Archived – Evaluation of the Waterways Management Program (WMP)

Archived information

The Standard on Web Usability replaces this content. This content is archived because Common Look and Feel 2.0 Standards have been rescinded.

Archived information 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.

Project Number 6B140
Final Report
February, 2011

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms

AToN
Aids to Navigation Program
BNA
British North America
CCG
Canadian Coast Guard
CHS
Canadian Hydrographic Services
DFO
Department of Fisheries and Oceans
DIS
Dredging Information System
DMMP
Dredged Material Management Plan
EC
Environment Canada
FREMP
Fraser River Management Program
FTE
Full-time Equivalent
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
IBP
Icebreaking Program
MCTS
Marine Communications and Traffic Services
MEB
Management Executive Board
MOU
Memorandum of Understanding
NHQ
National Headquarters
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
OOCL
Orient Overseas Container Line
PAA
Program Activity Architecture
PCMS
Project Control Management Section
PIANC
Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses
PMF
Performance Measurement Framework
PMS
Performance Measurement Strategy
PWGSC
Public Works Government Services Canada
RMAF
Results-based Management and Accountability Framework
RP
Real Property
SCOT
Standing Committee on Transport
TBS
Treasury Board Secretariat
US
United States
USACE
United States Army Corps of Engineers
WD
Waterways Development
WMP
Waterways Management Program

 

Executive Summary

Program Description

Marine trade in Canada’s waterways is a multi-million dollar industry, directly supporting international commerce and trade competitiveness. To a large extent, commerce depends on reliable and safe waterways, and ensuring timely and cost-effective delivery of goods.

Naviagbility in Canadian waterways is highly influenced by water levels and the bottom condition of shipping channels. The monitoring and maintenance services provided by the Waterways Management Program (WMP) enable the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) to help ensure safe, economical and efficient movement of ships in Canadian waterways.

The WMP ensures that commercial shipping channels are designed and maintained by their custodians and operators in the interests of safe navigation, that mariners are provided the necessary information to use the channels in a safe manner, that the channels are environmentally sustainable, and that the requirements of commercial channel navigation are met in the international hydraulically regulated channels of the St. Lawrence River. The WMP’s overall objectives are:

  • To contribute to safe and effective transits and access to ports;

  • To contribute to the environmental sustainability of commercial channels; and

  • To contribute to the economic sustainability of commercial waterways.

The WMP contributes to the achievement of those objectives by carrying out the following activities: channel compliance; channel dredging; channel monitoring; channel and ice cover control structures; and water depth forecasts. WMP provides channel management to ensure accessibility of waterways and to contribute to their safe use. It also sustains navigable channels, reduces marine navigation risks and supports environmental protection.

The WMP is delivered with the support and combined efforts of several key partners and stakeholders such as Canadian Hydrographic Service (CHS), Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), Environment Canada, CCG Fleet, DFO Real Property and external contractors for dredging services. Additional partners and stakeholders include other federal government departments, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Provincial and Municipal authorities, and local interest groups.

The main clients of the program are mariners, pilots, the shipping industry, ferry operators, fishers, as well as the various associations and committees that represent them.

Evaluation Objective and Methodology

The main objective of the WMP Evaluation was to determine the extent to which the WMP is managed effectively and efficiently and whether it had achieved its stated objectives and results. As such, the primary focus of this evaluation was to assess value for money, and to provide clear and valid conclusions about the relevance and performance, including effectiveness, efficiency and economy of the program.

The evaluation was conducted by the DFO Evaluation Directorate and was undertaken between November 2009 and August 2010 and covers the period from 2005-2006 to 2009-2010.  The evaluation assesses the extent to which WMP has achieved its outcomes stemming from activities outlined in the program logic model. This was the first evaluation of WMP.

For this evaluation, a non-experimental evaluation design, in which measurements are taken after the program has been implemented, was used. This model was chosen for several reasons. WMP is a full coverage program that is intended to be delivered across Canada where it is needed and could not be withheld from any area or region by virtue of its safety oriented outcomes. As a result, a control group could not be established. In addition, there were no measures in place before WMP was introduced; therefore a pre-test of the clients in locations receiving the treatment was not possible.

 The evaluation questions were determined on the basis of the new Evaluation Policy (2009), by reviewing documents and the results of the Phase 1 interviews with key contacts.

To the extent possible within the available budget and timeframe, the evaluation methodology incorporated multiple methods and data from different primary and secondary sources in order to ensure that the findings were valid and captured key points of view on the WMP. Whenever possible, the opinions and observations expressed by key informants were corroborated with evidence from program documentation and data. Secondary data was examined including; document reviews, literature review, departmental correspondence and a media scan. Primary data was collected by the evaluation team specifically for this study. These consisted of 19 key informant interviews. Key informants included program personnel, partners and clients.

Over the course of the evaluation, the following limitations in the methodology were observed:

  • Non-experimental Design: Since there are no measurements before the program began, nor a comparison group against which to assess other plausible causes for the outcome, it is difficult to attribute impacts to the program. Although this model lacks scientific rigour, the rigour of this design was increased by describing activities, outputs and outcomes through a logic model, enabling evaluators to make causal linkages, to logically argue that results can be attributed to the program (internal validity). The program’s operationalizations (activities) were described in great detail increasing the evaluation's construct validity. Lastly the evaluation employed a variety of evaluation methods (e.g. interviews, document review), to assess, in the context of the above construct, the impact of the program.

  • Depth of environmental analysis. As part of this analysis, we identified and studied dredging programs in the United States. We undertook a macro level comparison of dredging programs and compared the difference between programs with respect to their overall management of waterways from a delivery perspective.

  • Data from interviews. The sample of clients interviewed reflected the types of clients served by the Waterways Management Program but was not representative of all users of the program's services. As for the limited number of program personnel involved in the delivery of the WMP, this limited the number of perspectives and hence there is a risk of bias in their responses. In this context, both the client and program personnel key informant interviews are based on their extensive experiences.  As there is a likelihood of subjectivity, the qualitative evidence was used in combination with other lines of evidence to ensure neutrality for reporting purposes. 

 

Evaluation Findings and Conclusions

Relevance

Overall, the evaluation concluded that the WMP is relevant as the government of Canada has certain legal mandates to manage its waterways up to the port limits and is restricted with respect to what it can delegate to other legal entities.  With the exception of waterways management services that occur within some port limits, many of WMP activities and assets do not lend themselves to being absorbed by other levels of government or the private sector.

The evaluation findings indicate an overall need for the WMP as it contributes to safe and efficient waterways.  The WMP provides essential information i.e. channel design guidelines as well as advice and guidance to users that is required for the planning and execution of safe transits.  The WMP also responds to an important economic need as their channel monitoring survey and dredging activities contribute to the livelihood of small coastal communities in Canada and the Great Lakes and St.-Lawrence River in order to ensure advertised depths to enable vessels to optimize their loading operations, thus having a significant impact on the sustainability of the economy as a whole.

WMP is aligned with the Government of Canada’s priorities as well as DFO priorities. The program’s long term outcomes of Maritime Safety, Marine Trade and Commerce and Protection of the Marine & Freshwater Environment are aligned with the DFO priority of Safe and Accessible Waterways.

The CCG has the mandate to provide waterways management services and the role of the federal government is appropriate. The evaluation found that the Constitution Act provides the Federal Government with the general legislative authority for waterways management. The Oceans Act provides the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans with the legislative authority to provide services for the safe, economical and efficient movement of ships in Canadian waters through the provision of various services, including channel maintenance. [Solicitor-client privilege] 

As far as assets are concerned, the CCG was unable to divest itself of the marine structures identified for divestiture as no other entities were interested in taking them.

Effectiveness

The evaluation concluded that WMP is achieving its intended outcomes and overall is effective.

WMP contributes to marine safety by the establishment of channel guidelines to usage, safety information, as well as the water level forecast and monitoring of channel bottom conditions. The program also provides advice and guidance based on a per case basis concerning the application of the guidelines for the design, maintenance and safe use of waterways. In addition, according to all respondents interviewed, there is a risk to marine safety if the program does not conduct its activities.

The evaluation found that the program uses marine structures to reduce sedimentation and erosion, however the actual reduction is not well measured. Many of these structures have been performing these functions since the 1930s, and continue to do so today in spite of a lack of current data to support this claim.  In addition, there are six marine structures used for ice control management effectively minimize ice jams and flood damage.  Amongst these structures there are three ice booms in the St-Lawrence River which play a key role.

Marine structures have also led to optimized water flows and levels as they are designed to stabilize main channels by directing river flows towards the navigation channels and causing a natural deepening of the bottom. However, some marine structures in the St-Lawrence River have a limited impact since the construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway and especially, the Moses-Saunders dam in the 1950s whose networks can release water and more effectively control water flows and levels. In spite of the difficulties in measuring WMP’s impact with respect to water flows and levels,  the evaluation concluded marine structures have contributed to optimize water flows and levels even if the impact of some structures have diminished over time.     

The WMP contributes to safe transits and access to ports through the provision of channel guidelines, the sounding and monitoring of channel bottom conditions and provision of information and advice. The evaluation found that other CGG programs such as aids to navigation program (AToN) or icebreaking program (IBP) also contribute to safe transits and access to ports however, WMP contributes in a specific way to safe transits and access to ports.

