Executive summary: United States preclearance in Canada
Description of the project
Preclearance is a border management program designed to enhance border security, improve the cross-border flow of legitimate goods and travellers and allow for border infrastructure to be used more efficiently. Associated legislation, regulation and policy provide authority to border officers of an inspecting party (example, the US) to conduct customs, immigration, agriculture and public health and safety examinations inside the territory of a host party (example, Canada). By doing so, preclearance allows border officers of the inspecting party to determine the admissibility of goods and travellers before they enter into the territory of the inspecting party.
In , Canada and the United States signed the Agreement on Land, Rail, Marine, and Air Transport Preclearance (LRMA), a treaty-level agreement establishing the legal framework for an expanded preclearance program between Canada and the US. Based on the LRMA, the Preclearance Act (PCA) 2016 received Royal Assent in . The PCA 2016 provides the enabling legislative authority to ratify the LRMA, and it replaced the PCA 1999. Ratification of the LRMA and the coming into force of the PCA 2016 occurred in . While the LRMA and PCA 2016 allow for Canadian officials in the US to conduct preclearance on goods and individuals seeking to enter Canada, this PIA focuses exclusively on US preclearance operations in Canada, which impact the CBSA's collection of information on individuals and goods.
In Canada, US air preclearance has been successfully in place since the 1950s. As of , US preclearance operations are at eight airports across Canada in the traveller stream. There is no commercial preclearance in Canada and there are no Canadian preclearance operations in the US at this time.
For preclearance in Canada, the PCA 2016 provides the CBSA with legal authority to exercise various powers with respect to US-bound travellers upon the request of or after a referral from Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
After receiving a request from a CBP preclearance officer, and after the CBSA officer has determined there are reasonable grounds under Canadian law, the following searches of a person may occur: frisk search for health and safety, strip search and an monitored Bowel movement (MBM). In addition, after the traveller provides consent, a CBSA officer may transfer a person to a medical facility where an X-ray or body cavity search (BCS) may be performed.
In practice, the CBSA may be called upon to assist the US preclearance officers in performing various types of searches: frisk, strip, MBM, X-ray, and BCS. Personal information is exchanged between the CBSA and CBP for the purposes of preclearance.
Heads of the institution: Privacy impact assessment and US preclearance in Canada
- Government of Canada Institution
- Canada Border Services Agency, Travellers Branch
- Government Official responsible for the privacy impact assessment
- Vice President Travellers Branch
- Head of the government institution / Delegate for section 10 of the Privacy Act
- Director General, Information Sharing, Access to Information and Chief Privacy Office
Name of program or activity of the government institution
- Program
-
Border Management – Sub-program: Traveller Facilitation and Compliance
The following program under the CBSA's Departmental Results Framework (DRF) applies to Preclearance activities: Traveller Facilitation and Compliance.
The CBSA assesses risk to identify threats, manages the free flow of admissible travellers and commercial goods into, through and out of Canada, and manages non-compliance.
Under Traveller Facilitation and Compliance, the CBSA processes admissible travellers and their goods in an efficient manner, and compliant with applicable legislation.
- Standard or Institution specific Class of Record
- To be determined.
- Standard or Institutional specific Personal Information Bank
- To be determined.
- Legal authority for program or activity
-
Predominately, the legal authority is under the Preclearance Act 2016. However, other acts apply to certain processes that extend from preclearance activities, such as the authorities under the Customs Act and Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).
The Agreement on LRMA contains provisions which obligate the Host Party (that is, Canada) to perform certain duties. Because the US did not create or edit legislation, they perform their activities in accordance with the LRMA and the PCA 2016.
Section 2: Risk area identification and categorization
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
Program or activity that does not involve a decision about an identifiable individual | 1 |
Administration of programs / Activity and services | 2 |
Compliance / Regulatory investigations and enforcement | 3 |
Criminal investigation and enforcement / National security | 4 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
Only personal information, with no contextual sensitivities, collected directly from the individual or provided with the consent of the individual for disclosure under an authorized program. | 1 |
Personal information, with no contextual sensitivities after the time of collection, provided by the individual with consent to also use personal information held by another source. | 2 |
Social Insurance Number, medical, financial or other sensitive personal information and/or the context surrounding the personal information is sensitive. Personal information of minors or incompetent individuals or involving a representative acting on behalf of the individual. | 3 |
Sensitive personal information, including detailed profiles, allegations or suspicions, bodily samples and/or the context surrounding the personal information is particularly sensitive. | 4 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
Within the CBSA (amongst one or more programs within the CBSA) | 1 |
With other federal institutions | 2 |
With other or a combination of federal/provincial and/or municipal government(s) | 3 |
Private sector organizations or international organizations or foreign governments | 4 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
One time program or activity | 1 |
Short–term program | 2 |
Long-term program (existing program that has been modified or is established with no clear "sunset") | 3 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
The program affects certain employees for internal administrative purposes | 1 |
The program affects all employees for internal administrative purposes | 2 |
The program affects certain individuals for external administrative purposes | 3 |
The program affects all individuals for external administrative purposes | 4 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
6.1 Does the new or modified program or activity involve the implementation of a new electronic system, software or application program including collaborative software (or groupware) that is implemented to support the program or activity in terms of the creation, collection or handling of personal information? |
Yes No |
6.2. Does the new or modified program or activity require any modifications to IT legacy systems and/or services? |
Yes No |
6.3 Does the new or modified program or activity involve the implementation of one or more of the following technologies? | |
6.3.1 Enhanced identification methods |
Yes No |
6.3.2 Use of Surveillance |
Yes No |
6.3.3 Use of automated personal information analysis, personal information matching and knowledge discovery techniques |
Yes No |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
The personal information is used within a closed system | 1 |
The personal information is used in system that has connections to at least one other system | 2 |
The personal information is transferred to a portable device or is printed | 3 |
The personal information is transmitted using wireless technologies | 4 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
Managerial harm | 1 |
Organizational harm | 2 |
Financial harm | 3 |
Reputation harm, embarrassment, loss of credibility | 4 |
Type | Level of risk |
---|---|
Inconvenience | 1 |
Reputation harm, embarrassment | 2 |
Financial harm | 3 |
Physical harm | 4 |
Page details
- Date modified: