Partners in Protection… Moving Forward

Based on information originally presented by Canada Border Services Agency Original: April 2007 • Updated: February 2008

2

Table of Contents

Part 1Strengthening the Program …..………………….…….. 3

Part 2Mutual Recognition with Customs-Trade PartnershipAgainst Terrorism (C-TPAT)……………………………. 9

Part 3Status of PIP …………………………………………….. 17

3

Strengthening the Program

4

FUNDING

• This will be a year of changes and transition for the Partners in Protection Program (PIP).

• Funding to implement significant enhancements to the PIP program was announced in the Spring budget 2007 by Minister Day.

• Treasury Board (TB) funded - $11.6 M over five-years.

5

SECURITY and PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP (SPP)

• SPP Deliverables:

Implement significant enhancements to strengthen the PIP program;

Achieve mutual recognition between Partners in Protection (PIP) and U.S. Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) with target date of June 2008.

6

Current Program Delivery - Overview

• Companies provide an Information Sheet, a summary of the security measures they have in place and sign an MOU

• Risking performed at HQ

• Intelligence Officers (IO) deliver the program nationally in line with the Customs to Business partnership recommendations of the World Customs Organization:

– IOs perform physical security assessment and conduct awareness sessions

– IO can detect and deter illegal activities by:• Exchanging information, discussing smuggling trends, gathering

tactical intelligence, promoting safe streets against drugs, weapons, etc. and cultivating informants

7

PIP Program Evaluation

“ PIP is a highly relevant program, has a valid program rationale and is clearly aligned with CBSA and government priorities. ”

“ No other CBSA program provides CBSA with an opportunity to work in partnership with trading entities to focus on the security of their processes, procedures and premises.”

“ The program is fully justified in an environment of heightened security concerns and increased risk of terrorism and contraband smuggling within cross-border movement of goods. ”

8

Program Evaluation Findings

•Insufficient resources for PIP are having a negative impact

•The absence of an automated system facilitating program data collection and analysis hinders effective program monitoring and evaluation

•Inconsistent PIP program delivery across Canada

•Funding received as part of SPP agreement ($11.6M) will cover additional program resources

•Phase 1: automate current manual processes with corporate toolsPhase 2: prepare concept paper to develop a long-term solution that will be aligned with CBSA’s corporate strategy (web portal)

•Development of standardized IO training course, awareness session presentation, communication material

Key Findings Solutions

9

•Few costs associated with participation at present, but only a few tangible benefits

•Harmonizing PIP with CBSA programs for pre-approved, low risk clients and closer cooperation with C-TPAT would reduce burden on participants and provide benefits to CBSA

•Outreach efforts not at their ultimate level

•Additional program benefits are being explored (i.e. lower risk scores, FAST, front of the line inspections & expedited passage as part of Business resumption plan)

•PIP is participating in the dialogue to improve other CBSA programs (i.e. FAST) and is currently negotiating mutual recognition with C-TPAT representatives (target date June 2008)

•Detailed communications plan is being prepared and a product review has been undertaken – Focus is on transition, outreach and greater engagement of Regions

Program Evaluation Findings

Key Findings Solutions

10

Mutual Recognition withCustoms-Trade

Partnership Against Terrorism(C-TPAT)

11

Mutual Recognition

• The CBSA is working to make PIP and C-TPAT more compatible.

• Mutual recognition will bring benefits for PIP members:– Easier for businesses to meet requirements of PIP and

C-TPAT, enhanced reputation by demonstrating adherence to high security standards.

• Mutual recognition is being determined using the U.S.’s 4-phase formalized process– Programs must have similar minimum security requirements and

on site validations

12

Mutual Recognition – Current Status

Phase I• July 2007: C-TPAT and PIP representatives met to

commence discussions – no show stoppers

• End of September 2007: PIP sent C-TPAT a detailed side by side comparison of security criteria and received a favourable response.

• November, 2007: C-TPAT and PIP representatives met again

13

Differences between PIP & C-TPAT

• In the security criteria– Generally, the differences are minor in nature and should not

interfere with the programs being acknowledged as compatible.• i.e., PIP asks for a site map, but C-TPAT does not. - a site map will

help IOs identify location of security equipment such as cameras, entrances, etc.

• In the validation process– PIP does not conduct overseas validations of trade chain partners,

like C-TPAT.– C-TPAT provides conditional approval and minimal benefits (3- tier

approval process) prior to on-site validation; PIP does not.

• In the administration of the program– In addition to site visits, PIP offers awareness sessions whereas

C-TPAT on-site validations are for security purposes only.

14

How the Program is Changing

• Security measures verified before application is approved and MOU is signed

• Introduction of deny, suspend, cancel and appeal processes• Current recommendations will become minimum-security

requirements– e.g. currently we recommend the positive identification of

employees, visitors and vendors; under the modernized program, this will be mandatory.

• Re-assessment to take place every three years• Current members will not be “grandfathered” into the new program.

However, Members will be given time beyond June 2008 to meet new security criteria (transition period)

15

Impacts of Changes on Current Members

• All members will be required to complete a Security Profile and sign an MOU.

• Some companies may have to make a financial investment in new security equipment and/or implement new security processes (i.e., lighting must be provided, gates must be manned or monitored, employee identification system must be in place, etc.)

• PIP member companies will be required to demonstrate that each of their business partners conform to a reasonable degree of security standards.

16

BENEFITS

• CBSA is considering having low risk scores for PIP members– Business resumption plan– Front of the line examinations

• Improved security levels

• CBSA expertise to assess partners’ security measures, to address any vulnerabilities, and to provide awareness sessions

17

Status of PIP

18

Communications Strategy

3 Communication Plans: Transition, Program Launch, Promotion• Objectives: ensure smooth implementation of new program requirements and foster

awareness• Approach: proactive, high-profile, sustained, tailored and diversified• Products: internet notices, presentations, e-mails and letters, briefing materials, Q&As,

promo items

Key Activities for the short-term Dates• Briefing to Minister November 6 2007• Important Notice posted on Internet November 7, 2007• Letter to PIP members November 7, 2007• MOU and Security Criteria available October 23- December 31, 2007

to the public for comments• Creation of PIP Steering Committee November 15, 2007 • Presentations to Canadian Associations October 2007 – April 2008 • New program developments updates January – April 2008

(e-mail to PIP members, internet updates)

19

• Highway carriers: 1387 members.

• Importers: 340 members. • Manufacturers: 274 members.• Customs brokers: 55 members.

• Highway carriers, importers, manufacturers, and customs brokers equal about 94% of PIP members.

• Others equal about 6%. Courier (12); Marine (10); Air (4)Warehouse (10); Rail (3); FF (3)Port Auth. (5); Logistic (18);

Intermodal (6)

PIP MEMBERSHIP

20

FUTURE CCLA INPUT

• CBSA/CCLA PIP Feedback Conference Call Scheduled:

• Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2008 at 10 a.m. • Awaiting call-in coordinates• Messaging forthcoming

21

CBSA CONTACTS

• Web site address:

www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca

• E-mail address:

pip-pep@cbsa-asfc.gc.ca

Contact Information:

Thompson, Ahern & Co. Ltd.Ron Stefaniuk • Consulting Department

6299 Airport Road, Suite 506Mississauga, Ontario, L4V 1N3

Phone: (905) 677-3471 • Fax: (905) 677-3464