WMP activities such as channel bottom monitoring, channel guidelines, water level forecasting and dredging also play a significant role in Canada’s economic sustainability. For example, channel bottom monitoring is a key service to shipping companies, allowing them to determine the maximum loads and to plan safe and efficient transits to Canada. Furthermore, all the key informants interviewed confirmed that the program activities contribute to economic sustainability and any decrease of such activities will have a negative impact on the economy.

The importance of the scope of this economic activity is illustrated in Canada’s Foreign Policy Newsweekly: A water and oceans report (2010), where with respect to trade with countries other than US, 92% of Canadian exports and 87% of its imports are moved across ocean trade routes, directly employing nearly 145,000 Canadians and generating $19 billion of economic output.  Also, the WMP provides channel bottom monitoring information for the Port Metro Vancouver and stimulating automobile, steel, forestry and container traffic, resulting in 2,200 jobs, $133 million in direct wages, and $165 million in Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

The evaluation found that the WMP activities such as dredging and channel design guidelines are conducted in compliance with environmental laws.  WMP contributes to environmental sustainability by adhering to environmental laws as well as ensuring safe navigation while reducing risk of incidents or accidents on the water. 

In addition to ensuring that its activities are compliant with laws and regulations, the WMP also ensures that waterways are safe for navigation by preventing an accident that could easily turn to an environmental disaster.  For example, the WMP’s channel design guidelines play a major role when assessing the capacity of a waterway to contribute to safe transits of ships. 

Based on our key informant interviews and document review, we found that the WMP is contributing in achieving its ultimate goal of maritime safety, marine trade and commerce, protection of the marine and freshwater environment.

Overall the evaluation revealed that there are seven partners involved in the delivery of the WMP.  Few issues were found with respect to partners having an impact on the success of the program. For example in spite of Fleet’s aging vessels, there was no evidence to suggest that this is impacting negatively on WMP’s ability to conduct channel bottom monitoring and dredging in the Quebec region.  The evaluation findings also revealed that DFO-Real Property financial issues may impact the WMP’s ability to achieve its outcomes.  As the custodians of all marine structures (except ice booms),  very few investments have been made in their maintenance and refurbishment even though there is a documented need to develop and implement a plan to maintain and/or update the structures.  

Efficiency

Overall, the WMP is operating efficiently with respect to its ability to plan activities, most notably in the case of its risk-based approach to planning channel monitoring surveys and the maintenance and refurbishment of its marine structures.  However, some improvements can be made with respect to clarifying roles and responsibilities with some of its partners, and with respect to performance measurement in the context of results based management.

The WMP has engaged in meaningful planning activities and as a result of the WMP Action Plan, for example, the program has been able to identify several issues that are impacting on the program’s efficiency. For example, findings from the document review and key informant interviews suggest that although some WMP roles and responsibilities with partners are clearly defined, further clarification is needed with respect to developing MOUs or generally clarifying and communicating roles and responsibilities on more specific issues with Port Authorities, DFO-RP, EC, PWGSC and CHS. (See recommendation 2)

Effective channel monitoring survey and marine structure planning is also demonstrated by the program’s development of a risk-based approach to prioritizing activities.  The results of these exercises, confirmed by key informant interviews, suggest that the use of program personnel’s knowledge and experience in conducting risk-based prioritization exercises demonstrates effective decision-making.  By prioritizing activities and allocating resources to optimize the efficient use of resources, the WMP yields maximum production of outputs i.e. surveying channels most in need of monitoring. 

The relevance of the current Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy was examined and the results suggest that the current WMP performance measurement indicators do not accurately align with the outputs and expected outcomes of the program, and as a result, the evaluation was unable to determine relevance of the PM Strategy. Given the incomplete PM Strategy, performance data has not been consistently collected across regions.  The evaluation also found there is a lack of coherence with the TBS RMAF requirements where the WMP has only two of the five recommended components of an RMAF; a logic model and performance measurement framework. (See recommendation 3)

Finally, given the PM Strategy is incomplete and yielding limited performance data, no evidence was found during the course of the evaluation to support the intentional use of performance data in the context of formal results-based management decision-making.

Economy

The evaluation concluded that WMP manages its activities economically through a risk-based approach. The WMP achieves its expected outcomes (maritime safety, marine trade and commerce and protection of the marine and freshwater environment) while minimizing the use of resources; however, the at-risk nature of its current state of operations along with any further reductions in resources may result in a decrease of services and ultimately impact the program’s ability to achieve its outcomes.

A risk-based approach to prioritizing activities and hence allocation of resources for channel monitoring survey activities and the management of marine structures is contributing to the program’s ability to deliver its services economically.   A Heat Map was produced using the results from the channel monitoring surveys prioritization activity (See Graph 1, p.49).  The Heat Map shows that the majority of channels are in the high risk category. In other words, the WMP is at-risk of not providing survey information to mariners in support of safe transits and access to ports. (See recommendation 4) 

Similarly the risk-based approach to prioritize activities and allocation of resources for marine structures found that the majority of structures are also in the high risk category (See Graph 2, p.50).  There is a risk that the structures will not be able to carry out their function thus threatening the program’s ability to stabilize waterways, improve navigation and reduce channel maintenance costs.  In both cases, there is a potential performance issue that translates into a risk of failing to achieve program outcomes.  A lack of resources is a contributing factor to this situation. (See recommendation 5)

WMP financial data indicates that program funding has been consistently reduced over for the past five years.  This is affecting the WMP’s ability to deliver its core services, for example fewer channels are being surveyed each year.  Furthermore, concerns were raised by key informants over the WMP’s current position to deliver only its core services related to safety, which may potentially impact levels of service the program is able to offer, and possibly affect the programs ability to achieve expected outcomes in the future. 

Finally, a comparison between the dredging program in Canada and the United States (U.S.) found the management of waterways in Canada is approached more economically.  The WMP manages its waterways by focusing on channel monitoring activities rather then dredging to determine the best channels through which to navigate and in some cases where to dredge whereas the U.S. manages its waterways by dredging navigational channels for vessels to transit through. 

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the Waterways Management Program evaluation, it is recommended that the program:

Recommendation 1:

[Solicitor-client privilege]

Recommendation 2:

We recommend that the WMP clarify and document by establishing clear MOUs the roles and responsibilities between itself and other federal government partners (PWGSC, CHS, and DFO-RP)

Recommendation 3:

We recommend that the WMP develop and implement a Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy with clearly defined indicators that align with the outputs and expected outcomes of the program. This PM Strategy would include a program profile, a logic model, a performance measurement framework, an evaluation and reporting strategy as well as a data collection strategy.

Recommendation 4:

To ensure safe navigation, now and in the future, we recommend that the CCG communicates to users the status of its mandated channels such as the results of sounding activities and relevant information in order for mariners to make informed navigational decisions.

Recommendation 5:

To ensure safe navigation, now and in the future, we recommend that the CCG and DFO-RP collaboratively develop and implement a maintenance and/or refurbishment plan in order to ensure the suitable performance of its marine structures.

1.  Introduction

1.1.  Context of the Evaluation

This evaluation report aims to present the results of the evaluation of the Waterways Management Program (WMP). As identified by the Evaluation Policy, all direct program spending must be evaluated every five years. This evaluation was slated in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) five-year evaluation plan and focuses on the core issues in assessing value for money as defined by the Treasury Board Evaluation Policy (2009). These core issues include: relevance and performance, including effectiveness, efficiency and economy of the WMP.

The timeframe for this evaluation, a first for the WMP, covers the period from 2005-06 to 2009-10. The evaluation assesses the extent to which WMP has achieved its outcomes stemming from activities outlined in the Program Logic Model. The evaluation is inclusive of the National Capital Region as well as five regional offices.  Site visits were carried out in four regional offices; Maritimes, Quebec, Central and Arctic, and Pacific.  The evaluation was conducted by the DFO’s Evaluation Directorate and was undertaken between November 2009 and August 2010.

1.2  Objectives of the Evaluation

The main objective of this evaluation is to determine to what extent the WMP is managed effectively and efficiently and whether it had achieved its stated objectives and results. As such, the primary focus of this evaluation was to assess value for money, and to provide clear and valid conclusions about the relevance and performance, including effectiveness, efficiency and economy of the program. In this report we draw the lessons learned from each of these issues and develop recommendations for improving the program going-forward. The results of this evaluation will be intended for program management decision-making and informal contribution in support of Strategic Review.

2.  Program Profile/Background

2.1.  Context and Overview of the WMP

Marine trade in Canada’s waterways is a multi-million dollar industry, directly supporting international commerce and trade competitiveness. To a large extent, commerce depends on reliable and safe waterways, and ensuring timely and cost-effective delivery of goods. Safe, efficient and environmentally-sound use of Canada’s waterways brings economic benefits to the marine shipping industry as well as economic and social benefits to the public.

The Canadian Coast Guard’s (CCG’s) WMP helps to ensure safe and efficient navigation, supports protection of the marine environment, and facilitates marine trade and commerce along 57 different waterways, representing 980 kilometres of waterways across Canada.

Navigability in Canadian waterways is highly influenced by water levels and the bottom condition of shipping channels. The monitoring and maintenance services provided by the WMP enable the CCG to help ensure safe, economical, and efficient movement of ships in Canadian waterways. These services also contribute to the maintenance of specific navigable channels, reduce marine navigation risks, and support environmental protection.

The WMP has been in existence since 1982, when the dredging program was transferred from Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) to Transport Canada. The CCG remained with Transport Canada until 1995, when it was transferred to DFO.

