost-effective? Cost-efficient?
Are there more efficient and effective models to achieve the expected results?
Return to Top of Page

Evaluation Methodology

Review and Analysis of Documents and Data

CBSA documentation reviewed include reports such as the Land Border Systems Review, the Border Management Action Plan, the Air Core Services Review, the draft Marine Core Services Review, and relevant internal correspondence regarding the implementation and management of CBSA people processing activities and clearance of commercial passenger vessels. Relevant Acts and Regulations, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and CBSA Enforcement manuals, D-Memoranda, CBSA training curriculums, communication and CBSA Internet materials were also reviewed. In addition, program data from CBSA databases[26 ] were analyzed, as were financial data provided by the Comptrollership Branch.

Literature Review

The evaluation team reviewed design, delivery and performance documents of similar activities in other countries such as the United States and European Union countries for comparison purposes. Reports and statistics on the potential economic impacts of the cruise ship, ferry and tour boat industry in Canada were also reviewed.

In-depth Interviews with Key Stakeholders

One-on-one and group interviews were conducted (Exhibit 5) with 73 individuals.[27] The interviews with key stakeholders covered the design and management of different aspects of people processing and commercial passenger vessel clearance in the marine mode, and their views and explanations of data and results obtained from other research methodologies. Telephone interviews were conducted with CBSA management in regions and districts not visited to understand opportunities and challenges in low volume areas. These numbers are also included in Exhibit 5.

Exhibit 5: Interviews Conducted for the Evaluation
Interview Category Number of one-on-one Interviewees Number of Group Interviewees
Total 35 38
CBSA HQ management and staff[28] 16 12
CBSA Regional management and staff[29] 14 17
OGDs and private sector stakeholders[30] 5 9
Site Visits

CBSA offices located in the Pacific (Vancouver, Victoria), Atlantic (Halifax, Saint John), Northern Ontario (Rockport, Gananoque) and Quebec regions (Montréal, Québec City) were visited. The site visits selected had the largest volume of passengers and crew, and received a variety of vessel types. The sites were identified through consultation with CBSA program management both at NHQ and in the regions. The site visits enhanced the evaluation team's understanding of how the clearance of commercial passenger vessels is delivered and managed, how it contributes to the achievement of CBSA and program outcomes, and related strengths and limitations of current approaches.

Focus Groups

The evaluation team conducted five focus groups, one each in Halifax, N.S., Montréal, Que., Québec City, Que., Victoria, B.C., and Vancouver, B.C. Each focus group was made up of three to seven BSOs whose primary work activities were the processing and clearance of commercial passenger vessels. The input from these groups contributed to the evaluation team's understanding of the operational context in which BSOs carry out their activities.

Evaluation Research Limitations

As a result of a major organizational restructuring of CBSA's NHQ, effective April 1, 2010, new roles and responsibilities, as well as budgets associated with the activities, were not always clear. Consequently, the evaluation had limited information to determine the efficiency or effectiveness of the new management structure.

The CBSA received funding to enhance its capacity for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels. From 2003–2004 to 2007–2008, it received $14.9M and $3.4M of ongoing funding through the Smart Border Declaration submission (Cruise Ship Inspections Initiative), and $14.4M for the same period and $2.7M of ongoing funding through the Public Safety and Anti-Terrorism submission (Passenger and Crew Screening Initiative). From 2005–2006 to 2009–2010, it received $20.4M and $4.5M of ongoing funding though Securing Canada's Maritime Transportation System submission (Screening Marine Crews and Passengers initiatives within the Great Lakes System). However, linking activities in the clearance of commercial passenger vessels with specific funding was not always possible, because the activities involved in clearing commercial passenger vessels do not represent a discrete program. As such, they are not treated as a single budgetary unit. To determine the overall cost to the Agency to deliver these services, and consequently whether they are cost-effective, was not possible.

While the CBSA collects considerable data and information on activities in the marine mode, the data contained within existing information management systems are not broken down or categorized by type of vessel, activity, region, etc. It was, therefore, impossible to determine how many or what percentage of passengers and crew are screened, how many were examined and their resultant, the number of vessel rummages or any enforcement and compliance actions. The inability to make such determinations constrained the ability of the evaluation to determine the extent to which expected outcomes had been achieved.

Return to Top of Page

2. Key Findings - Relevance

Is the rationale for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities valid and do they address an ongoing need?

There is a current and ongoing need for a CBSA presence at marine POEs to process incoming commercial passenger vessels, passengers and crew.

In Canada, it is expected that overall cruise tourism will continue to increase. The 2007 Economic Contribution of the International Cruise Industry in Canada report estimated that in 2007, cruise calls in Canada generated $1.1 billion in direct spending by cruise lines and passengers and crew, and created 9,791 annual full- and part-time jobs paying $344M in wages and salaries.[31] Direct spending between 2003 and 2007 increased by 16% from the $965M reported in 2003. For FY 2009–2010, Saint John, N.B., reported their biggest year in terms of number of passengers to date and Victoria, B.C., saw a large increase. Ship agents interviewed for this evaluation shared that they expect more ships with a greater passenger and crew capacity in the 2011 and 2012 seasons.

The U.S. Passenger Vessel Act impacts the number of cruise ships arriving in Canada. As long as it is in effect and there is a demand for Alaskan and New England cruises, Canada will receive high volumes of international cruise traffic. The 1886 Passenger Vessel Act states that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, under penalty of $200 for each passenger so transported or landed.” [32] As such, a foreign-flagged cruise ship departing Seattle for Alaska must stop at a port in Canada.[33] Of the 546 registered cruise ships in the world, only 30 (5.5%) are registered in the United States.[34] As a result of both the increasing number of cruise ships and the Passenger Vessel Act, the demand for CBSA services at marine POEs will continue.

Are the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities aligned with federal roles and responsibilities and with CBSA priorities?

Government-wide economic stimuli priorities include cruise ship terminal infrastructure development and enhancements. The CBSA's clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities are required to support the federal government initiatives.

In the 2008 and 2010 Speeches from the Throne, the Government of Canada identified both economic security and national security as government priorities, recognizing the need to invest in infrastructure that contributes to increased trade, efficient movement of goods and people, and economic growth.

The federal government has invested in infrastructure projects to support the cruise ship industry. For example, the Canada's Economic Action Plan objectives are to create jobs and boost the economy, and to help communities improve their infrastructure. The federal government's investments in the shore power facility at the Canada Place cruise ship terminal in Vancouver, B.C. ($9M), the construction of the Nanaimo, B.C. ($22M), and Campbell River, B.C. ($16M) cruise ship terminals, and a $60M-investment over five years to develop cruise ship ports of call in Quebec will not only contribute to the strengthening of the tourism industry and the Canadian economy, but will also increase the demand for CBSA services.

Activities related to the clearance of commercial passenger vessels and their passengers and crew are aligned with the CBSA's strategic priorities and outcomes.

The CBSA's authority for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels is derived from the Customs Act and the IRPA. The activities support CBSA's strategic outcomes of “integrated border services that support national security and public safety priorities and facilitates the free flow of persons and goods”,[35] by ensuring that travellers, goods, and conveyances/vessels are compliant with CBSA and OGD requirements and through identification and interdiction of inadmissible people and goods. Furthermore, by screening the passenger and crew information submitted to the CBSA by the shipping agents, officers identify high-risk people as early as possible before their arrival at a POE. Identifying such individuals prior to their arrival at a Canadian POE contributes to the CBSA's strategy of an expanded security zone by pushing the border out beyond the actual Canadian border.

The CBSA directly supports the federal government's marine security priorities by providing integrated border services to all vessels arriving in Canada, including cruise ships, ferries and tour boats.

The federal role in marine security is clearly established in several federal statutes, regulations and initiatives, including the Marine Transportation Security Act and Regulations and the Marine Security Initiative. Following the 9/11 terrorists attacks in the United States, the Government of Canada put in place measures to better protect marine infrastructure and ports through the implementation of the International Marine Organization Ship and Port Facilities Code.[36] These elements will ensure that Canada meets current international standards and obligations, including those developed by the International Maritime Organization.[37]

Between 2003 and 2008, the Government of Canada invested $7.7B to fight terrorism and reinforce public security through the Public Safety and Anti-Terrorism and SMART Border initiatives. Additionally, six federal government departments and agencies, including the CBSA, implemented marine security projects. Of the $60M that was provided for marine security, the CBSA[38] received $14.4M[39] over five years for enhancing passenger and crew screening.

