

Currently released so far... 12900 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/08
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
2011/05/13
2011/05/14
2011/05/15
2011/05/16
2011/05/17
2011/05/18
2011/05/19
2011/05/20
2011/05/21
2011/05/22
2011/05/23
2011/05/24
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Consulate Karachi
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AE
ASEC
AS
AR
AMGT
AFIN
AORC
AU
AG
AF
APER
ABLD
ADCO
ABUD
AM
AID
AJ
AEMR
AMED
AL
ASUP
AN
AIT
ACOA
ANET
ASIG
AA
AGMT
AINF
AFFAIRS
ADANA
AY
AADP
ARF
ACS
AGR
AMCHAMS
AECL
AUC
APEC
APECO
AFGHANISTAN
ACAO
ASEAN
ADM
AGAO
AND
ADPM
ATRN
ALOW
AROC
APCS
AORG
AO
AODE
ACABQ
AX
AMEX
AZ
ARM
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
ACBAQ
AFSI
AFSN
AC
ASEX
AER
AVERY
AGRICULTURE
ASCH
AFU
AMG
ATPDEA
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AORL
BR
BO
BA
BM
BL
BH
BK
BEXP
BILAT
BTIO
BF
BU
BD
BY
BE
BG
BB
BBSR
BT
BRUSSELS
BP
BX
BC
BIDEN
BMGT
BWC
BN
BTIU
CA
CS
CO
CD
CR
CPAS
CDG
CI
CDC
CBW
CU
CVIS
CE
CONS
CH
CMGT
CASC
CY
CW
CG
CJAN
CIDA
CODEL
CWC
CIA
CBSA
CEUDA
CFED
CLINTON
CAC
CL
CACS
CIC
CHR
CAPC
CM
CT
CTR
COM
CROS
CN
COPUOS
CV
CF
CARSON
CONDOLEEZZA
CICTE
CYPRUS
COUNTER
COUNTRY
CBE
CKGR
CVR
COUNTERTERRORISM
CITEL
CLEARANCE
COE
CARICOM
CB
CSW
CITT
CACM
CDB
CJUS
CTM
CAN
CLMT
CBC
CNARC
CIS
EFIN
ECON
ETRD
EAID
EC
EU
EUN
EINV
EG
ETTC
EIND
ELAB
EAGR
ECIN
EINT
ENRG
EFIS
ELTN
EAIR
EPET
EZ
ET
ENERG
ECPS
EWWT
EI
ETRN
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EEPET
EUNCH
ER
ES
EN
EMIN
ESENV
ENNP
ENGR
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ENVI
ECINECONCS
ELN
EFTA
ELECTIONS
ENVR
EXTERNAL
ENIV
ESA
EPA
ETRO
ETRDECONWTOCS
EUR
ECUN
EXIM
EK
EUREM
ECONOMY
EUMEM
ERNG
EFINECONCS
EAIDS
ECA
ETRC
EINVEFIN
ETC
EAP
EINN
ECONOMIC
EXBS
ENGY
ECONOMICS
EIAR
EINDETRD
ECONEFIN
EURN
EDU
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ECIP
EFIM
EREL
EINVETC
ECONCS
ETRA
EAIG
EUC
ERD
IQ
IR
IS
IN
IA
IC
IZ
ICRC
ID
IDA
IT
IO
IAEA
ICJ
ICAO
IV
IBRD
IMF
IAHRC
IWC
ILO
ISLAMISTS
IGAD
ILC
ITU
ITF
INRA
INRO
ICTY
INRB
ITALY
IBET
IL
INTELSAT
ISRAELI
IMO
IDP
ICTR
ITRA
IRC
IRAQI
IEFIN
IPR
IIP
INMARSAT
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
INTERNAL
IRS
INTERPOL
IEA
INR
ISRAEL
IZPREL
IRAJ
IF
ITPHUM
IACI
INDO
KPAO
KMDR
KCOR
KNNP
KJUS
KCRM
KDEM
KVPR
KTFN
KPRP
KTIP
KSCA
KSUM
KTEX
KIDE
KIRF
KV
KTIA
KN
KG
KFRD
KWMN
KUNR
KISL
KU
KGHG
KPKO
KOMS
KPAL
KIPR
KMCA
KOMC
KRVC
KSEP
KAWC
KOLY
KWBG
KACT
KFLO
KHIV
KZ
KGIC
KBCT
KDRG
KBTR
KCFE
KE
KHLS
KMPI
KAWK
KPWR
KIRC
KRAD
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFLU
KPLS
KRIM
KSTH
KDDG
KPRV
KICC
KS
KSAF
KBIO
KREC
KCGC
KCIP
KTDB
KWAC
KPAI
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFSC
KSTC
KMFO
KID
KNAR
KMIG
KVRP
KNEI
KGIT
KNSD
KHDP
KSAC
KWMM
KR
KCOM
KAID
KENV
KVIR
KHSA
KO
KCRS
KPOA
KTER
KFIN
KSPR
KTBT
KX
KCMR
KMOC
KCRCM
KBTS
KSEO
KOCI