2.2.  Partners, Stakeholders and Clients

The WMP is delivered with the support and combined efforts of the following key partners and stakeholders:

  • Canadian Hydrographic Service (CHS), CCG Fleet (provides sounding vessels and crew) and Environment Canada (EC) for services such as conducting bottom sounding surveys in specific waterways (Quebec Region) and the provision of water level depth forecasts for mariners to plan safe and efficient passage, and to maximize their vessel cargo.
  • PWGSC for services such as bottom sounding surveys, dredging, and the adequate disposal of sediments in all regions, except Quebec. They provide the sounding vessels, however, they hire external contractors for dredging services.
  • DFO Real Property Directorate, for the lifecycle management (maintenance and upkeep) of marine structures; and
  • CCG Integrated Technical Services, for the management of the information system and communication services of MARINFO in the Quebec Region.

Additional partners and stakeholders include other government departments such as Transport Canada, EC, branches of DFO’s Marine Programs, Estuary/River Management Boards, marine industry associations, pilotage authorities, ports and channel owners that provide expert advice, guidance, resources, and support. WMP is also supported regionally by a variety of partners and stakeholders such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, delivery resources and personnel, including a system of staffed facilities, local contractors, Provincial and Municipal authorities, and local interest groups.

The main clients of the WMP are mariners, pilots, the shipping industry, ferry operators, fishers, as well as the various associations and committees that represent them.

2.3  Program Objectives

The following are Waterways Management Program objectives:

  • Contribute to safe and effective transits and access to ports;
  • Contribute to the environmental sustainability of commercial channels; and
  • Contribute to the economic sustainability of commercial waterways.

According to the DFO Program Activity Architecture (PAA), WMP is a sub-activity within the CCG program activity under the strategic outcome of ‘Safe and accessible waterways’. The program contributes to the achievement of safe and accessible waterways by carrying out information and advice and channel depth management activities.

While WMP does not have a Results-based Management Accountability Framework (RMAF), the program did create, in 2002, a Performance Measurement Strategy (PMS). A revised PM Strategy is currently being drafted by the program to more accurately measure the outputs and outcomes of the program.

2.4  Program Activities

Information and Advice and Channel Depth Management are the two main activities of the WMP. 

Within information and advice activities, WMP provides channel design and usage expertise, consult stakeholders and provides advice on safe channel usage, conducts water level depth forecasting, and monitors channel bottoms to provide associated channel safety information to users. Within Channel Depth Management activities, WMP conducts the following activities; managing channel marine structures and dredging of Central and Arctic and Quebec regions.

2.5  Program Risk Profile

The WMP completed a Risk Profile in 2008/09 and again in 2009/10. In reference to the 2009/10 Risk Profile, nine risks were identified with the majority classified as moderate to high with regard to impact and moderate to high for likelihood. The following risks were identified; outdated work descriptions in Waterways Management; rust-out Waterways structures; funding pressures; sustainability of Waterways surveying service delivery; directives supporting provision of Waterways surveying service are unclear; lack of management direction over Waterways management future; ambiguity over roles and responsibilities in Waterways program; capacity to support e-navigation; and tools to assess larger vessels.

2.6  Governance and Resources of the Program

The WMP reports to Navigations Systems sector of the CGG. The Navigation Systems sector is part of the Maritimes Services Division of the CCG. The CCG is a special operating agency of DFO. The WMP program has personnel both at the national headquarters (NHQ) and in the 5 CCG regions (Pacific, Central and Arctic, Maritimes, Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec).

At NHQ in Ottawa, the manager of the Waterways has a staff of four people; two engineers, a waterways technology officer and a program monitoring officer.   The Waterways Management Manager reports to the Director of Navigation Systems which in turn reports to the Director General of Maritimes Services. The CCG deputy head is the Commissioner which oversees the work of the Director General of Maritimes Services.

 The Regional Offices of the CCG are headed by an Assistant Commissioner whom report to the Commissioner of the CCG in national headquarters. The regional Director of Maritimes Services reports to the Assistant Commissioner.  The Waterways Superintendent reports to the regional Director of Maritimes Services.

The following table summarizes WMP financial and human resource information from 2005/06 to 2009/10:

TOTAL PROGRAM COST

Spending Profile

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

Mains

Actuals

Mains

Actuals

Mains

Actuals

Mains

Actuals

Mains

Actuals

Salary

3,136.6

2,358.5

3,114.7

2,476.1

3,114.3

2,585.8

1,764.2

3,129.6

2,805.0

 

Non-Salary O&M

12,601.8

7,120.6

11,035.5

7,932.9

12,058.4

12,208.6

6,797.2

9,397.6

6,730.0

 

Vote-Netted Revenue (VNR)

(4,600.0)

(4,342.6)

(4,600.0)

(5,239.6)

(4,600.0)

(5,431.6)

(4,600.0)

(5,929.0)

(4,600.0)

 

Total Program Costs

11,138.4

5,136.5

9,550.2

5,169.5

10,572.7

9,362.8

3,961.4

6,598.2

4,935.0

 

Table 1: Waterways Management Program Total Program Cost

The CCG manages the maintenance dredging of the navigation channel of the St. Lawrence River between the Port of Montreal and Cape Gribane near the City of Quebec. This navigation channel (St. Lawrence Ship Channel) requires maintenance dredging on an annual basis to ensure commercial navigation. Based on the recommendations from SCOT, the costs of this maintenance dredging service are to be borne those who benefit from this service. Ships that transit the St. Lawrence Ship Channel (with a draught of 5.0 meters or more) pay a fee obtained by multiplying the gross tonnage of the ship by $0.0377 for each transit1. The CCG is reimbursed, via fees, for the total direct costs it incurs to manage and perform the maintenance dredging of the Ship Channel on behalf of commercial users. In cases of a shortfall in revenue, for each fiscal year, the difference between the total direct costs to the CCG to manage and perform the dredging of the Ship Channel, and the revenue generated from the transit fee, is paid by the Port of Montreal, the Port of Quebec and Ultramar Ltd. on a pre-determined cost-shared basis.

The following table summarizes Maintenance Dredging Services Tonnage Fees from 2005/06 to 2009/10.

 

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

Overall cost of maintenance dredging (CCG)

4 391.9

5 679.8

5 735.0

6 641.806

8 346.449

Less: Contribution of CCG for U.S. ship exemption

93.0

156.6

113.4

74.088

28.763

Contribution assumed by the Industry2

4 298.9

5 523.2

5 621.6

6 567.719

8 317.686

Less: Total fees billed by March 31st

4 994.0

5 322.6

5 394.3

5 635.302

4 902.540

Total amount paid by partners3

- 695.1

200.6

227.3

932.417

3 415.146

Table 2: Summary of Maintenance Dredging Services Tonnage Fees

Logic Model of the Program

For the purpose of this evaluation, the following program logic model was developed in collaboration with the program. 

Figure 1: Waterways Management Program Logic Model

Figure 1: Waterways Management Program Logic Model

3.  Methodology

We used a multiple-lines-of-enquiry approach to study the issues and questions that were the focus of this evaluation. This section outlines the scope and methods of our approach, the evaluation design, evaluation questions, the methodological approach, analytical methods as well as the limitations of the evaluation.

3.1  Project Management

The evaluation was conducted by an evaluation team led by a senior evaluation manager within the Evaluation Directorate at DFO. The team collaborated with Waterways Management Program personnel on preparing a list of documents to review, identifying key informants and stakeholders and reviewing and providing feedback on interview guides and various reports.

3.2  Evaluation Design

For this evaluation we used a non-experimental design, in which measurements are taken after the program has been implemented. This model was chosen for a number of reasons.  First, the WMP is a full coverage program.  It is intended to be delivered across Canada where it is needed and could not be withheld from any area or region by virtue of its safety oriented intended outcomes and a control group could not be established. Secondly, there were no measures in place before the Waterways Management Program was introduced; therefore a pre-test of the clients in locations receiving the treatment was not possible

3.3.  Evaluation Questions

The questions were determined on the basis of the new evaluation policy, by reviewing documents and the results of Phase I interviews with key contacts. Annex A features an evaluation matrix organized by the key issues covered: relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy).

3.4.  Secondary Data Sources

Secondary data was examined including; document reviews, departmental correspondence and a media scan.

3.4.1.  Document Review

The document review consisted of the analysis of documents provided by the program and included both public and internal program documents and consisted of public documents i.e. annual reports and internal documents prepared by Waterways Management Program personnel. A literature review was also used in order to make a comparative assessment of the program using studies of similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions.  In this case evaluators principally searched the USACE in order to compare dredging programs in the United States with those in Canada. A comprehensive search of ministerial correspondence was conducted for this evaluation. Finally, a media scan of Canadian media was conducted for this evaluation.

3.5.  Primary Data Sources

Primary data was collected by the evaluation team specifically for this evaluation study. These consisted of 19 key informant interviews.

Interviews were conducted with 7 program personnel and 4 partners. The purpose was to obtain information on the perceptions of individuals. These individuals play a significant role in or have extensive experience with the program's design or implementation, as well as information on the importance of the program. Eight clients were also contacted to discuss the Waterways Management Program's purpose and impact (more specifically, its ability to obtain results) and ask for their opinion on the services provided and the role of government.

3.6.  Analytical Methods

The analysis methods used for this evaluation were tailored to the nature and availability of the data to be gathered, which were in turn linked to the evaluation questions. Extensive use of triangulation was used as an analytical method. In the social sciences, triangulation means that more than two methods are used in a study with a view to double (or triple) checking results using multiple lines of enquiry to corroborate findings.