Return to Top of Page

3. Key Findings – Performance

How effective are the management and delivery of the clearance of commercial passenger vessels activities?

Standard Operating Procedures and manuals are in place for the clearance of cruise ships, ferries and tour boats. However, they are not consistently followed.

Three key resources apply to the clearance of commercial passenger vessels. The People Processing Manual outlines the CBSA requirements and policies for carrier reporting and CBSA processing of passengers, crew and their goods that arrive in Canada by cruise ships, ferries and tour boats. The Passenger and Crew Screening SOPs provide guidelines to BSOs who conduct examinations of foreign nationals aboard inbound and outbound vessels. The Enforcement Manual supports and guides CBSA officers in the execution of their enforcement related responsibilities. All manuals and SOPs are updated as required.

CBSA regional management and BSOs interviewed expressed a concern with the lack of guidelines that sets out minimum standards for physical facilities, tools and systems required at marine POEs in order to adequately process vessels, passengers and crew. They were of the opinion that this has led to variations in delivery, targeting and examination across the regions.

The People Processing Manual requires that when a ship is in port, the gangway is to be monitored.[40] While CBSA personnel at some ports monitor the gangways while the ship is in port, at others they do not. Gangway monitoring is regarded by regional management and BSOs alike as a low value activity. As an alternative, the Southern New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island District adopted a roving strategy[41] whereby BSOs conduct rummages, cabin searches, in-depth interviews with identified travellers and crew, and other activities that would more likely mitigate the risks. No data were available to determine whether this roving strategy has resulted in enforcement actions.

The clearance of cruise ships in terms of reviewing documentation and conducting verification is done differently in different regions and ports. At some ports, BSOs board the ship to process the paperwork (as per the People Processing Manual), while at others, BSOs arrange to have the documentation brought to the appropriate CBSA office by the ship authorities. The Manual clearly states that the “BSOs will board the vessel upon arrival to ensure that… documentation is submitted”.[42] Some current practices are therefore in contradiction to the stated process.

The evaluation noted that the processes followed in some ports may be inconsistent with the requirements of the Customs Act and IRPA. For example, BSOs should conduct interviews with travellers and crew upon arrival. According to the Customs Act, anyone entering the country regardless of nationality, must “present himself or herself to an officer and answer truthfully any questions asked by the officer…”[43]. In addition, the IRPA states that “every person seeking to enter Canada must appear for an examination to determine whether that person has a right to enter Canada or is or may become authorized to enter and remain in Canada.”[44] While the number of passengers and crew aboard large cruise ships makes this requirement difficult to meet, in some ports BSOs do not meet with travellers and crew and simply have the passports of the individuals brought to the CBSA office by cruise ship personnel.

In the event that an individual is deemed inadmissible to Canada and considered a risk, the individual will be removed. For individuals who are inadmissible but do not represent a risk, officers may choose to issue an allowed-to-leave[45], but permit the passenger to continue the cruise. BSOs inform the ship's security officer or another authority that this particular passenger is to remain on board at all times. This remain-on-board order is typically done verbally, although Montréal Marine Operations has the cruise ship authority sign a form acknowledging the remain-on-board order. However, BSOs issuing the allowed-to-leave often do not always inform the subsequent ports that such an order has been given; therefore, there is no assurance that the individual is complying with the order.

Regional fora are in place for CBSA and private sector stakeholders to discuss issues related to the cruise industry. However, at the national level, the primary national CBSA/industry committee has been inactive for the last one to two years.

Cruise industry representatives interviewed for this evaluation indicated that they have a good working relationship with the CBSA at a regional level and were satisfied with the services they are receiving from the CBSA. BSOs do their job well and are able to clear commercial passenger vessels in a timely manner, allowing passengers to disembark quickly for their day trips and tours. The Port Authority for Vancouver holds an annual meeting with representatives from the CBSA, shipping agents, cruise lines, OGDs and local authorities (i.e. City of Vancouver, Vancouver Police Department) to discuss issues and successes from the past cruise season and schedules for the upcoming season. This allows for continuous improvement and facilitation because cruise planning and scheduling is done two years in advance. This was regarded as a best practice by the cruise ship industry.

However, the same representatives reported that better communication between key players at the national level would be beneficial. The Cruise Ship Long Range Planning Committee[46] was instituted to “share information and engage in meaningful discussions and solutions that support the mandates and missions of both the CBSA and the cruise industry”.[47] Although this committee is supposed to meet twice a year[48], it was last convened in December 2009.[49] The cruise ship industry sets the cruise schedule two years in advance. Industry representatives indicated that the committee offers an excellent forum to jointly discuss and plan to better meet the demands of the upcoming cruise seasons.

The CBSA Marine Managers' Conference is supposed to be held annually. It provides a forum at which key issues in the marine environment are discussed, including cruise ship issues. However, it has not been held since October 2008, which in the opinion of CBSA regional management and BSOs has resulted in little communication between NHQ and regions regarding activities and best practices.

Representatives from Transport Canada reported that additional communication with the CBSA would be beneficial. One issue pertaining to the port identification cards required under the Marine Transportation Security Regulations was raised by Transport Canada, various port authorities and CBSA management and staff.[50] CBSA officers require such cards to gain access to marine ports and docks, although local police and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are exempt. Negotiations to ensure the security of officers' personal information have taken place at port level, resulting in cards with different information depending on the port. It is anticipated that Transport Canada's 2011 regulatory amendments will include a provision that will allow any Government of Canada employee, while in the performance of their duty at a marine facility or on a vessel at a marine facility, to enter a restricted area once their security clearance is confirmed by Transport Canada.

Mandatory marine-specific training is provided to the BSOs by the regions, but the full training is not always delivered due to resource constraints.

BSOs must have completed the Vessel-in-service[51] or the Marine-in-service (MIS)[52] course, which are delivered regionally, in order to board vessels and complete clearances. These courses are also prerequisites for all training offered by the Marine Centre of Expertise, such as the vessel rummage and the shipboard confined space entry courses. Because ferries are considered an extension of the highway mode and tour boats are small conveyances, these courses are not mandatory for officers to board these vessels.

Depending on the needs of the port, the five–day, in-service course is reduced to four days to focus on marine vessels or three days to focus on containers. However, the MIS was shortened to only one or two days in Victoria, B.C., due to resource constraints. This resulted in BSOs not receiving all of the required training to complete the MIS as per the national guidelines. The Human Resources Branch is aware of this issue and is working on a resolution.

There are limited data available specifically on the clearance of commercial passenger vessels.

BSOs collect statistics of their daily activities, which are submitted monthly to G11[53] at NHQ where they are rolled up for a national picture. Since the G11 data are not broken down by cruise ship[54] and ferry[55] clearances, the Operational Monitoring and Reporting Section of the Border Operations Directorate provided the regions with a separate Excel spreadsheet to capture this detail. However, the information provided is missing key elements necessary to make determinations on the effectiveness of the program activities. Missing elements include information such as the number of passengers screened, number of crew screened, number of examinations, number of resultant examinations, number of Temporary Resident Visas confirmed, number of individuals deemed inadmissible and the number of allowed-to-leaves and Temporary Resident Permits issued for travelers travelling by all types of vessels. In addition, BSOs do not report the number of high risk notices for international waste issued or the number of ships that are non compliant with ship stores regulations. By not recording the details or the reason for the high risk notice, the CBSA is unable to track the ship's compliance over time.

Return to Top of Page

To what extent have the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities contributed to the identification and interdiction of inadmissible people and goods?

Although risk assessments indicate that cruise ship passengers and crew are low risk, BSOs and management expressed concern that this venue may be used to gain illegal entry into Canada or to import or export contraband.

The 2006 Cruise Ship Threat Assessment, the 2008 Border Risk Assessment and the 2010 National Port Risk Assessment deem cruise ship passengers and crew to be low risk. These determinations were based, in part, on past seizures and IRPA infractions. However, because there are few vessel rummages conducted and many ports are not equipped with facilities that allow for secondary examination, the seriousness and risk associated with cruise ship passengers and crew may be underrepresented. In 2008, 212 irregular migrants[56] in the marine mode overall were interdicted.[57] It is not known what percentage of these were individuals who arrived on commercial passenger vessels.

The number of seizures in 2009–2010 decreased significantly compared to the three previous years. Jewellery and narcotics remain the most common seizures on commercial passenger vessels (Exhibit 6).