KNUP
KPAONZ
KNUC
KNNPMNUC
KERG
KSCI
KTLA
KCSY
KTRD
KMRS
KNPP
KJUST
KRCM
KCFC
KCHG
KREL
KFTFN
KLIG
KDEMAF
KGCC
KICA
KHUM
KSEC
KPIN
KESS
KDEV
KPIR
KWWMN
KOM
KWNM
KRFD
KRGY
KIFR
KWMNCS
KPAK
MARR
MOPS
MUCN
MCAP
MNUC
MEPP
MTCRE
MASS
MO
MIL
MX
MAS
MEDIA
MAR
MI
MQADHAFI
MPOS
MTCR
MK
MG
MA
MY
MU
ML
MPS
MW
MD
MARAD
MC
MR
MT
MTRE
MASC
MRCRE
MAPP
MZ
MP
MOPPS
MTS
MLS
MILI
MEPN
MEPI
MEETINGS
MERCOSUR
MCC
MIK
MAPS
MV
MILITARY
MDC
MASSMNUC
NI
NZ
NL
NO
NPT
NATO
NS
NU
NP
NPA
NSFO
NDP
NT
NW
NASA
NSG
NE
NORAD
NAFTA
NG
NATIONAL
NSSP
NV
NSF
NK
NA
NEW
NPG
NR
NGO
NIPP
NZUS
NH
NC
NRR
NAR
NATOPREL
NSC
OIIP
OPRC
OTRA
OEXC
OREP
OSCE
OVIP
OPAD
OBSP
OECD
OFFICIALS
OAS
OPDC
ODIP
OPCW
OES
OFDP
OPIC
OCS
OIC
OHUM
OSCI
OVP
ODC
OIE
OTR
OMIG
OSAC
OFDA
ON
OCII
PREL
PINR
PGOV
PARM
PE
PTER
PHUM
PO
PINS
PREF
PK
PM
POL
PBTS
PNAT
PHSA
PAS
PA
PL
PGIV
PHUMPREL
POGOV
PAK
PEL
PROP
PP
PINL
PBT
PTBS
PG
PINF
PRL
PALESTINIAN
PSEPC
POSTS
PAHO
PHUMPGOV
PGOC
PNR
PREFA
PMIL
POLITICS
POLICY
PROV
PBIO
PREO
PAO
PDOV
PGOF
POV
PCI
PRAM
PSI
POLITICAL
PAIGH
PJUS
PARMS
PROG
PTERE
PRGOV
PORG
PS
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PPA
PINT
PMAR
PRELP
PNG
PFOR
PUNE
PGOVLO
PHUMBA
POLINT
PGOVE
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PDEM
PECON
PY
PLN
PHUH
PF
PHUS
PU
PARTIES
PCUL
PGGV
PSA
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
RU
RS
REGION
REACTION
REPORT
RO
RW
RCMP
RSO
RP
RM
ROOD
RFE
RICE
ROBERT
RSP
RF
RELATIONS
RIGHTS
RIGHTSPOLMIL
RUPREL
SENV
SY
SNAR
SCUL
SP
SF
SW
SOCI
SU
SMIG
SO
SA
SR
SZ
SI
SC
SEVN
SN
STEINBERG
SK
SH
SNARCS
SPCE
SARS
SNARN
SG
SL
SYRIA
SIPRS
SAARC
SNARIZ
SWE
SYR
SEN
SCRS
SAN
ST
SIPDIS
SSA
SPCVIS
SOFA
SENVKGHG
SANC
SHI
SHUM
TU
TSPA
TBIO
TS
TRGY
TINT
TPHY
TN
TW
TH
TZ
TSPL
TP
TBID
TI
TF
TD
TT
TNGD
TL
TC
THPY
TIP
TX
TV
TK
TERRORISM
TO
TRSY
TURKEY
TFIN
TAGS
TR
UK
UNSC
UNGA
UNESCO
UNHRC
UP
UN
USTR
US
UNDC
UY
UNICEF
UNDP
UNMIK
UNAUS
UNCHC
UNCSD
USOAS
UNFCYP
UG
UNIDROIT
UNO
UV
UNHCR
UNEP
USEU
UZ
UNCND
USUN
UNCHR
USNC
USPS
USAID
UE
UNVIE
UAE
UNODC
UNCHS
UNFICYP
UNDESCO
UNC
UNPUOS
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 05OTTAWA3732, PRECLEARANCE CONSULTATIVE GROUP REVIEWS POLICIES
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05OTTAWA3732.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
05OTTAWA3732 | 2005-12-22 15:30 | 2011-04-28 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Embassy Ottawa |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
221530Z Dec 05
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 OTTAWA 003732
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
FOR WHA/CAN, EB/TRA, AND L/WHA
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAIR ECIN ASEC CA
SUBJECT: PRECLEARANCE CONSULTATIVE GROUP REVIEWS POLICIES
AND PROCEDURES
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED--PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY.