3.7.  Methodological Limitations and Constraints

Over the course of the study we observed some shortcomings in the methodology. In order to minimize their impact on the results of the evaluation, we corroborated with information collected from a variety of sources using a variety of methods. In other words, we combined the various methods discussed earlier to arrive at the same conclusions, thereby reinforcing our assessment as to their validity. None of these shortcomings significantly jeopardized the validity or accuracy of the evaluation results.

  1. Non-experimental Design.  A non-experimental design involves taking measurements after a program has been introduced, with no control group. The model below illustrates as follows:

 

Exposure to Waterways Management  Program

Measurement After Exposure

Clients and Beneficiaries

X

01

The model above shows that it is difficult to clearly measure the effects of the Waterways Management Program. Since there are no measurements before the program began, nor a comparison group against which to assess other plausible causes for the outcome, it is difficult to attribute impacts to the program (01 may be affected by multiple factors). In other words, it is difficult to draw a clear conclusion about the incremental or net impact of the program. Although this model lacks scientific rigour, the rigour of this design was increased by describing activities, outputs and outcomes through a logic model, enabling evaluators to make causal linkages, to logically argue that results can be attributed to the program (internal validity). Further, a thorough program profile complemented the logic model.  The program’s operationalizations (activities) were described in great detail increasing the evaluation's construct validity. Lastly the evaluation employed a variety of evaluation methods (e.g. interviews, document review), to assess in the context of the above construct, the impact of the program.

  • Depth of environmental analysis. As part of this analysis, we identified and studied dredging programs in the United States. We undertook a macro level comparison of dredging programs and compared the difference between programs with respect to their overall management of waterways from a delivery perspective.

  • Data from interviews. The sample of clients interviewed reflected the types of clients served by the Waterways Management Program but was not representative of all users of the program's services. As for the limited number of program personnel involved in the delivery of the WMP, this limited the number of perspectives and hence there is a risk of bias in their responses. In this context, both the client and program personnel key informant interviews are based on their extensive experiences.  As there is a likelihood of subjectivity, the qualitative evidence was used in combination with other lines of evidence to ensure neutrality for reporting purposes.  

4.  Major Findings

4.1.  Relevance

The evaluation found that there is a need for the program and that the program is aligned with Government of Canada priorities as well with DFO/CGG priorities and strategic outcomes. In addition, there is a clear indication that it is the federal government role to manage the Canadian waterways.

Relevance Question #1: Is there a continued need for the Waterways Management Program?

Key Findings

The findings indicate an overall need for the WMP as it contributes to safe and efficient waterways.  The WMP provides essential information i.e. channel design guidelines as well as advice and guidance to users that is required for the planning and execution of safe transits.  The WMP also responds to an important economic need as their channel monitoring survey and dredging activities contribute to the livelihood of small coastal communities in Canada and the Great Lakes and St.-Lawrence River waterways in order to ensure advertised depths to enable vessels to optimize their loading operations, thus having a significant impact on the sustainability of the economy as a whole.

Evidence

Indeed, results from key informants and document review indicate that WMP provides essential information (channel design guidelines and available water depth) that is required for the planning and execution of safe transits. The need for this information has grown in the absence of activities such as dredging. In fact, during the Levels of Service review conducted in 2007, some additional needs were identified. For example, providing water level forecasts during the winter season and conducting regular surveys of harbour approaches and channels traditionally not undertaken by the CCG.

On the other hand, WMP is not only needed for safety purposes but also for commercial purposes. The evaluation found that there is a need for WMP, particularly with respect to economic implications to shipping industry as well as providing access up to the port limits and communities. For example, the program contributed to the livelihood of small coastal communities in Canada as it informs mariners of the depths available in the channels approaching ports, especially small craft harbours.

In another example, just under 50% (3 of 8) of clients interviewed noted the need to maintain channels at their advertised depths.  If this were not the case, the shipping industry would be unable to optimize their loading operations of vessels, especially those with deep drafts.  This is especially the case in the Great Lakes and in the St-Lawrence river, where these channels are dredged.  Therefore, maintaining channels at their advertised depths has a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness of the shipping industry and on the sustainability of the economy as a whole.

Relevance Question #2: Is the Program aligned with Government of Canada priorities, and with DFO/CCG priorities and strategic outcomes?

Key Findings

The program’s long term outcomes of Maritime Safety, Marine Trade and Commerce and Protection of the Marine & Freshwater Environment are aligned with the DFO priority of safe and accessible waterways. The WMP long term outcomes are also aligned with Government of Canada priorities. For example, Transport Canada’s Gateway Framework is a strategy that is designed to stimulate the economy, develop a clean energy economy, expand international trade and contribute to environmental sustainability. WMP aligns with this strategy as such that it will contribute to the efficiency, safety and sustainability of major transportation systems such as waterways.

Evidence

The Government of Canada’s strategies to develop a transportation network for the 21st century is a case in point. The Transport Canada’s Gateway Framework is designed to ensure that Canada will be competitive in the global economy. Strategies advanced under this Framework will enhance multimodal, integration of major transportation systems, as well as their efficiency, safety, security, and sustainability. The WMP aligns with this strategy as it contributes to maritime safety, marine trade and commerce as well as promoting the protection and sustainable use of the environment. This Framework also intends to make Short Sea Shipping between Canada, the United States and Mexico a viable mode of transportation in order to optimize transportation networks that are environmentally sustainable. Activities of the WMP such as channel bottom monitoring, will also contribute to the success of Short Sea Shipping. 

The WMP long-term outcomes align with the DFO priority of safe and accessible waterways. Though the long-term outcome of Maritime Safety is not directly mentioned in recent Speeches from the Throne or Budget speeches; however the 2007 Budget theme- "Aspire to a Stronger, Safer, Better Canada" sets the agenda for making Canada’s communities safer. Maritime Safety contributes to the success of this priority to the extent that it has an impact on reducing accidents and fatalities in waterways. 

Relevance Question #3: Is the current role of the Federal Government appropriate?

Key Findings

The activities undertaken by the WMP are appropriate for the Federal Government. By virtue of the Constitution Act andthe Oceans Act, the government of Canada is mandated to provide channel maintenance services in Canadian waters when the provision of that service has not been assigned by law to another department, board or agency of the government of Canada. [Solicitor-client privilege]

As far as assets are concerned, the Waterways Structures Divestiture Study4 found that the CCG was unable to divest itself of the marine structures identified for divestiture in the report as no other entities were interested in taking them.

In short, the government of Canada has certain legal mandates to manage its waterways up to the port limits and is restricted with respect to what it can delegate to other legal entities.  With the exception of waterways management services that occur within some port limits, many of WMP activities and assets do not lend themselves to being absorbed by other levels of government or the private sector.

Evidence

[Solicitor-client privilege]

Overall, the key informant interview results suggest at this point that the transfer of WMP or some of its activities to other entities is not feasible as marine transportation activities are under the responsibility of the federal government in the constitution of Canada and can not be transferred to a province; but only to another federal entity such as a port authority. Indeed, 29% (2 of 7) of the program key informants indicated that the transfer of WMP to other entities is not feasible. Also, the latter are rarely enthusiastic to take charge of these services because they do not have the expertise and financial capacity to deliver them as well as the CCG.

In addition, results from the Waterways Structures Divestiture Study conducted by the Project Control Management Section of Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC/PCMS) revealed that 7 of the 35 structures fall within CCG’s core mandate and it is highly unlikely that another party could be found to take over or even share responsibility for their maintenance. Furthermore, the CCG was unable to divest itself of the marine structures identified for divestiture in the report as no other entities were interested in taking them.

4.2.  Effectiveness

On the basis of the facts pulled by the information at our disposal, we found that WM is achieving its intended outcomes.

Effectiveness Question #1: Has WMP resulted in increased awareness of channel safety information?

Key Findings

Both the document review and the stakeholder interviews indicate that WMP resulted in increased awareness of channel safety information. WMP produces channel design guidelines that are used to manage dredging and provide planners with procedures with respect to determining waterway parameters that affect safe transiting in Canadian waterways. Over 75% (7 of 8) of clients interviewed qualified the tool as good, helpful and useful, however some noted that it should be communicated more broadly.

The WMP also provides advice and guidance to users on a per case basis in interpreting or in the application of the channel design guidelines and other technical matters related to the safe design, maintenance and use of navigational channels.  Over 75% (7 of 8) of clients interviewed indicated that they are aware of usage and safety information and of their availability.

Forecasts (minimum water level/depth information) are also produced by the program to increase the awareness of safety information.  The table below describes the channel for which forecasts are made. 

Channel

Frequency of Forecast
(ice free season)

Mackenzie River

Twice weekly

Fraser River
(main channel)

Every Friday

St. Lawrence River

Every Thursday

Detroit River

Every Tuesday

Table 2: Frequency of Water Level Forecast by Channel

The WMP increases awareness of safety information by conducting channel bottom monitoring of 56 channels, thus responding to the mariners need for up-do-date information on bottom conditions and restrictions or hazards in order to plan and execute safe transits.  The WMP is making strides in providing channel bottom monitoring safety information electronically through website portal in the Quebec (Marinfo) and Pacific regions (Avadepth) for example.  

In general, the document review and key informant interviews indicate that there is awareness of channel design, usage and safety information and of its availability; and that the WMP provides advice, forecasts and channel bottom monitoring information which all contribute towards increasing the mariner’s awareness of channel safety information.

Evidence

The document review found that WMP produced a guideline that increases the awareness of channel safety information. As such, the guideline: A Users Guide to the Design, Maintenance and Safe use of Waterways is a tool used by the program to manage dredging works to the advertised depth and also contribute to assess vessel’s size that might affect safety transit in Canadian waterways. The program has also identified a level of service and subsequent service standard for the development and use of this tool. Furthermore, it provides planners with a set of procedures to be used when determining waterway parameters required to provide efficient maneuverability with no less than minimum safety margins and allowances.

In addition to the guidelines, the WMP provides advice and guidance on a per case basis on the application of the guidelines and other technical matters related to the safe design, maintenance and use of shipping channels; or assist other departments and agencies with channel assessment based on the guidelines and in-house expertise. For example, the WMP advised mariners transiting on the Miramichi River that the channel conditions no longer meet design guidelines5 (depth, width and alignment). It should be noted that expert advice on channel design and maintenance is not a WMP mandate even if the program can provide advice on the interpretation and application of the guidelines.

The key informant interviews (over 75% or 15 of 17) indicate that, in general, stakeholders are aware of channel design, usage and safety information and their availability. Depending on the clients, the awareness could be about the PIANC or WMP guidelines. According to the interview results, those who are aware of the guidelines are generally those who use them on a regular basis, or have experienced issues that require the use of the guidelines.

In spite of these various reasons, all clients consider the guidelines to be a valuable tool. Regarding the quality of the information produced, over 75% (7 of 8) of the clients interviewed are in general satisfied, qualifying it as good, helpful and useful. In addition, the guidelines are also an important tool for the program staff as they allow them to provide reliable guidance infilling waterways, when they are no longer safe. According to them, the guidelines are crucial in their operating environment.

Even if the guidelines are viewed as a valuable tool, it was suggested by some key informants that they should be communicated more broadly as the information was not always accessible. In fact, one client and one partner spoke of the guidelines needing to be communicated more broadly but one program personnel interviewed suggested everyone is aware of guidelines as they are posted on the Internet.

In addition to the guidelines, WMP also increases awareness of safety information by conducting channel bottom monitoring based on a national policy6 that prioritizes the channels according to risk analysis criteria and available budget. Indeed, CGG established the bottom monitoring information service to respond to the mariners need for up-do-date information on bottom conditions, restrictions or hazards, to plan and execute safe transits. There are currently 56 monitored channels in all five CGG regions and in 2009, over 1105 kilometers were surveyed.

The document review found that on average 97.3% of planned soundings are being completed across four regions as highlighted in the table below. However, we cannot confirm if the program has always completed the planned soundings as the data from previous years was not available.

Region

Planned sounding (km)

Actual sounding (Km)

Completed % of Planned

Central and Arctic

112.6

99.6

88.5

Pacific

393.2

392.2

99.7

Maritime

110

111.4

101

Quebec

208.5

208.5

100

Table 3: Planned soundings vs. Actual sounding for 2009-10
It should be mentioned that WMP is making strides in providing channel bottom monitoring safety information electronically. Information on channel bottom monitoring is not communicated consistently across regions. Some use electronic means such as a website portal in the Quebec (Marinfo) and Pacific regions (Avadepth) while others rely on printed materials. The program is currently planning on further developing these e-navigation services in the coming years.

Based on those various elements, we can say that WMP resulted in increased awareness of channel safety information but that information could be communicated more broadly and efficiently. However, due to lack of data, we were not able to determine by how much WMP has increased the awareness of channel safety information among its clients.

Effectiveness Question #2: To what extent has WMP led to reduced sedimentation and erosion in the Great Lakes connecting channels and the St. Lawrence River?

Key Findings

The evaluation found that the program uses marine structures to reduce sedimentation and erosion.

Marine structures7 manage sedimentation rates and patterns, reduce scouring and erosion, manage currents, water levels and manage waves. Many of these structures have been performing these functions since the 1930s, and continue to do so today in spite of a lack of current data to support this claim. 

It is acknowledged that marine structures contribute to sedimentation reduction, however the actual reduction (or volume) is not well measured. 

Evidence

The evaluation found that marine structures manage sedimentation rates and patterns as well as reduce scouring and erosion. They also help manage currents and water levels and moderate waves. In fact, the marine structures, many of which were built in the 1930s, are an integral part of the design, maintenance and use of navigational channels as they help reduce sedimentation and erosion in the Great Lakes connecting channels and the St. Lawrence River.

The results from the interviews found that the actual sedimentation reduction is not well measured. Indeed, one program key informant stated that even though some sedimentation analysis is completed in regions, they are not quantitatively measured or reported by the program. Despite this situation, in general clients interviewed confirm that dredging contributes to reduction of sedimentation and erosion. These comments have been confirmed by one program key informant who also states that marine structures and dredging reduce sedimentation and erosion.

In short, the information gathered from the document review and interviews indicates that marine structures contribute to the reduction of sedimentation and erosion in the Great lakes connecting channels and the St. Lawrence River.

Effectiveness Question #3: To what extent has ice jam and flood damage been minimized due to the WMP?

Key Findings

The evaluation found that the six8 marine structures used for ice control management effectively minimize ice jams and flood damage.  Amongst these structures there are three ice booms in the St-Lawrence River which play a key role. The importance of their role was confirmed in a 1993 incident where they were not installed9, resulting in flooding and trapped vessels. An incident of this magnitude has not occurred since as the ice booms are installed every year.

Evidence

The evaluation found that some WMP activities have minimized ice jams and flood damage. There are 52 marine structures across the five CCG regions, however six (6) of these (including three (3) ice booms) are used for ice control management. The document review found that marine structures are crucial to ensure effective ice cover management.

In addition, the results of the key informant interviews suggest that all ice booms (3) are contributing to the prevention of ice jams and flood damage. Client, partners and program personnel gave various examples to explain how these structures contribute to prevent ice jams and flood damage. For example, in 1993, the ice booms were not installed10 and a huge ice jam occurred on the St-Lawrence River. Consequently, CCG icebreakers worked extra time to free the channel. Municipalities along the banks of St-Lawrence River were flooded and vessels were blocked, costing ten of thousands of dollars for ship owners. Since this episode, ice booms have always been installed and no ice jam of this magnitude has occurred since.

It is clear that marine structures, especially ice booms play a key role in minimizing ice jam and flood damage based on the consequences from the 1993 ice jams occurrence.

Even if such an incident did not happen again, we can assert that marine structures, play a key role in minimizing ice jams and flood damage.

Effectiveness Question #4: To what extent has WMP led to optimized water flows and levels?

Key Findings

The WMP has led to optimized water flows and levels through those marine structures designed to stabilize main channels by directing river flows towards the navigation channels and causing a natural deepening of the bottom. However, some marine structures in the St-Lawrence River have a limited impact since the construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway and especially, the Moses-Saunders dam in the 1950s whose networks can release water and more effectively control water flows and levels. In spite of the difficulties in measuring WMP’s impact with respect to water flows and levels,  we can observe from the document review and the interviews, marine structures have contributed to optimize water flows and levels even if the impact of some structures have diminished over time.      

Evidence

Marine structures were designed to stabilize the main channel, improve navigation and reduce channel maintenance costs. The structures form an integral part of the overall channel maintenance strategy, and are a cost effective alternative to long term dredging. They are engineered to direct river flow towards the navigation channel causing a natural deepening of the bottom by using the river’s own energy to scour the riverbed to a new designed depth and equilibrium. 25% (2 of 8) of clients interviewed were of the opinion that marine structures definitely optimize water flow and levels. For example, they said that structures impact the way the ships maneuver in the river. They also consider that some marine structures are more valuable than others without mentioning any in particular.

The result from the key informant interviews also indicated that marine structures have a limited impact on optimized water flows and levels. From a client perspective, marine structures have limited ability to control the level of water because they do not act like a dam where you can release water. For example, in the St. Lawrence Rive, dykes were installed in the Lake-Saint-Pierre channels in the 1930s to direct the flow in the navigation channel and to increase water levels. These structures optimized the water levels within the waterways. However, since the construction of the Moses-Sanders dam in the 1950s at Cornwall, the role played by these dykes has been less important regarding water levels.

Various points of view were expressed with regard to the extent WMP led to optimized water flows and levels. A program key informant stated, it is difficult to quantitatively measure the impact of WMP on water flows and levels. However, as we can observe from the document review and the interviews, marine structures have contributed to optimize water flows and levels even if the importance of some structures have diminished over time.

Effectiveness Question #5: To what extent has the WMP contributed to safe transits and access to ports?

Key Findings

The WMP contributes to safe transits and access to ports through the provision of channel guidelines, the sounding and monitoring of channel bottom conditions and provision of information and advice.  With respect to this particular outcome, clients interviewed were all satisfied with the program with respect to the achievement of this particular outcome. The evaluation found that other CGG programs such as aids to navigation program (AToN) or icebreaking program (IBP) also contribute to safe transits and access to ports but WMP contributes in a specific way to safe transits and access to ports.

Evidence

The document review indicated that the program contributed to safe transits and access to ports through the establishment of channel guidelines, the sounding and monitoring of channel bottom conditions and provision of information and advice. The program also informs its clients about any waterways that no longer meet channel design guidelines. For example, CCG annually informs appropriate users that the Miramichi River in its current condition does not meet suggested design guidelines and consequently its depth, width and alignment is not suitable for any further commercial usage of the waterway in its current condition.

Overall, all clients interviewed are satisfied with the job done by the program and affirmed that the transits and access to ports are safe. 25% (2 of 8) of clients also suggest that WMP information, advice and channel management activities are contributing to safe transits and access to ports. For example, clients stated that the port of Sorel demonstrates that maintenance of waterways is crucial for access and safe navigation to ports in general; and they could not do their job safely without the WMP.

On the other hand, 25% (2 of 8) of clients and one program key informant interviewed stated that safe transit is a shared responsibility as WMP is one of a number of players that ensures that transits are safe among others CGG programs like AToN, Marine Communications and Traffic Services (MCTS), CHS, etc.

The key informant interviews also highlighted the importance of timeliness in receiving information from channel bottom monitoring surveys. Indeed, over 60% (5 of 8) of clients stated that it is important to receive the information from surveys as soon as it is available and not waiting to formally publish it for the public.

The information collected during the evaluation, indicates clearly that WMP contributes in a specific way to safe transits and access up to port limits.

Effectiveness Question #6: To what extent has the WMP contributed to economic sustainability (of marine trade and commerce)?

Key Findings

The evaluation found that the WMP activities such as channel bottom monitoring, channel guidelines, water level forecasting and dredging play a significant role in economic sustainability.

All the key informants interviewed confirmed that WMP activities contribute to economic sustainability. For example, it is largely due to the activities of WMP (maintenance of the St-Lawrence and navigation channels) that the port of Montreal is a trading hub for container ships.  The interviews also found that any decrease in WMP activities will have a negative impact on the economy.

The importance of the scope of this economic activity is illustrated in Canada’s Foreign Policy Newsweekly: A water and oceans report11, where with respect to trade with countries other than US, 92% of Canadian exports and 87% of its imports are moved across ocean trade routes, directly employing nearly 145,000 Canadians and generating $19 billion of economic output.  Also, the WMP provides channel bottom monitoring information for the Port Metro Vancouver and stimulating automobile, steel, forestry and container traffic, resulting in 2,200 jobs, $133 million in direct wages, and $165 million in Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

In short, the evaluation found that WMP plays a key role in the Canadian economy and that the program provides key supports to these activities.

Evidence

A number of WMP activities are key to contributing to economic sustainability of marine trade and commerce.  As previously noted and based on the document review, channel bottom monitoring is an essential service to shipping companies in order to determine the maximum loads in order to plan efficient passages. The channel design guidelines also contribute to providing economic benefits to the marine shipping industry. For example, the Squat equation12 allow mariners to load to deeper draw and still remain within the regulated under keel clearance. This will help Canadian ports to remain competitive. In addition, water level forecasting is relied upon internationally to ensure safe transits and access to ports. For example, Orient Overseas Container Line (OOCL) relies on water level forecast for the St-Lawrence River to determine appropriate loads for their ships and the ability to guide them accordingly.

Furthermore, all the key informants interviewed confirmed that WMP activities contribute to economic sustainability. For example, it is largely due to the activities of WMP (maintenance of the St-Lawrence and navigation channels) that the port of Montreal is a trading hub for container ships. In addition one partner key informant stated that while dredging may be costly, it has positive impacts as it opens a new venue for other business to set up or in some cases ensures the existence and livelihood for towns and communities.

The evaluation also found that WMP plays an important role in the Canadian economy. Indeed, Canada’s Foreign Policy Newsweekly: A water and oceans report reveals that exports account for over 40% of Canada’s $977 billion GDP. The same publication indicates that in trade with countries other than US, 92% of Canadian exports and 87% of its imports are moved across ocean trade routes. Also, Canada’s 546 ports handle over 390 million tones of cargo each year and serve as Canada’s gateway to more than 100 other economies and ocean’s industries directly employing nearly 145,000 Canadians and generating $19 billion of economic output.

The key informant interviews also found that any decrease in WMP activities will have negative impact on the economy. For example a program key informant stated that there is a rigorous competition between Canadian, US and European ports and that the Canadian shipping industry must be supported. Otherwise there is a risk that these other countries will eventually control these economic aspects.

Elsewhere, the evaluation found that the WMP provides channel bottom monitoring information that is crucial for the management of dredging in the Fraser River by the Port Metro Vancouver.  For example, the report: «Dredging the lower Fraser River13- Multiple Accounts Evaluation Analysis» (2005) demonstrates the importance of dredging with respect to the economic sustainability of marine trade and commerce. According to the report many vessels currently using the port could not continue to use it as a port of call because of channel sedimentation. The termination of dredging would therefore have a substantial negative impact on jobs, wages, and GDP. The report also estimated that within six years after dredging stops, all automobile, steel, forestry and container traffic at the port would cease, resulting in a loss of 2,200 jobs, $133 million in direct wages, and $165 million in GDP. 

In short, the evaluation found that WMP plays a key role in the Canadian economy and that the program provides key supports to these activities.

Effectiveness Question #7: To what extent has the WMP contributed to environmental sustainability of commercial channels?

Key Findings

The evaluation found that the WMP activities such as dredging and channel design guidelines are conducted in compliance with environmental laws.  All clients, partners and program personnel interviewed agreed that the WMP contributes to environmental sustainability by adhering to environmental laws as well as ensuring safe navigation while reducing risk of incidents or accidents on the water. 

In addition to ensuring that its activities are compliant with laws and regulations, the WMP also ensures that waterways are safe for navigation by preventing an accident that could easily turn to an environmental disaster.  For example, the WMP’s channel design guidelines play a major role when assessing the capacity of a waterway to contribute to safe transits of ships. 

The document review also found that the marine industry is the least polluting form of transportation and offers economic and environmental benefits by reducing air pollution, gridlock (by getting trucks off surface corridors) and creating jobs for skilled mariners and shipbuilders. 

In short, WMP contributes to environmental sustainability based on the compliance of it activities in respect of environmental laws and regulations by reducing risk of incidents or accidents on the water and by supporting a lesser pollutant form of transportation.

Evidence

WMP contributes to environmental sustainability by adhering to specific Acts14 with regard to dredging. In fact, all dredging projects are subject to an environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Federal Law) or Quebec’s Environment Quality Act (for dredging in the St. Lawrence River in the Quebec region) to ensure that dredging will not have negative impact on the environment. The assessment usually includes recommendations and mitigation measures and the entrepreneurs hired to complete dredging activities also respect those laws.

These findings have been confirmed from the key informant interviews. Indeed, all clients, partners and program personnel interviewed agree that WMP contributes to environmental sustainability by adhering to environmental laws as well as ensuring safe navigation while reducing risk of incidents or accidents on the water. For example, 25% (2 of 8) of clients interviewed stated that without WMP there would be an increased risk of incidents on the water which in turn, could negatively impact environment.

In addition to ensuring that its activities are compliant with laws and regulations, the program also ensures that waterways are safe for navigation by preventing an accident that could easily turn into an environmental disaster. As was previously stated, waterways in Canada play a key role in the economy and usage of waterways will likely increase. This growth will not be without risk and the impact on human and marine life of a single marine incident may be far more devastating than in the past15. This is why the channel design guidelines play a major role when assessing the capacity of a waterway to contribute to safe transits of ships.

The document review also found that the marine industry is the least polluting form of transportation and offers economic and environmental benefits. For example, the U.S. has unveiled a new initiative to move cargo on the water rather than on crowded U.S. highways. Moving goods on the water has many advantages as it reduces air pollution, gridlock (by getting trucks off surface corridors) and jobs for skilled mariners and shipbuilders.

WMP contributes to environmental sustainability based on the compliance of it activities in respect of environmental laws and regulations as well as reducing risk of incidents or accidents on the water.

Effectiveness Question #8: Is the WMP contributing in the achievement of its ultimate goal of: maritime safety; marine trade and commerce; protection of the marine and freshwater environment?

Key Findings

Based on our key informant interviews and document review, we found that the WMP is contributing in achieving its ultimate goal of maritime safety, marine trade and commerce, protection of the marine and freshwater environment.

Evidence

Overall, the document review and our preceding findings suggest that without WMP activities, (such as channel bottom monitoring) there would be a negative impact on maritime safety, marine trade and commerce and the protection of the marine and freshwater environment.

According to all key informants interviewed, the WMP contributes to the achievement of marine safety; marine trade and commerce; and the protection of the marine and freshwater environment. For example, they all believe that there is a risk to marine safety if the depths of channels are not made known to mariners. From a marine safety standpoint, there is always risk of vessels being grounded if the channel is not surveyed, monitored or dredged appropriately.

Clients interviewed also confirmed that the withdrawal of WMP services would negatively impact marine trade and commerce. For example vessels would stop coming and/or trade will be very limited if WMP ceases its activities and services. Moreover, 25% of clients interviewed felt that the current state of non-dredging16 could negatively impact marine trade and commerce. This was confirmed by a program key informant who stated it is cheaper to monitor than dredge, but it is limited with respect to ensuring safety.

Regarding the protection of the marine and freshwater environment, 37.5% of the clients interviewed and one partner key informant spoke of various environmental consequences if WMP ceases its services. In general, they assume that the likelihood of grounding, collisions, and environmental damage would definitely happen in the short term and these risks would increase in the long term.

These findings highlight how WMP contributes to its ultimate goal. In some cases, examples are highlighted identifying consequences that would result if there were a withdrawal in the program services. Currently, WMP is contributing to the achievement of its ultimate goal.

Effectiveness Question #9: To what extent have there been unintended outcomes due to the WMP?

Key Findings

Although a few notions were raised, the evaluation could not provide sufficient evidence to conclude any positive or negative impacts occurred as a result of the WMP.

Effectiveness Question #10: What external influences impact on the success of WMP?

Key Findings

Overall the evaluation revealed that there are seven partners (Table 4) involved in the delivery of the WMP.  Few issues were found with respect to partners having an impact on the success of the program. For example in spite of Fleet’s aging vessels, there was no evidence to suggest that this is impacting negatively on WMP’s ability to conduct channel bottom monitoring and dredging in the Quebec region.  The document review and the interviews revealed that DFO-Real Property financial issues may impact the WMP’s ability to achieve its outcomes.  As the custodians of all marine structures (except ice booms),  very few investments have been made in their maintenance and refurbishment even though there is a documented need to develop and implement a plan to maintain and/or update the structures.   

In brief, the major issue that can affect the programs’ ability to achieve its outcomes is DFO-RP ability to invest in the maintenance and renewal of marine structures.

Evidence

The document review found that seven partners have a direct influence on the success of WMP achieving its intended outcomes. The table below shows the role that each partner plays with regards to the program’s activities.

 

PWGSC

CCG - Fleet

CHS

EC

USACE

DFO-
RP

Channel Bottom Monitoring

X

X

X

 

 

 

Water level forecasts

 

 

X

X

X

 

Dredging

X

 

 

 

 

 

Disposal of sediments

X

 

 

 

 

 

Lifecycle management of marine structures

 

 

 

 

 

X

Table 4: Partners involved in the delivery of WMP

The document review also reveals that fleet vessels (CGG fleet provides the sounding vessels and crew for channel bottom monitoring and dredging in Quebec region only) are aging and there is a need to re-invest to ensure a continued provision of the service. Even though the key informant interviews confirmed that the CGG fleet provides assets for use by the program, there was no evidence that their condition has negatively impacted the programs ability to achieve its outcomes.

DFO-Real Property (RP) is the custodian of all marine structures (except ice booms), and as such they are responsible for their maintenance and upkeep. However, the document review found that very little investment is made for the maintenance and refurbishment of marine structures even though there is a documented need to develop and implement an investment plan. If the necessary capital funds to ensure the long-term future of the structures are not invested, this may soon jeopardize safe and efficient commercial navigation.  For example, the Maughers Beach Breakwater17 was severely damaged in 2003 by Hurricane Juan. Since then the protection works at Maughers Beach have constantly deteriorated and are on the verge of potential failure. The overall condition of the site, now, represents a potential hazard and navigational risk to the Port and Harbour of Halifax.

In addition, two program key informants and one client spoke of funding having a significantly negative impact on the ability to maintain/support the structures. For example, two program key informants stated that the structures are at risk and the last maintenance occurred in 1994 when WMP resided in Transport Canada. According to them, the key change that would be required for this activity is ensuring proper regular maintenance.

In brief, the major issue that can affect the programs’ ability to achieve its outcomes is the CGG’s ability to renew its fleet and the DFO-RP ability to invest in the marine structures.

4.3.  Efficiency

Efficiency Question #1: Does the Waterways Management Program have management and administrative systems in place for an effective implementation of the program?

Key Findings

Overall, the WMP is operating efficiently with respect to its ability to plan activities, most notably in the case of its risk-based approach to planning channel monitoring surveys and the maintenance and refurbishment of its marine structures.  However, some improvements can be made with respect to clarifying roles and responsibilities with some of its partners, and with respect to performance measurement in the context of results based management.

The WMP has engaged in meaningful planning activities and as a result of the WMP Action Plan, for example, the program has been able to identify several issues that are impacting on the program’s efficiency.  Examples include a lack of clarity in defining the strategic vision for the program or improving direction and leadership from headquarters and standardizing work descriptions.

Effective channel monitoring survey and marine structure planning is also demonstrated by the program’s development of a risk-based approach to prioritizing activities.  The results of these exercises, confirmed by key informant interviews, suggest that the use of program personnel’s knowledge and experience in conducting risk-based prioritization exercises demonstrates effective decision-making.  By prioritizing activities and allocating resources to optimize the efficient use of resources, the WMP yields maximum production of outputs i.e. surveying channels most in need of monitoring. 

Findings from the document review and key informant interviews suggest that although some roles and responsibilities are clearly defined with some of its partners (i.e. PWGSC), more work needs to be done with respect to developing MOUs or generally clarifying roles and responsibilities on more specific issues with port authorities, DFO-RP, EC, PWGSC and CHS (see Table 6). 

The relevance of the Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy was examined and the results suggest that the current WMP performance measurement indicators do not accurately align with the outputs and expected outcomes of the program. Furthermore, results from the document review and key informant interviews concluded that data collection has been minimal and has not been consistently collected across regions.  Hence, it was not possible to determine if data is accurate and complete. The evaluation also found there is a lack of coherence with the TBS RMAF requirements where the WMP has only two of the five recommended components of an RMAF; a logic model and performance measurement framework (see Table 7)18. Finally, no evidence was found during the course of the evaluation to support the intentional use of performance data in the context of formal results-based management decision-making as there was little to no record of performance data.

Evidence

Waterways Management Program Action Plan

The document review found that WMP has engaged in planning activities which have resulted in addressing efficiency issues and leading to the development of an Action Plan in 2009. The Action Plan is the result of the Strategic Performance Framework (SPF) of Maritime Services, which has reviewed all aspects of the program in accordance with the Treasury Board Management Accountability Framework.  The Action Plan outlined various WMP initiatives, associated deliverables and timeframes. As a result of the Action Plan, WMP was able to identify several program inefficiencies. Examples of program inefficiencies included the following: lack of clarity in defining the strategic vision for the program; improving direction and leadership from headquarters; standardizing work descriptions in the WMP; and developing a risk-based approach to prioritize activities and allocation of resources for channel monitoring survey activities and the management of marine structures.

Risk-based Approach for Channel Monitoring Surveys and Marine Structures

According to the results of the document review, WMP developed and implemented a risk-based approach to prioritize activities and allocation of resources for channel monitoring survey activities and the management of marine structures. 

The results of the document review suggest that the risk-based approach was implemented in order to prioritize the surveying of commercial channels according to risk analysis criteria19. The purpose of this exercise was to contribute to the annual planning of surveys according to available budget. During 2009-10, the need/frequency to conduct channel monitoring surveys was assessed based on the knowledge and experience of program personnel using the following criteria; navigation safety, environment, efficiency/economy, reputation/image. Once completed, the results of the assessment were then reviewed by all regions in order to ensure the accuracy of the exercise. This exercise allowed the program to use risk rated information to support decision-making with respect to which channels to monitor.

Similarly, a risk-based approach that prioritizes maintenance and refurbishment activities and allocation of resources was also applied to the management of marine structures. The results of the document review suggest that the purpose of this exercise was to prioritize marine structures according to risk analysis criteria in order to better manage the structures. Marine structures were assessed based on the knowledge and experience of program personnel using the following criteria; legal, navigation safety, damage to property, environmental, navigational access, and collateral safety. This exercise allowed the program to use risk rated information to support decision-making with respect to which marine structures to maintain.

The results of these exercises confirmed by key informant interviews suggest that the use of program personnel’s knowledge and experience in conducting risk-based prioritization exercises demonstrates effective decision-making.  By prioritizing activities and allocating resources to optimize the efficient use of resources, the WMP yields maximum production of outputs i.e. surveying channels most in need of monitoring. 

Roles and Responsibilities

 During the development of the 2009 WMP Action Plan, the program identified several WMP roles and responsibilities that required clarification. The document review revealed the program is in the process of clarifying those identified roles and responsibilities (see Table 5 below).

Defined WMP Roles and Responsibilities

The development of a formal roles and responsibilities matrix between HQ and the regions is to be completed in June 2010

A national directive regarding the roles and responsibilities regarding marine structures (between WMP and Real Property) is to be completed in 2010

The development of a national directive on available water depths forecasts in order to clearly define the roles of the WMP, the CHS and EC is to be completed in spring 2010

Undefined WMP Roles and Responsibilities

Clarification of roles and responsibilities between CHS, PWGSC and CCG on channel bottom monitoring

Determining the responsibility of dredging approaches to harbours and wharves that are outside the jurisdiction of Port Authorities

Table 5: Defined vs. Undefined WMP Roles and Responsibilities

26% (5 of 19) of all key informants interviewed stated that WMP roles and responsibilities require further clarification. 29% (2 of 7) of program key informants stated some roles and responsibilities between WMP and its partners are well defined (i.e. PWGSC) however the program would benefit from further clarification, for example by establishing clear Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with some of its partners or more clearly communicating WMP roles and responsibilities.

Similarly, from a partner perspective, there seems to be mixed views in terms of the clarity of roles and responsibilities between the program and its partners. Partners such as PWGSC consider roles and responsibilities to be well defined, however other partners such as Port Authorities and CHS stated there is some confusion surrounding the roles and responsibilities as no formal MOUs have been established.

Findings from the document review and interviews suggest that although some roles and responsibilities are clearly defined with some of its partners (i.e. PWGSC), more work needs to be done with respect to developing MOUs or generally clarifying roles and responsibilities on more specific issues with Port Authorities, DFO-RP, EC, PWGSC and CHS (see Table 6). 