In comparison to all marine vessels, cruise ship and ferries accounted for 95% of jewellery and 58% of narcotics seizures for the same time period. However, the value of the seizures attributed to passenger vessels was negligible. For example, in FY 2009–2010, jewellery seizures associated with passenger vessels and ferries accounted for 9% (value of $9,961) compared to jewellery seizures in the marine mode overall ($117,363). Furthermore, narcotics seizures from passenger vessels and ferries in FY 2009–2010 were valued at $2,095, compared to $11,882,253 in the marine mode overall, representing less than 1% of the overall value.

Exhibit 6: CBSA Seizures for Commercial Passenger Vessels, FY 2005–2006 to 2009–2010
Commodity Group FY 2005–2006 FY 2006–2007 FY 2007–2008 FY 2008–2009 FY 2009–2010 Total
Total 150 174 166 193 99 782
Marine overall 619 555 477 488 499 2638
Alcoholic Beverages 11 5 9 21 5 51
Child Pornography 1 0 0 1 7 9
Clothing and Footwear 5 8 3 8 3 27
Jewellery 23 61 67 62 38 251
Narcotics/Drugs/Chemicals 85 69 63 53 28 298
Other[58] 17 22 14 19 11 83
Tobacco Products 5 2 1 17 1 26
Watches 3 7 9 12 6 37

Source: Integrated Customs Enforcement System, September 2010.

The data demonstrate that the risk associated with commercial passenger vessels, in terms of inadmissible goods, is low. This observation is further substantiated by statements made in the focus groups that cruise ship drug seizures involve small amounts intended for personal use.

The CBSA has no legislative authority to require[59] cruise, ferry and tour operators to provide the CBSA with API/PNR, which limits the effectiveness and timeliness of Agency's targeting activities.

Currently, cruise lines and some ferry operators transmit advance information [60] voluntarily however, the quality and completeness of the information varies greatly. Manifests arrive via fax or e-mail and are sometimes difficult to read as they can be handwritten. As well, they are often incomplete or in non-transferable formats. This impedes the Agency's ability to effectively target high-risk people and goods.

There is no national program, strategy or automated targeting tool for passengers and crew of cruise ships, ferries or tour boats, resulting in variations in how targeting is carried out across regions. Typically, BSOs run the names of the individuals through the Integrated Border Query (IBQ) and other relevant databases as needed, including the Integrated Customs Enforcement System, Canadian Police Information Centre and Field Operations Support System. However, no region conducts pre-arrival targeting on 100% of the passenger and crew. The Halifax targeting operations conducted a check in 2007 whereby 100% of passengers and crew were screened through various CBSA databases to better understand the risks associated with cruise ship traffic.

There is a duplication of effort in the targeting of passengers and crew aboard cruise ships as they may be targeted several times if they stop in multiple ports of call in Canada.

Each region does its own targeting; therefore, the same passengers and crew may be targeted numerous times. In addition, when a cruise ship arrives at a second Canadian port of call, officers in this port are unaware of what percentage of passengers and crew have already been screened, and whether there is anyone onboard that is not allowed to disembark. As a result, there is no assurance that 100% of passengers and crew will be screened while the vessel remains in Canadian waters or that individuals who are to remain on board while the vessel is in Canadian waters actually remain on board. Minimal pre-arrival information is received on passengers and crew of ferries and tour boats, and limited targeting is conducted.

Interviewees stated that they do not have the human resources or required tools to run 100% of passengers and crew, and therefore analyze only those deemed high risk. Officers define a high-risk group for a specific cruise ship based on country of origin and demographics (e.g. gender and age), and meet the individuals of interest once they have arrived.

In reporting on Public Security Initiatives funding (Passenger and Crew Screening Initiative), the CBSA states that 100% of the vessels are screened, based on the total number of vessels for which pre-arrival notices were received. However, this reporting does not include the number of passengers and crew screened.

Collecting this information is complicated by the Agency's inability to require advance passenger information, making it difficult for the Agency to interdict illegal migrants and those deemed a security risk. While the Public Security Initiatives funding was intended to enhance the Agency's use of contraband detection equipment, the analysis and targeting functions, and the identification and interdiction of high risk individuals, the evaluation team could find no significant evidence of these funds being directed to the clearance of commercial passenger vessel passengers and crew.

Facilities vary from port to port in terms of physical structure, tools and systems and these differences impede the CBSA's ability to interdict inadmissible people and goods.

At this time there is no guidance framework provided on the minimum CBSA standards for facilities at a marine port servicing cruise ships, ferries and tour boats. Consequently, the facilities for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels are often sub-optimal and vary greatly across the country. The Environmental Operations Directorate is using the Facilities Operating Requirements and Planning Guide for airports as a standard basis for new facilities in the marine mode. Where airport facilities are required to include waiting areas, examination counters, cash-out offices, x-ray machines, and interview, documentation and personal search rooms, no such requirements exist for the marine ports clearing commercial passenger vessels.

Under section 6 of the Customs Act, the owner or operator of a wharf or a dock that receives international conveyances shall provide, equip and maintain – free of charge – adequate buildings or other facilities for the proper search of persons by officers. Where some commercial passenger vessel facilities are equipped with clearance halls and secondary examination areas, others are located in garages, warehouses or in open public areas. In remote ports, there may not be a physical structure or facility at all. Officers may not have access to a space to conduct inspections, and there may be no systems and contraband detection equipment available. Of the six CSOs visited, only one[61] was fully automated with computers and document readers at both primary and secondary inspection lines. Of the three ferry facilities visited, one[62] was automated, while another[63] had a computer with IBQ access on site.

Some terminals are designed in such a way that passengers and crew could potentially exit without being processed by a BSO. For example, in one port, partition walls were moved, breaking the sterility[64] of a customs controlled area. This is further complicated by the lack of proper signage clearly indicating to passengers that they are within a controlled area. Should BSOs find a weapon in the luggage of a traveller, policy dictates that they draw their weapons.[65] However, the policy also says that when in view of the public, officers should refrain from drawing their sidearm. Without proper secondary examination areas, officers are unable to comply with these policies and to effectively use control and defensive tactics.[66]

Many facilities do not have detention cells. Therefore, if a traveller has to be detained, BSOs may have to do so aboard the ship or in a non-designated area.

Ferry passengers disembarking by foot or by car are required to go through the Primary Inspection Line (PIL). Although ferries are considered an extension of highway, ferry sites do not have the same access to tools, such as Integrated Primary Inspection Line (IPIL) Highway and licence plate readers. In “FERRY” locations where the basic tools (IPIL or IPIL Highway) are not available, the Agency is not in a position to identify high-risk travellers, vehicles or lookouts. Tour boat passengers are interviewed aboard the vessel or under a canopy. These sites do not have access to systems and tools such as contraband detection equipment.

Return to Top of Page

To what extent do the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities ensure compliance for travellers, goods and conveyances/vessels with CBSA and OGD requirements?

Inspections to ensure compliance with OGD requirements are not done consistently across regions.

BSOs are responsible for conducting food and waste inspections[67]. According to the People Processing Manual, they should board the ship and assess the garbage and recycling storage facilities, inspect the food storage and ensure that all fresh and frozen goods are either U.S. Department of Agriculture or Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) approved. As a result, when the cruise ship arrives in a Canadian port for the first time in any given cruise ship season, BSOs are to conduct an inspection to assess the vessel's compliance with CFIA regulations. Once a low risk certificate is issued, the ship no longer requires inspection for the remainder of the Cruise Ship season. In other ports visited (e.g. Halifax, N.S., and Victoria, B.C.), officers only ask ship officials about their waste and provisions, and do not routinely conduct examinations.

Upon the completion of the inspection, a Notice of Inspection is provided to the Ship Security Officer or other authority stating what the risk level will be for the ship upon its next entry into Canada. If the vessel is deemed low risk, its waste can be treated as domestic upon the ship's subsequent arrivals in Canada. However, if the vessel is deemed high risk, special measures have to be taken by the ship to treat their waste.[68] The Notice of Inspection does not outline the reason for the risk rating, nor does the CBSA track this information; therefore, the Agency is unable to provide assurance that specific measures were undertaken by vessel authorities.

While there are Administrative Monetary Penalties (AMPS) for non-compliance, they are not used by all regions and it cannot be determined how many were levied against commercial passenger vessels.