¶1. (SBU) Summary: The inaugural meeting of the Preclearance
Consultative Group (PCG) took place in Ottawa on December 13.
The U.S. side was represented by the State Department,
Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Transportation
Security Administration. Canadian officials were from
Foreign Affairs Canada, Transport Canada, and the Canada
Border Services Agency (CBSA). Terry Breese, Director of the
Office of Canadian Affairs, Department of State, led the U.S.
delegation. Tobias Nussbaum, Director, U.S. Relations
Division, Foreign Affairs Canada, led the Canadian
delegation. This was the first formal review since
conclusion of the Aviation Preclearance Agreement in 2001 of
policies and procedures at the seven air preclearance
facilities in Canada (the eighth will be in Halifax). Issues
raised included congestion at preclearance areas, especially
during peak hours; intransit and progressive preclearance;
and U.S. input ("consultation") to the process of granting
security clearances for Canadian employees having access to
the preclearance areas. Government of Canada (GOC) officials
agreed that a mechanism can probably be developed whereby the
U.S. can check Canadians working in the preclearance areas
against U.S. data bases, though the extent of such
information sharing was not resolved at this meeting.
Several members of the group will meet again soon to address
the immediate concerns of the Halifax International Airport
Authority (HIAA) regarding the installation of radiation
detection equipment at the new preclearance facility there.
Other follow up items will be handled through correspondence
between PCG member agencies. End summary.
-----------------------------------------
A Brief History of Preclearance in Canada
-----------------------------------------
¶2. (U) Following a pre-meeting in Washington in October,
2005, and numerous e-mail and telephone exchanges, the
members of the PCG finally sat down in Ottawa on December 13
to work on a mutually-agreed agenda. The U.S. has provided
preclearance customs and immigration services for passengers
departing Canada for the United States from some Canadian
airports since the 1950's. Being precleared in Canada allows
passengers the flexibility to land in U.S. destination cities
which are not serviced by U.S. inspection agencies. A formal
preclearance agreement was signed by Canada and the U.S. in
1974; that was subsequently updated by an agreement signed in
January 2001 and brought into force in May 2003.
Preclearance is presently offered at seven airports:
Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver, and
Winnipeg. Halifax is scheduled to begin preclearance on
October 1, 2006. Although the 2001 agreement authorizes
Canada to offer preclearance at 13 U.S. airports, no
facilities have been opened in the U.S. The 2001 agreement
also stipulated that a Preclearance Consultative Group would
meet on a regular basis to address issues which could not be
resolved at the local (individual airport) level, and that
the PCG should conduct a joint review of the preclearance
program. The December 13 meeting was the first PCG review.
------------------------------
Major U.S. Issues/Agenda Items
------------------------------
¶3. (SBU) Perhaps the foremost concern of U.S. preclearance
personnel is ensuring physical security in the preclearance
area itself. U.S. officers working preclearance are not
armed. They must rely on armed Canadian police officers to
respond if a passenger threatens or assaults them, or must be
forcibly detained, removed, or arrested. Our officers are
also vulnerable to any weapon, explosive, or biological agent
that a would-be terrorist or hijacker might be trying to
smuggle aboard a flight to the U.S. The U.S. position is
that for any new preclearance facilities, or extensive
remodeling of existing facilities, we want baggage and
passenger security screening to be done by Canadian Air
Transport Security Authority (CATSA) personnel in front of,
not after, the preclearance area (see para. 5 also). Second,
many Canadian airport, airline, contractor, and vendor
employees have access to the preclearance area. The U.S. is
concerned that Transport Canada, which grants security
clearances that allow the airport authorities to issue
identification badges, does not have access to all
potentially detrimental information concerning an applicant
for employment. The U.S. wants to ensure that a Canadian
with a record in the United States does not slip through the
Transport Canada background investigation. In addition to
normal criminal checks, which can be conducted by Transport
Canada and CBSA now, the U.S. also wishes to check Canadians
who may work in preclearance areas against CBP and
Immigration and Customs Enforcement records.