The People Processing Manual identifies the following two AMPs applicable to cruise ships[69]:

  • C207: Master of a ship failed to place alcohol, tobacco and other goods for sale on board the ship under lock or seal and keep them there while the ship was in port.
  • C018: Person in charge of a commercial conveyance arriving in Canada failed to transport passengers and crew to a CBSA office designated for that purpose and open for business, forthwith on arrival.

From FY 2004–2005 to FY 2009–2010, 68 C207 AMPs were applied against marine vessels overall, of which 57 were applied in the Pacific region (Exhibit 7).[70] Other AMPs may have been applied as a result of processing commercial passenger vessels. For example, $40,000 worth of jewellery was brought off a cruise ship without submitting the required paperwork to the CBSA in the Pacific region for which a C366 AMP was applied. Because the system does not capture vessel type, the type and level of non-compliance by commercial passenger vessels is not known.

Exhibit 7: Total number of Marine C207 AMPs Applied by Region, FY 2004–2005 to FY 2009–2010
Region Number of Contraventions Net Value ($)
Total 68 $90,000
Atlantic 6 $6,000
Quebec 5 $5,000
Northern Ontario 0 $0
Greater Toronto Area 0 $0
Windsor–St. Clair 0 $0
Niagara–Fort Erie 0 $0
Prairie 0 $0
Pacific 57 $79,000
Return to Top of Page

To what extent do CBSA activities enhance border services and client satisfaction through the availability of extended service arrangements (cost recovery)?

Cost recovery allows the CBSA to offer extended services in areas that would not otherwise receive them. As the viability of the cruise industry depends in part on adding new destinations, the demand for clearance at non-designated sites is increasing.

Cost recovery is employed as a means of offering a greater number of clearance opportunities[71] at non-designated sites.[72] Cost-recovery agreements[73] for clearances at non-designated sites increased from 18 to 37 from FY 2006–2007 to 2009–2010, representing a 44% increase (Exhibit 8).

On a regional basis, the Atlantic and Quebec regions saw the greatest increases in the number of vessel clearances[74] at non-designated sites, with a 170% and 115% increase respectively. In recent years, new markets have developed for cruises in the north and throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. During the same time period, the CBSA conducted 37 cruise ship clearances at non-designated sites in Nunavut, 25 in Newfoundland and Labrador, and 60 in Quebec.[75]

Exhibit 8: Total Number of Cost-Recovery Cruise Ship Clearances at Non-Designated Sites, FY 2006-2007 to FY 2009-2010
Total Cost-Recovery Clearances Non-Designated Sites
 

Atlantic

Quebec

NOR

Pacific

Other

National Ports

2006-2007

10 13 13 19 0 55

2007-2008

7 11 15 15 2 50

2008-2009

12 8 19 12 0 51

2009-2010

26 30 11 11 1 79

Total

55 6 58 57 3 235

Due to the seasonal nature of clearing passenger vessels, it can be a challenge for regions to meet the increased demand for services. CBSA management in Northern Ontario also said that delivering services as per the cost-recovery agreements for arrivals in Nunavut is problematic because ship arrival dates and times may vary due to last-minute scheduling changes and weather. This impacts the regions ability to effectively plan for deployment of BSOs to non-designated sites.

The current sites designated as per section 5 of the Customs Act do not reflect the cruise ship or tour boat traffic in Canada.

In FY 2008–2009, 12 CSO[76] sites received no passenger or vessel traffic while 10 CSO sites received no traffic in FY 2009–2010. During the same period, Pelee Island, Ont., and Dawson City, Y.T., received the lowest ferry traffic with 4,253 and 3,552 passengers respectively. Furthermore, even though the People Processing Manual states that tour boats should be cleared at “FERRY” sites,[77] no tour boat clearances were made at any of these sites. The two POEs that receive tour boat traffic are designated as NEXUS/MARINE and Telephone Reporting (TRS/M) sites.

Exhibit 9: Passenger and Crew Traffic at CSO and “FERRY” Sites, FY 2008–2009 and FY 2009–2010
Region Number of CSO sites FY
2008–2009 Traffic
FY
2009–2010 Traffic
Number of “FERRY” sites FY
2008–2009 Traffic
FY
2009–2010 Traffic
Total 24 1,723,850 1,316,471 12 836,952 757,244
Atlantic 7 361,240[78] 268,605[79] 3 63,109 55,183
Quebec 2 114,548 112676 0 - -
Greater Toronto Area 3 0 70[80] 0 - -
Northern Ontario 1 0 818 1 26,203 23,814
Niagara/Fort Erie 5 0 0 0 - -
Windsor/St. Clair 2 0 0 3 319,224 276,405
Pacific 4 1,248,062 934,302 5 428,416 401,842

Source: G11, Cruise Ship and Ferries 2008–2009 and 2009–2010 roll-ups.

Private sector stakeholders interviewed unanimously indicated that they would like to see a greater number of CSO sites.

Because of the vast coastline and the reliance on marine-based industries, including tourism, in Newfoundland and Labrador, the Cruise Association of Newfoundland and Labrador argues that the two existing CSO sites (St. Johns and Corner Brook) are not sufficient to meet the needs of the industry. Private sector stakeholders suggested that there should be two new CSO sites added, one in Naine, N.L., and one in St Anthony, N.L. From FY 2006–2007 to 2009–2010, there were no cruise ship clearances recorded in Naine and 16 in St. Anthony. CBSA management indicated that there is not enough traffic in these areas to warrant the designation of two new sites.

Private sector stakeholders mentioned that a CSO site should be established in Iqaluit, Nun., to accommodate the increasingly popular niche market for small, high-end cruises through the north. Industry representatives raised concerns about the cost of clearing vessels in the north related to cost-recovery agreements with the CBSA. In 2009–2010, there were 11 cruise ship clearances in Nunavut, costing an average of $17,245 per vessel.

CBSA management and staff, and private sector stakeholders indicated that the level of service provided and/or received under cost recovery differs from what is provided and/or received at designated ports during designated hours. In some instances, cost-recovery services at a non-designated site were more in line with policies and procedures than those services provided at the designated port. For example, cost recoverable services for the Quebec Region are delivered by four BSOs based out of Québec City.[81] In these instances, BSOs monitor the gangways and conduct all required clearances while the ship is in port. However, it was reported by the industry that the same level of service is not always being provided at CSO sites in the region.

Return to Top of Page

4. Demonstration of Efficiency and Economy

Are the commercial passenger vessels clearance activities cost-effective and cost-efficient?

The overall expenditures related to cruise ship, ferry and tour boat clearances are estimates.

Each region tracks salary costs differently. For regions that track costs by activity (for example, primary and secondary processing), salary expenditures by mode or type of vessel were not available. As a result, the data do not present an accurate accounting of expenditures and may understate actual expenditures. Based on available data, the CBSA spent approximately $7.6M in FY 2009–2010 on the clearance of commercial passenger vessels. Expenditures have remained relatively constant over the last three years (Exhibit 10).

Exhibit 10: Overall Expenditures for Clearance of Commercial Passenger Vessels Activities, FY 2005–2006 to FY 2009–2010
Region FY 2005–2006 FY 2006–2007 FY 2007–2008 FY 2008–2009 FY 2009–2010 Total
Total $5,416,501 $5,259,247 $6,912,894 $7,213,956 $7,639,336 $32,441,934
Total with Internal Services Costs $6,981,867 $6,779,169 $8,910,720 $9,298,789 $9,847,104 $41,817,653
Atlantic $0 $0 $1,136,400 $1,132,000 $1,509,000 $3,777,400
NOR $622,000 $836,855 $944,009 $1,137,792 $1,099,898 $4,640,554
GTA $1,092,473 $577,658 $857,041 $932,068 $931,557 $4,390,797
Windsor/St. Clair $986,451 $1,014,388 $1,179,080 $1,194,120 $1,259,656 $5,633,695
Quebec $283,000 $294,000 $295,000 $355,500 $339,000 $1,566,500
Prairie $4,033 $1,322 $2,264 $0 $11,225 $18,844
Pacific $1,509,544 $1,928,024 $1,955,100 $1,885,476 $1,957,000 $9,235,144
Sub-total $4,497,501 $4,652,247 $6,368,894 $6,636,956 $7,107,336 $29,262,934
NHQ $919,000 $607,000 $544,000 $577,000 $532,000 $3,179,000

Source: Comptrollership Branch, November 2010.

The regional expenditures reported against activities related to the clearance of commercial passenger vessels are not proportional to the overall traffic volumes reported by the individual regions.

In 2009–2010, the GTA Region reported expenditures of almost $1M for clearance activities and reported the clearance of a total of 70 passengers and crew. On the other hand, in the same year, the Pacific Region reported expenditures of over $1.9M (25.6% of total expenditures) but accounted for 71% of cruise traffic and 54% of ferry traffic in that same year. The Quebec Region reported low expenditures relative to its traffic volumes. Based on the reported expenditures and the number of passengers processed in each region for FY 2009–2010, the regional variation for processing individuals on commercial passenger vessels was wide, ranging from $1.46 and $13,307 (Exhibit 11).

Exhibit 11: Per Person Cost to Clear Cruise Ships/Ferries/Tour Boats by Region, FY 2008–2009 to FY 2009–2010
Region FY 2008–2009 FY 2009–2010
Expenditures All CPV Traffic[82] Cost/passenger[83] Expenditures All CPV Traffic[84] Cost/passenger[85]
Total $6,636,956 2,591,517 $2.56 $7,107,336 2,115,989 $3.36
Atlantic $1,132,000 424,349 $2.67 $1,509,000 323,788 $4.66
NOR[86] $1,137,792 56,882 $20.00 $1,099,898 66,906 $16.44
GTA $932,068 0 - $931,557 70 $13,307.96
Windsor/St. Clair $1,194,120 4,966 $3.74 $1,259,656 276,405 $4.56
Quebec $355,500 39,224 $3.10 $339,000 112,676 $3.01
Prairie $0 0 - $11,225 - -
Pacific $1,885,476 1,676,478 $1.12 $1,957,000 1,336,144 $1.46

While the CBSA received Public Security Initiatives (PSI) funding activities related to clearance of commercial passenger vessels, it was not possible to attribute these funds to specific clearance activities.

The CBSA receives funding through two PSI related to this evaluation: the Cruise Ship Inspection and Passenger and Crew Screening[87]. The Cruise Ship Inspections Initiative aims to intercept inadmissible goods and persons including criminal groups, terrorists, illegal migrants and contraband. The Passenger and Crew Screening Initiative aims to enhance the CBSA's ability to screen vessels, and examine travel documents of marine crew and passengers in order to interdict stowaways, deserting crew members, smuggled persons, non-admissible supernumeraries[88] and persons who are a threat to national security. Of note is that the passenger and crew screening funding was allocated for all marine vessel types, not only commercial passenger vessels.

The CBSA received $19,420,200 from FY 2004–2005 to FY 2008–2009 for the Cruise Ship Inspections Initiative and $27,440,800 for the Passenger and Crew Screening Initiative over the same period. As of FY 2009–2010, the CBSA is receiving ongoing funding of $4.6M for cruise ship inspections and $6.9M for passenger and crew screening to continue these initiatives.

The CBSA collected $495,000 for the clearance of commercial passenger vessels under cost-recovery agreements in 2009–2010.[89] However, issues were raised regarding the calculation of agreements and the redistribution of recovered funds.

The rates are determined on the basis of factors such as the number of BSOs required, their salary, and travel and accommodation costs. Cost recovery is to be cost-neutral for the CBSA and to allow for some flexibility to provide services beyond current base budget levels.[90] However, interviews with regional management noted that the formula does not take into account the resources expended on developing, negotiating and revising the agreements with the industry, which are valid for one season only. Furthermore, while the POEs provide the clearance services, they do not receive the recovered funds in the fiscal year that the services were delivered. When and if the recovered funds are transferred back to the specific region, they are often in operation and maintenance, and not salary dollars. This strains their budgets as much of the expenses incurred are in salary dollars.

Both the overall number of clearances and the cost recovery amounts for cruise ships at non-designated sites increased somewhat between FY 2007–2008 and FY 2009–2010, although neither reached the levels of 2006–2007 (Exhibit 12). The cost to clear a vessel and passengers more than doubled from FY 2006–2007 to 2007–2008, going from $2,697 to $6,105 per vessel.[91] The high cost associated per vessel clearance in the Quebec and Northern Ontario regions can be attributed, in part, to the distances travelled by BSOs to remote locations. Cost recovery for services provided outside core hours at designated CSOs amounted to $120,000 in FY 2009–2010 (Exhibit 13).

Return to Top of Page
Exhibit 12: Number and Cost of Cost-Recovery Clearances at Non-Designated Sites by Region, FY 2006–2007 to FY 2009–2010
Region FY
2006–2007
FY
2007–2008
FY
2008–2009
FY
2009–2010
Vessels Costs Vessels Costs Vessels Costs Vessels Costs
Total 153 $412,669 48 $293,041 51 $299,183 58 $375,172
Atlantic 108 $169,189 7 $9,021 12 $41,728 26 $55,903
Quebec 13 $0 9 $64,082 8 $0 19 $121,352
Northern Ontario 13 $152,223 16 $106,832 19 $192,766 11 $190,254
Niagara/Fort Erie 0 $0 1 $2,258 0 $0 0 $0
Prairie 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 1 $3,746
Pacific 19 $91,257 15 $110,848 12 $64,689 1 $3,877

Source: Inventory of Contracts – Cruise, Designation Services Unit, 2010

Exhibit 13: Number and Cost of Cost-Recovery Clearances Outside Core Service Hours at Designated CSOs by Region, FY 2006–2007 to FY 2009–2010
Region FY
2006–2007
FY
2007–2008
FY
2008–2009
FY
2009–2010
Vessels Costs Vessels Costs Vessels Costs Vessels Costs
Total 30 $12,721 36 $45,026 64 $80,725 100 $120,189
Atlantic 29 $9,080 31 $19,253 60 $39,430 84 $73,849
Quebec 1 $2,689 5 $25,773 4 $41,295 16 $46,340
Northern Ontario 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 6 $3,043
GTA 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Niagara/Fort Erie 1 $952 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Windsor/St. Clair 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Prairie 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Pacific 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0

Source: Designation Services Unit Summary of Cost-Recovery Services, 2010

During site visits, it was noted that ports were charging special service fees for certain clearance activities in contradiction to the D-Memorandum.

The Vancouver, B.C., CSO site, for example, charges “special service fees”[92] for the clearance of cruise ships outside designated operating hours. This is done mainly because it is easier and faster to complete the paperwork for “special service fees” locally, whereas a cost-recovery agreement requires NHQ approval and would take longer to process. The cruise line pays $54 per hour per BSO for services requiring up to two hours of work. For each subsequent hour, the cruise line pays an hourly rate of $27 per officer. There is no charge for the time spent by an officer on meals and rest.[93] The D-Memorandum specifically states that special service fees can only be charged for the clearance of goods, not passengers or crew. [94]

Are there more efficient and effective models to achieve the expected results?

Applying the air and highway mode clearing process to cruise ships, and their passengers and crew would increase effectiveness and efficiency.

Travellers arriving in Canada by air and highway are processed at a POE. Upon being cleared for both immigration and customs purposes, they are allowed to travel within Canada without being processed again by the CBSA. The same is generally true for passengers and crew arriving by ferry, tour boat and cruise ship with 250 or less passengers and crew.

Cruise ships with 250 passengers and crew and more, however, are not fully cleared at their first point of arrival.[95] BSOs may clear a portion of the individuals from an IRPA point of view by interviewing some, but not all passengers, based on pre-arrival information. Customs clearance, on the other hand, takes place at the end of the journey when passengers (and some crew) disembark.

This process creates ambiguities as to the extent of the CBSA's authority when the cruise ship proceeds inland to other ports – especially when pre-arrival targeting in advance of the next port of call find inadmissible individuals (i.e. does the CBSA have the authority to interview an individual in the next port of call even though the individual was cleared from an immigration perspective in the last port of call). This issue is especially prevalent on the East Coast, where the majority of cruise itineraries include multiple Canadian ports of call,[96] and where targeting may take place in Halifax, N.S., in Québec City, Que., and in Montréal, Que.

Changing the processing model for large cruise ships would decrease the need to monitor gangways, conduct compliance checks of ship stores, bars, casinos, waste and provisions and examinations several times on one voyage, and rationalize targeting activities. Once cleared at a CSO site, the ship would be free to stop at other ports within Canada without requiring a CBSA presence,[97] thereby also reducing the need for cost-recovery agreements.

The “U.S. Direct” and “Direct-to-Bus” initiatives allow for an expedited transit of pre-screened, low-risk people who are embarking or disembarking a cruise ship in Vancouver, B.C.

In 2009–2010, 77,097 passengers participated in these initiatives, representing 19% of all cruise passengers processed in Vancouver, B.C.[98] U.S. Direct allows U.S. citizens or Permanent Residents, who are participating in the On Board Check-In program to be transferred from dock to airport and vice versa in a secure manner. They must depart on pre-cleared flights destined for the United States or go directly to the cruise ship terminal from the airport on the same day. Their luggage is pre-tagged and transferred separately to and from the airport. Direct-to-Bus, on the other hand, is an expedited border process (i.e. an express lane) for U.S. citizens and Permanent Residents in the cruise ship terminal. To participate, they must leave for the airport by charter bus and exit Canada by air on the same day.

Both were initiated by the private sector (i.e. Vancouver International Airport Authority and the Cruise Lines) to reduce wait times. Private sector and CBSA interviewees were highly satisfied with the initiatives' ability to expedite border clearance for cruise ship passengers.

Return to Top of Page

5. Key Conclusions, Recommendations and Management Response

There is a current and ongoing need for a CBSA presence at marine POEs to clear commercial passenger vessels. The CBSA's activities are aimed at facilitating the entry of legitimate travellers and goods and at preventing inadmissible people and goods from entering Canada. The Agency's authority is derived from the CBSA Act, the Customs Act, and the IRPA as they pertain to the international movement of travellers and goods, including passengers and crew arriving in Canada by cruise ships, ferries and tour boats. The activities support and are aligned with the Government of Canada's economic stimuli and national security priorities. For example, the Government has invested significantly over the last two years in the construction of cruise ship terminals and infrastructure to boost the economy and create jobs. In addition, the CBSA receives a total of $11.5M annually through marine security investments, however, the percentage dedicated to the clearance of commercial passenger vessels in not known.

Cruise ships of more than 250 passengers and crew are not fully cleared at their first point of arrival.[99] BSOs may clear individuals from an immigration perspective by interviewing some passengers and crew based on pre-arrival information upon arrival. Customs clearance, on the other hand, takes place when passengers (and some crew) disembark. This process creates ambiguities as to the extent of the CBSA's authority when the cruise ship proceeds inland to other ports – especially when pre-arrival targeting conducted prior to the next port of call finds inadmissible individuals, who have already been admitted to Canada.

Aligning the clearance of large cruise ships with other modes (i.e. air, highway and cruise ships with less than 250 passengers and crew) would decrease the need to monitor gangways, conduct compliance checks of ship stores, bars, casinos, waste and provisions and examinations several times on one voyage, and rationalize targeting activities. Once fully cleared at a CSO site, the cruise ship could stop at other ports within Canada without requiring further processing by the CBSA.[100] This would also reduce the number of cost-recovery agreements.

The CBSA does not have a commercial passengers vessels targeting program and has no legislative authority to require cruise, ferry and tour operators to provide the CBSA with Advance Personal Information/Passenger Name Record (API/PNR). Some advance information is provided voluntarily by cruise ship operators; however, because it is not a legislative requirement, the information is not always received. When it is received, it is not always timely, complete or in a useable format. Furthermore, with each region doing their own targeting of passengers and crew, there is duplication of effort as targeting results are not communicated to staff at subsequent ports. In addition, only a portion of cruise ship passengers and crew are screened prior to arrival at any one port. As of April 1, 2010, a new functional authority for targeting was created, which aims to consolidate targeting activities within the CBSA. The CBSA is currently pursuing the expansion of API/PNR in the marine and rail modes of transportation.

Facilities vary from port to port in terms of physical structure, tools and systems, and these differences impede the CBSA's ability to interdict inadmissible people and goods. While the air mode uses the Facilities Operating Requirements and Planning Guide as a baseline for facilities, there is currently no framework stipulating the minimum standards required for a marine port servicing cruise ships.[101] Ferries and tour boats are covered under the Land Border Facilities Design Guide which is currently being revamped. Where some commercial passenger vessel facilities are equipped with clearance halls and secondary examination areas, others are located in garages, warehouses or in public areas.

In light of these findings, the evaluation recommends that:

Recommendation 1:

The Programs Branch develop options and an implementation plan for streamlining the processes for the clearance of large commercial passenger vessels (including passengers and crew) to enhance efficiency and effectiveness; strengthening pre-arrival targeting efforts to avoid duplication; assessing feasibility of targeting 100% of passengers and crew; and aligning physical facility, tool and systems requirements with the preferred option.


Management Response:

The CBSA concurs with this recommendation. The Programs Branch will approach this in two phases:

The Branch will work with the Comptrollership and Operations branches and the regions to develop measures (within the current legislative/regulatory regime and in consideration of existing facility configuration) that could be implemented on a site-by-site basis by August 2011. These measures will be monitored and a report on progress and outcomes will be prepared by December 2011.

In parallel, the Programs Branch will begin work immediately on the regulatory changes necessary to require commercial passenger vessels to provide advanced passenger information to the CBSA for risk assessment (industry consultation required). The Branch will also seek funding for Information Technology (IT) and other investments that would be necessary in order to implement advance passenger information in the marine mode. When this authority and funding is secured, the Branch will be in a position to implement significant changes to the manner in which marine passenger vessels are cleared. These changes will improve client service, achieve greater efficiency and enhance risk assessment capacity. The timing of the changes will depend on the identification of funding and the regulatory process.

The Agency is also in the process of implementing a new targeting service delivery model that will consolidate all air and marine targeting into a single centre. Once the centre is operational and the legal authorities and IT systems enhancements are in place, marine passenger targeters will be positioned to conduct targeting on all cruise ships entering Canada. The timing of implementation of a cruise ship targeting capacity in the National Targeting Centre will depend on the identification of funding for advance passenger information in the marine mode and the regulatory process.

Key milestones Expected completion date
Presentation to Program Standing Committee of short term measures within current regulatory, infrastructure and funding model (site by site). May 2011
Implementation of short term measures within current regulatory, infrastructure and funding model (site by site). August 2011
Presentation to Program Standing Committee of an assessment of short term measures. December 2011
Amendment to Regulations to introduce a requirement for cruise ships to report advance passenger information. TBD
Identification of funding for expansion of advanced passenger information to marine mode. TBD
Implementation of streamlined cruise ship clearance process to improve service, achieve greater efficiency and enhance risk assessment. TBD
Return to Top of Page

****

The CBSA collects considerable data and information on activities in the marine mode. However, the data required to make a determination on the extent to which the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities are achieving expected results are either not broken down or categorized by vessel, activity, region or in some cases simply not available.

It was noted that although there are national SOPs and manuals for the processing of passengers and crew in the marine mode, these are not always adhered to in the regions. For example, the People Processing Manual clearly states that the gangway is to be monitored the entire time a ship is in port. Some ports have implemented a roving approach which results in the gangway not being monitored for periods of time. While cruise ships are provided with the same services from port to port, the level to which these services are provided varies.

Regional fora are in place for the CBSA and private stakeholders to discuss issues regarding the cruise industry. National committees, on the other hand, have been inactive for the last one to two years. Within the CBSA, regional management and BSOs stated that there is little communication between NHQ and the regions regarding activities and the sharing of best practices.

In light of these findings, the evaluation recommends that:

Recommendation 2:

The Programs Branch enhance the delivery of the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities by:

  1. improving the collection of performance and financial information needed to manage and monitor the activities;
  2. monitoring regional compliance with national SOPs and D-Memoranda; and
  3. improving the communication between NHQ and regions by re-establishing a national forum.

Management Response:

The CBSA concurs with this recommendation.

  1. The Programs Branch will work with Operations Branch to design, develop, and improve the collection of performance and financial information in FY 2011–2012. Performance measurement indicators will be finalized by July 2011. The Programs Branch will also develop a revised data collection sheet, with added data elements that link directly to performance measurement for distribution to the regions by September 2011. The functional tables will begin operation in April 2011 and will improve the collection of financial information needed to manage and monitor the clearance of commercial passenger vessel activities.
  2. The Programs Branch will monitor regional compliance with national SOPs and D-Memoranda through improved communication between NHQ and the regions. Regular conference calls were implemented in November 2010 and cruise ship processing was the topic of a workshop at the Marine Managers Standing Committee in March 2011.
  3. In order to improve communications, the first meeting of the Marine Managers Standing Committee was held in March 2011. This group, which is made up of directors and chiefs of marine operations, has been established as a consultative forum to advance new and amended policy relating to the marine mode and to share best practices.
Key milestones Expected completion date
Develop and introduce new performance indicators. July 2011
Introduce revised data collection sheet in line with performance indicators. July 2011
Pursue development of Resource Allocation Model for cruise ship processing. September 2011
Implement regular conference calls. Ongoing
Convene meetings of the Marine Managers Standing Committee. Ongoing

****

The CBSA receives many requests for new and enhanced services[102] from various corporate stakeholders.[103] Specifically, there is much pressure from the cruise ship industry to add designated sites in the Arctic and Newfoundland and Labrador. In addition, traffic statistics show that there is an increasing demand for CBSA services at non-designated sites and a number of non-designated sites received considerable cruise traffic in 2009–2010.[104] While there is increasing demand for CBSA services and designation of sites, the evaluation found that in 2009–2010, ten CSO sites received no cruise ships.