¶4. (SBU) In response to U.S. arguments, GOC officials noted
that the GOC has concluded that sharing of an applicant's
name with CBP may not run counter to the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms (equivalent to the U.S. Bill of Rights).
However, the GOC believes that supplying extensive biographic
data raises Charter concerns but left date and place of birth
for further consideration. The U.S. side pointed out that
the more data supplied, the less of a problem we will have
with false matches. The GOC offered to work up a model of
exactly how information sharing between Transport Canada and
CBP might work. An issue for Canada is that the GOC might be
put in the position of justifying and explaining why a
Canadian citizen was denied the right to work on Canadian
soil; i.e., the preclearance area. The U.S. noted that there
might be occasions when we would not be able to share with
the GOC the reason why we request a hold on a particular
applicant.
¶5. (U) On the location of CATSA screening, Canadian
officials agreed that security screening will be placed in
front of preclearance facilities at all new or extensively
remodeled airports, a commitment we have been seeking for
some time. Regarding security in general at preclearance
areas, the U.S. noted that access to the area is a problem.
Sometimes non-passengers get all the way back to the
preclearance area without having been asked by airport
personnel for a ticket or boarding pass. It was noted that
at Vancouver airport, the "panic button" in the preclearance
area is not connected to any warning alarm. In addition, the
armed guard stationed at preclearance in Vancouver is in the
secondary area and is unable to view (or react to) what is
happening in primary inspection. The U.S. agreed to document
these and other such incidents in writing and submit them to
the GOC for action.
-------------------
The Case of Halifax
-------------------
¶6. (U) CBP reported that the process for starting Halifax
preclearance in October 2006 is moving forward. CBP approved
the overall building construction plan and has started
procurement of equipment. Recruitment of staff has begun.
There will be 14 to 19 inspectors in addition to the port
director. CBP anticipates that 270,000 passengers per year
will be precleared when the facility opens.
¶7. (U) The status of Halifax preclearance and the opening of
the facility on October 1 raises two issues: radiation
detection equipment for checked baggage, and the provision of
information on checked baggage to CBP inspectors. The U.S.
requirement that all airports use such equipment to inspect
passengers and baggage was issued after construction of the
airport preclearance facility was already approved and
underway. The U.S. requirement for information on checked
baggage has not been accommodated in the Halifax preclearance
facility design blueprints. Finally, the GOC reported that
HIAA is under the impression that CBP will pay for the
radiation detection equipment, but CBP allowed as how it has
not come to a final decision regarding payment for the
equipment. The GOC asked for, and the U.S. side agreed to,
"technical written explanations" regarding both the radiation
detection equipment and checked baggage requirements. U.S.
officials offered to meet soon with HIAA to go over these
requirements. The GOC suggested that the U.S. encourage HIAA
to invite Transport Canada to those meetings as well.
Regarding the opening date of October 1 and radiation
detection equipment, it was pointed out that handheld
scanners could be used until such time as permanent equipment
was installed. The U.S. will take into consideration a later
start-up date (post-October 1) for the permanent radiation
equipment. CBP will provide contact information to HIAA
regarding a company in Texas that manufactures the equipment
preferred by CBP.
----------------------------------
Major Canadian Issues/Agenda Items
----------------------------------
¶8. (U) The GOC raised the issue of congestion at Toronto and
Montreal, particularly during peak periods such as
pre-holiday travel. Canada also raised the question of CBP's
commitment in terms of personnel, equipment, and other
resources to adequately manage renewed growth in passenger
and baggage traffic between Canada and the U.S. now that the
aviation sector is bouncing back from the declines caused by
9/11. Canada pointed out that the successful negotiation of
an Open Skies agreement will further stimulate air traffic
between our two countries. The GOC reported that in a recent
four-hour meeting with Canadian carriers, two hours were
devoted to discussion of the congestion problem. The GOC
said that Canadian carriers had even offered to pay an
additional dollar to CBP from the Air Travelers Security
Charge at preclearance airports for passenger processing.
¶9. (U) Continuing on congestion, Canada pointed out that at
the Toronto preclearance area the morning rush hour lineup,
when flights are most dense, can be 90 minutes long. Pre-
and post-holiday air travelers are also subjected to long
waits. The U.S. replied that there must be a coordinated
effort by members of the airport council (e.g., airport
administration, CBP, CATSA, and the carriers) to reduce
congestion. Scheduling most flights of the day during a
two-hour morning period, the time considered most popular
with travelers, will of course lead to crowding at that
preferred flight time and should be addressed by the airport
council. CBP pointed out that sometimes it isn't responsible
for the congestion. At Vancouver airport, for example, CBP
periodically stops processing because CATSA cannot handle the
passenger flow.
¶10. (U) Regarding future growth and the commitment of
resources, the GOC offered to share with the U.S. studies it
has undertaken on airport growth rates. For its part, CBP
explained that it has developed models for the staffing of
preclearance facilities. CBP's models incorporate best
practices and also examine the most efficient use of
resources at preclearance facilities. CBP's staffing models
are not generally releasable, but CBP will share them with
the GOC. The U.S. will feed GOC data on projected growth
into CBP staffing models. The two sides expressed confidence
that application of the studies and staffing models will
enable the two governments to direct the other players
involved in airport councils to create conditions to both
avoid congestion and meet the demands of anticipated growth.
The GOC will encourage Canadian airport authorities and
carriers to form councils to work with CBP and CATSA.
¶11. (SBU) The GOC raised the issue of complaints about the
preclearance process/procedures. Canadian travelers complain
about being "detained" in secondary inspection, and the lack
of adequate advance information regarding their right to
withdraw their application to enter the United States once
the preclearance process has started. Foreign Affairs
receives about four complaint letters per month. CBP replied
that there is a customer satisfaction form available on which
travelers can register their comments about preclearance,
including complaints. A passenger can also ask at any time
in the preclearance process to speak with a supervisor, and
that request will be honored. It was suggested that more
signage could be displayed concerning a Canadian's right of
withdrawal. (Note: There are signs in the primary
inspection area, but not in the secondary area. End note.)
CBP offered to send directives to the preclearance ports
informing officers of their rights and obligations concerning
withdrawal. CBSA also undertook to restart training for CBP
officers on how Canadian law applies to the right of
withdrawal. Finally, the U.S. agreed to take action on
complaint letters received by the GOC, and to provide a
written response when appropriate.
¶12. (U) Canada asked that CBP officers be better informed
about the process whereby they must register with Foreign
Affairs Canada on arrival in country, and apply for an
identification card that is issued by the Protocol Office of
Foreign Affairs. The officers should also be sure to apply
for renewals of passports and work permits prior to their
expiration, and to return their identification cards at the
end of their assignments in Canada. The U.S. side said that
this issue is being addressed. Port directors and Embassy
Ottawa are making sure that officers are aware of these
requirements.
----------------------
Intransit Preclearance
----------------------
¶13. (U) Canada and the U.S. agreed to a joint review of
intransit preclearance, whereby passengers from domestic
Canadian flights, as well as foreign passengers from
international flights, arrive at a preclearance airport and
are processed for U.S.-bound flights. Intransit is
operational in Vancouver and works well. Domestic and
international passengers on their way to the U.S. share the
same secure transit facility. The GOC limits the number of
carriers (to four) whose passengers can apply for intransit
preclearance when they arrive in Vancouver. If CBP finds an
international intransit passenger inadmissible to the U.S.,
that passenger is turned over to CBSA, not returned to the
carrier for repatriation. To allow CBP to inspect
international intransit passengers with adequate time, the
carriers fax the Advance Passenger Information System (APIS)
data to CBP well before the arrival of the plane in
Vancouver. Toronto and Montreal want to begin intransit
preclearance, in 2007 and 2008, respectively.
--------------------------
"Progressive Preclearance"
--------------------------
¶14. (U) Canada and the U.S. had finalized pre-9/11 an MOU
for a pilot project for progressive preclearance under which
passengers could be cleared by CBP in Ottawa who were
transiting Toronto or Montreal for U.S.-bound flights. Under
that plan, an aircraft would carry only cleared passengers on
the domestic leg who were U.S.-bound. At the December 13 PCG
meeting, the U.S. agreed to review the pilot and reply. A
major challenge in Toronto and Montreal will be sterile areas
with adequate security--and size--to hold transit passengers.
Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa
WILKINS