In light of these findings, the evaluation recommends that:

Recommendation 3:

The Programs Branch review existing CSO sites with the intent to align locations with current and anticipated future demands.


Management Response:

The CBSA concurs and will undertake a review of the CSO and FERRY sites as part of the action plan developed in response to recommendation 2(b). This review will be completed by March 31, 2012. In addition, the CBSA has developed Marine and Rail Services Policy Frameworks (MRSPF) which will be used to review requests for new service and to determine eligibility for expanded border clearance services at Canada's marine ports. The approval of the Core Services Review-MRSPF is contingent upon funding, and therefore, the review of requests for new or enhanced CSO and FERRY sites or services is currently on hold. Once MRSPFs are implemented, an annual review of volumes at marine ports of entry will be conducted to rationalize service based on demands.

****

Return to Top of Page

Appendix A – Acronyms and Abbreviations

Acronyms Abbreviations
AMP Administrative Monetary Penalty
API Advance Passenger Information
BREA Business Research & Economic Advisors
BSO Border services officer
CBSA Canada Border Services Agency
CFIA Canadian Food Inspection Agency
CMRS Consolidated Management Reporting System
CSO Cruise Ship Operation
DRS/M Direct Reporting Site for Marine Private Vessel
FY Fiscal year
IBQ Integrated Border Query
IPIL Integrated Primary Inspection Line
IRPA Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
MIS Marine-in-Service
NHQ National Headquarters
OGD Other Government Department
PIL Primary Inspection Line
PNR Personal Name Record
POE Port of entry
PSI Public Security Initiative
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
TRS/M Telephone-reporting site Marine

Return to Top of Page

  • 1. Source: Business Research & Economic Advisors (BREA), The Economic Contribution of the International Cruise Industry in Canada 2007, p. 4.
  • 2. Source: CBSA G11 Monthly Statistics, 2010.
  • 3. Source: Business Research & Economic Advisors (BREA), The Economic Contribution of the International Cruise Industry in Canada 2007, p. 4.
  • 4. This amount does not include costs related to the Employee Benefit Plan (EBP), accommodations and internal services.
  • 5. Source: People Processing Manual, CBSA, 2010, Paragraph 120.
  • 6. If a cruise line planned their first point of arrival to be at a non-designated site, they would still be required to pay cost recovery for the clearances services.
  • 7. A facilities guide is in early stages of development for cruise ship specific requirements.
  • 8. Many factors may lead to a decision to change the designation or hours of service of a POE, such as: legislative changes, new government, agency or departmental policy, ensure operational efficiencies, budgetary constraints/reduction, and the need to level the playing field for operators.
  • 9. Source: Service Delivery Framework, Designation Services Unit, November 2009.
  • 10. Source: CBSA Inventory of Cost-Recovery Contracts (2006–2007 to 2009–2010),Designation Services Unit.
  • 11. Source: Business Research & Economic Advisors (BREA), The Economic Contribution of the International Cruise Industry in Canada 2007, p. 4.
  • 12. Ibid.
  • 13. Under the authority of section 5 of the Customs Act, designated CBSA offices are locations where travellers and commercial importers and exporters may fulfill their reporting obligations when entering and/or leaving the country.
  • 14. Documents include: General Declaration (A6), Ship Stores Declaration (E1), last port of clearance, goods to be landed list, passenger list, Cruise Vessel/Passenger and Crew Arrivals (E63-1), repatriating crew list with reason for leaving, joining crew list, crew's effect declaration (Y14), any letter of special permission or documentation concerning port-specific requirements, stowaway notification (when required), and Notice of deserters/Inadmissible Crew Member (IMM0202, when required). If the trip time from port to port is less than 96 hours, the notice must be sent prior to the ships departure. In the case of a remote port, the pre-arrival notice must be submitted 10 days prior to arrival.
  • 15. Travellers entering Canada complete a CBSA Declaration Card. The information from the declaration card is used for CBSA control purposes.
  • 16. In instances where the number of passengers and crew is low enough to be physically manageable and the risk has been assessed as low, a full CBSA clearance may be completed at the first port of entry. To be considered a small cruise ship, this number has been determined to be 250 passengers and crew or less.
  • 17. Source: People Processing Manual, Primary Processing, Cruise Ships, p. 23.
  • 18. Depending on the cruise line, the ship representative may be the ship agent, purser, captain or another authority.
  • 19. The cruise ship Pre-Arrival Notice or form BSF136 should include: name and call sign of cruise ship; name of the agent representing the cruise ship; total number of passengers and crew; total number of repatriating crew; date and time of arrival and departure; expiry dates of ship's certificates; and any additional port-specific information required to facilitate clearance.
  • 20. Also referred to as Before Arrival Information.
  • 21. In response to a request by the cruise ship, the CBSA may choose to offer services outside normal port operating hours or at non-designated sites on a cost-recovery basis.
  • 22. Completion of the CBSA Declaration Card (E311) for passengers and procedures outlined in Memorandum D3-5-2, Marine cargo – import movements for goods.
  • 23. Commercial Vessel – authorized marine site where commercial vessels other than ferry boats or cruise ships for reporting to CBSA.
  • 24. Telephone Reporting Site - Marine – location at which non-commercial, private and passenger marine vessels can report entry into Canada to CBSA by telephone.
  • 25. Direct Reporting Site for Marine Private Vessel – CBSA location where private recreational marine boats may directly report in person.
  • 26. Consolidated Management Reporting System (CMRS) and Integrated Customs Enforcement System.
  • 27. The high number of interviewees for this evaluation is attributable to the structural reorganization and managers, directors and director generals bringing the senior officer responsible for the related activities to the interview.
  • 28. CBSA headquarters staff, including senior management and program management in the Programs, Operations, Human Resources, and Technology branches.
  • 29. CBSA regional management and staff involved in clearance of cruise ships, ferries, tour boats, and their passengers and crew (e.g. Regional Directors General, Directors, Chiefs, Superintendents).
  • 30. This includes private sector stakeholders (e.g. Ferry and Cruise ship authorities) and OGD (e.g. Public Health Agency of Canada, Transport Canada).
  • 31. Source: Business Research & Economic Advisors (BREA), The Economic Contribution of the International Cruise Industry in Canada 2007, p. 6.
  • 32. Source: The Jones Act, Worldwide Travel & Cruise Associates Inc.
  • 33. Over time, a number of exceptions have been made. Foreign-flagged cruise ships may carry passengers from one U.S. port to another as long as they return them to the same port (i.e. a "cruise to nowhere"). Foreign vessels may also call at intermediate U.S. ports as long as no passenger permanently disembarks and the vessel makes at least one call at a foreign port.
  • 34. Source: World Ship Register.
  • 35. Source: Canada Border Services Agency, 2009-10 Report on Plans and Priorities.
  • 36. The International Ship and Port Facility Code is implemented through the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). The Code has two parts, one mandatory and one recommended. The Code takes the approach that ensuring the security of ships and port facilities is a risk management activity and that to determine what security measures are appropriate, an assessment of the risks must be made in each particular case. The purpose of the Code is to provide a standardized, consistent framework for evaluating risk, enabling governments to offset changes in threat with changes in vulnerability for ships and port facilities through the determination of the appropriate security levels and corresponding security measures.
  • 37. Source: FAQ on ISPS Code and maritime security, International Maritime Organization.
  • 38. At the time, the funding was directed to Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC).
  • 39. Source: Public Security and Anti-Terrorism – Addressing vulnerabilities in Canada's marine security, Treasury Board Submission, 2003.
  • 40. People Processing Manual, Chapter 6, p. 10.
  • 41. The primary goal of roving is to identify individuals who may be involved in the unlawful importation/exportation of goods, particularly those that are prohibited, controlled, or regulated in Canada. Source: Customs Enforcement Manual Part 3 Chapter 4, Roving Policy and Procedures.
  • 42. Source: People Processing Manual, Chapter 6, p. 19.
  • 43. Source: Subsection 11(1) of the Customs Act.
  • 44. Source: Subsection 18(1) of the IRPA.
  • 45. Before writing an inadmissibility report under A44(1), officers shall, at a port of entry, always consider allowing the person the opportunity to leave Canada voluntarily. If officers at a port of entry allow persons to withdraw their application to enter Canada, then the officers must give them an Allowed to Leave Canada form (IMM 1282B).
  • 46. Members include CBSA, the Shipping Federation of Canada, Great Lakes Cruising coalition, Northwest Cruise Ship Association, Cruising Association of Newfoundland and Labrador (CANAL) and The Capital Hill Group.
  • 47. Source: Cruise Ship Long Range Planning Committee: Terms of Reference p. 1.
  • 48. Source: Cruise Ship Long Range Planning Committee: Terms of Reference p. 1.
  • 49. The committee last met via conference call on December 9, 2009. A tentative date for the next conference call or meeting has not yet been set.
  • 50. Officers in one region felt that the information that they had to provide to the third party stakeholder and the fact that the ID cards have to be visible at all time, might represent a threat to their health and safety as officers. The restricted area pass includes: the name, height and eye colour of the person to whom the pass has been issued, a clear photograph of the person's head and shoulders or other facial image and an expiry date.
  • 51. The Vessel-in-service course is a condensed version of the MIS course focusing only on Vessel Rummage. This course fulfills the training requirements outlined in the Enforcement Manual to be able to board and perform operational duties within the superstructure of a commercial marine vessel.
  • 52. The Marine-in-service course fulfills the training requirements outlined in the Enforcement Manual to be able to board and perform operational duties within the superstructure of a commercial marine vessel.
  • 53. The G11 System is a customs management information system as well as an accounting system for capturing customs revenue receipts.
  • 54. The information collected includes the crew count, passenger count, Direct–to-Bus and U.S. Direct passenger count, number of passengers and crew queried, number of passengers and crew targeted, PIL times and number of PIL officers.
  • 55. The information collected includes the number of cars, buses and trucks, number of passengers in each vehicle and foot passengers.
  • 56. Irregular migrants are legitimate crew members who jump ship, crew members who are found inadmissible upon arrival, stowaways or improperly documented arrivals.
  • 57. Source: Irregular Marine Migration, 2009. Strategic Intelligence Analysis Division, Intelligence Directorate.
  • 58. “Other” includes, but is not limited to the following commodity groups: audio and camera equipment and parts, computer parts, cosmetics and toiletries, currency, firearms, furs, skins and leathers, pharmaceuticals and medicals, suspected proceeds of crime, and vehicle parts and accessories.
  • 59. The API/PNR program was implemented in a phased approach, starting with the air mode in 2002. CBSA is now pursuing the expansion to the marine and rail modes. To do so, CBSA will require marine carriers to provide information in a set format within a given timeline. They will also be required to submit a specific set of data for API, PNR and for the vessel. Source: Advance Passenger Information (API)/Passenger Name Record (PNR): Expansion to Marine Mode, 2009. Innovation, Science and Technology Branch.
  • 60. Passenger and crew information sent may include: surname, first name and initial(s) for middle names, date of birth, gender, citizenship, passport or travel document number.
  • 61. The Québec City POE is fully automated.
  • 62. Belleville Ferry Terminal.
  • 63. Point Alexandria.
  • 64. The physical isolation of cruise ship passengers and crew and their goods arriving into, in transit through or departing from Canada from all other individuals until CBSA clearance is completed. Source: People Processing Manual.
  • 65. “[a] duty firearm can be drawn when the officer has reasonable grounds to suspect it may be necessary to use the duty firearm for self-preservation or the preservation of anyone under the officer's protection or where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a person is armed and presents a danger to the officer, fellow officers or members of the public in the area.” Source: The Use of Force Policy.
  • 66. Source: Policy on the Use of Force paragraph 32, 2010.
  • 67. Source: People Processing Manual, Chapter 6, International Waste Policy.
  • 68. Source: Health of Animals Act and the CFIA International Waste Policy (AHPD-DSAE-IE-2002-17-3), animal products and by-products not originating in Canada or the United States that are to be disposed of in Canada are regulated as international waste.
  • 69. Source: People Processing Manual for Cruise ships.
  • 70. Source: Consolidated Management Reporting Services, Notice of Penalty Assessment. August 2010. AMPs are tracked by mode of transportation but not by vessel type.
  • 71. Source: Marine Core Services Review, Draft, CBSA, 2010, p. 17.
  • 72. Source: Marine Core Services Review, Draft, CBSA 2010, p. 7.
  • 73. One agreement may include multiple vessel clearances.
  • 74. A vessel clearance refers to one cruise ship. The number of passengers per ship is not available.
  • 75. Source: NHQ Inventory of Cost-Recovery Agreements, CBSA, Designation Services Unit FY 2006–2007 to 2009–2010.
  • 76. Yarmouth Ferry Terminal (Atlantic), Midland Town Dock, Parry Sound Town Docks, and Toronto Harbour Piers 51 & 52 and Queen Elizabeth Dock (Greater Toronto Area), Prince Arthur's Landing (Northern Ontario), Dieppe Park and Sarnia Government Dock (Windsor/St Clair), Goderich Harbour, Port Colborne, Port Weller, Thorold, and Tobermory (Niagara/Fort Erie).
  • 77. People Processing Manual, Chapter 7, p. 1.
  • 78 . No cruise traffic was received at the Yarmouth Ferry Terminal, thus data represents six ports.
  • 79. Ibid.
  • 80. In 2009–2010, only one of three ports received cruise traffic (Toronto Harbour), thus data represents this port alone.
  • 81. The number of officers dispatched to provide these services varies according to the size of the vessel. The Montréal office does not provide any cost recoverable services at non-designated sites.
  • 82. Traffic includes passengers and crew for cruise ships and tour boats and only passengers for ferry, as no crew data was available for ferry traffic.
  • 83. Calculated by dividing the number of passengers and crew by the total expenditures within the region.
  • 84. Traffic includes passengers and crew for cruise ships and tour boats and passengers for ferry as no crew data was available.
  • 85. Calculated by dividing the number of passengers and crew by the total expenditures within the region.
  • 86. The Northern Ontario Region only reported on Marine Security expenditures.
  • 87. The data provided in Exhibit 11 does not indicate whether the expenditures include PSI spending.
  • 88. A non-regular member of a staff, a member of the staff or an employee who is not part of the manpower complement (e.g. captain's wife).
  • 89. By comparison, the CBSA collected $1.9M in cost-recovery fees for 2009–2010.
  • 90. Source: Marine Core Services Review, Draft, CBSA 2010.
  • 91. Source: Inventory of Contracts – Cruise, Designation Services Unit, 2010.
  • 92. Services performed by an officer at the request of a person in charge of imported goods or goods destined for exportation is considered to be special services.
  • 93. Source: Memorandum D1-2-1, CBSA, 2008.
  • 94. Ibid.
  • 95. Source: People processing manual, CBSA, 2010, Paragraph 120.
  • 96. Based on cruise ship schedules (from Victoria, Halifax and Québec City) and cruise line itineraries (from Princess Cruises, Holland America and Carnival), multiple ports of call within Canada are rare on the West Coast. The majority of cruises in the Pacific region include only one stop in British Columbia.
  • 97. If a cruise line planned their first point of arrival to be at a non-designated site they would still be required to pay cost recovery for the clearances services.
  • 98. The ship agents are responsible for providing the required information for all participants to CBSA a minimum of 48 hours in advance of the ship's arrival.
  • 99. Source: People Processing Manual, CBSA, 2010, Paragraph 120.
  • 100. If a cruise line planned its first point of arrival to be at a non-designated site, it would still be required to pay cost recovery for the clearances services.
  • 101. A facilities guide is in early stages of development for cruise ship specific requirements.
  • 102. Many factors may lead to a decision to change the designation or hours of service of a POE, such as legislative changes, new government, agency or departmental policy, ensure operational efficiencies, budgetary constraints/reduction, and the need to level the playing field for operators.
  • 103. Source: Service Delivery Framework, Designation Services Unit, November 2009.
  • 104. Source: CBSA Inventory of Cost-Recovery Contracts (2006–2007 to 2009–2010), Designation Services Unit.