Relevance of the Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy

The relevance of the current WMP PM Strategy was assessed against its coherence with TBS guidelines and according to the accuracy, quality and availability of data.

The evaluation examined the extent to which the performance indicators accurately measured outputs and results of the program. The document review found that WMP developed indicators, outputs and outcomes in 2002 as part of their program logic model and PM Strategy; however, results from a program assessment conducted in 2009 stated that performance measurement indicators need to be revised as they are not deemed completely effective since they do not align with program results. In support of this finding, 43% (3 of 7) of program key informants confirmed the program was in the process of revising the performance measurement indicators. They also stated that the performance measurement indicators that were developed in 2002 did not align with program outputs and outcomes of the program for various reasons. Reasons include the following:

  • difficulty in obtaining data that is detailed enough to properly attribute a result to the program;
  • difficultly in translating the experience of the program personnel into performance indicators; and
  • the inefficiencies of measuring activities where a multitude of stakeholders are involved in achieving one expected outcome which makes it difficult to isolate a performance indicator attributable solely to the WMP.

Given this situation, the evaluation found that WMP’s performance indicators do not align with the outputs and results of the program.

Coherence or the extent to which WMP data capture and reporting capacity reflect Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) RMAF requirements was examined. The TBS recommends that all programs have the following five components as part of their RMAF20: a program profile, logic model, a performance measurement framework, an evaluation strategy and a reporting strategy. The document review found that the WMP has two of the five recommended components of an RMAF; a logic model and performance measurement framework (see Table 6 below).

RMAF Components

WMP Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy

Program profile

A brief WMP program profile was available but only as part of the 2010-11 DFO Strategic Review

Logic model

A logic model was available however it was rather rudimentary and had not been revised since it was developed in 2002

Performance Measurement Framework

A WMP PM Strategy was created in 2002; however it was never consistently implemented across regions21

Evaluation and Reporting Strategy

No evaluation strategy or reporting strategy was available; however, WMP provides input into the Department Performance Report on an annual basis as well as collects data as part of the DFO Performance Measurement Framework22

 Table 6: TBS RMAF components compared to WMP PM Strategy

With regard to assessing the availability of performance measurement data, the evaluation examined the extent to which information and data can be collected. Consultations with both WMP and the Program Planning and Performance Sector of the CCG confirmed that the data from indicators identified in the 2002 PM Strategy are not consistently being collected across Regions. With regard to data collection, 29% (2 of 7) of program key informants indicated that although performance data has been collected since 2001, it has been minimal. Given the lack of performance data, it was not possible to determine the availability of WMP data as outlined in the PM Strategy, and therefore it was not possible to assess the quality of such data. The evaluation was not able to assess the extent to which the performance data that is being collected is accurate and complete mainly due to the lack of data collection since the development of the framework in 2002.

Results from the document review and key informant interviews concluded that the evaluation was unable to determine the relevance of the WMP PM Strategy given it did not currently meet the needs of the program as the program only has two of the five TBS recommended RMAF components; data is not consistently collected across regions and as a result, it was not possible to determine if data is accurate and complete.

Use of Performance Data in Results-based Management Decision Making

To assess usefulness, the evaluation focused on the extent to which the performance data supports decision making and departmental accountability requirements. No evidence was found during the course of the evaluation to support the intentional use of performance data in the context of formal results-based management decision-making as there was little to no record of performance data. Findings from the document review and key informant interviews suggest that WMP performance data is not currently supporting program decision making. From a program perspective, 29% (2 of 7) of program key informants acknowledged performance measurement information is an important part of the management process. Without a PM Strategy, WMP is not able to use performance data in results-based management decision-making.

4.4  Economy

Economy Question #1: Is the Waterways Management Program operating in a way that minimizes the use of resources to achieve its intended outcomes?

Key Findings

The WMP achieves its expected outcomes (maritime safety, marine trade and commerce and protection of the marine and freshwater environment)23 while minimizing the use of resources.

A risk-based approach to prioritizing activities and hence allocation of resources for channel monitoring survey activities and the management of marine structures is contributing to the program’s ability to deliver its services economically.   A Heat Map24 was produced using the results from the channel monitoring surveys prioritization activity.  The Heat Map (Graph 1) shows that the majority of channels are in the high risk category. In other words, the WMP is at-risk of not providing survey information to mariners in support of safe transits and access to ports.   

Similarly the risk-based approach to prioritize activities and allocation of resources for marine structures found that the majority of structures are in the high risk category as illustrated in the Heat Map for Marine Structures (Graph 2).  There is a risk that the structures will not be able to carry out their function thus threatening the program’s ability to stabilize waterways, improve navigation and reduce channel maintenance costs.  In both cases, there is a potential performance issue that translates into a risk of failing to achieve program outcomes.  A lack of resources is a contributing factor to this situation.

WMP financial data (Graph 3) indicates that program funding has been trending downwards for the past five years.  This is affecting the WMP’s ability to deliver its services, for example fewer channels are being surveyed each year.  Furthermore, concerns were raised by key informants over the WMP’s current position to deliver only its core services related to safety, which may potentially impact levels of service the program is able to offer, and possibly affect the programs ability to achieve expected outcomes in the future. 

Finally, comparative data between Canada and the United States (U.S.) illustrates that the management of waterways in Canada is approached more economically.  The WMP manages its waterways program by focusing on channel monitoring activities to determine the best channels through which to navigate and in some cases where to dredge whereas the U.S. manages its waterways by dredging navigational channels for vessels to transit through.
 
The results of the document review, key informant interviews and comparative data concluded that the WMP manages its activities economically through a risk based approach; is currently able to deliver its services within its allocated funding; but the at-risk nature of its current state of operations along with any further resource reductions may result in a decrease of services and ultimately impact the program’s ability to achieve its expected outcomes.

Evidence

Risk-based Prioritization Approach for Channel Monitoring Surveys

To support the program in delivering its services within the allocated budget, a risk-based approach to prioritizing activities and allocation of resources was initiated for channel monitoring survey activities. The purpose of this exercise was to prioritize surveying activities according to risk analysis criteria in order to contribute to the annual planning of surveys according to the available budget.

WMP surveys the bottom of commercial channels to identify the bottom conditions, restrictions or hazards to safe navigation and provides the information to marine pilots and other stakeholders. This information is essential to effectively maintain the channels and for mariners to navigate safely and efficiently. The document review found that in 2009-10, a risk-based approach for channel monitoring surveys was conducted to prioritize activities and the allocation of resources. The channels were assessed based on the following criteria; risks related to navigation safety; environment; navigation efficiency/economy; and reputation/image of CCG.

A Heat Map was produced using the identified risks from the risk-based prioritization exercise (Graph 1). As the Heat Map shows, the majority of channels are in a high risk category. The clustering of channels in the upper right hand of the quadrant, and in some cases at the extreme edges suggests that the consequences of not carrying out channel surveying activities are high with respect to risks related to navigation safety, the environment, to maritime efficiency/economy and to the reputation/image of CCG. Under the current financial framework, the program is unable to monitor all of its channels based on the frequency with which each one should be surveyed (i.e. annually, bi-annually, or every five years). The program is at risk of not achieving its outcomes due to its inability to carry out all soundings. If the program were able to conduct its scheduled channel bottom surveys, this would mitigate the manifestation of the risks cited above. Alternatively, communicating to users the status of its channels  (i.e. information on the latest survey results: date, hazards, available water depth, etc.) would enable mariners to make informed decisions about whether or not to navigate through a given channel. Prioritizing activities and allocation of resources for channel bottom surveys represent a logical way for the program to achieve its expected outcomes within the allocated budget; however, any further budget restrictions to the WMP may affect its ability to achieve its long-term outcome of safe and accessible waters.
Graph 1: Heat Map for Channel Bottom Monitoring [ Source: 14.1 Risks (Waterways Management Action Plan)]
Graph 1: Heat Map for Channel Bottom Monitoring [ Source: 14.1 Risks (Waterways Management Action Plan)]

Risk-based Prioritization Approach for the Marine Structures

Similar to channel monitoring surveys, results from the document review found that a risk-based assessment was conducted for marine structures to support funding decisions and overall management of the structures. The structures were assessed on legal, navigational safety, damage to property, environmental, navigational access and collateral safety. To illustrate the program is operating in a way that minimizes the use of resources to achieve its expected outcomes, a Heat Map was created using all six identified risks from the risk-based exercise with regard to probability and impact (Graph 2).

The Heat Map shows the clustering of structures in the upper right quadrant of the map indicates that the majority of structures are considered to be in a high risk category. These results suggest that the program is producing enough outputs to produce the desired result at the lowest cost, yet suggest if more funding was allocated to the maintenance and/or refurbishment of the structures, the number of structures in the high risk category would shift downwards and to the left and be more evenly dispersed across the low and medium risk categories. The findings suggest that if additional funding is not provided there is a risk that the structures will not be able to carry out their function thus threatening the programs ability to stabilize waterways, improve navigation and reduce channel maintenance costs. While the Heat Map demonstrates the program is economical, there is a possibility that the program has reduced its resources to a point where the may not be able to achieve its outcomes. The majority of marine structures have reached a state of such poor condition that there are significant risks to the programs ability to achieve its expected outcomes.

Graph 2: Heat Map for Marine Structures [Source: 16.1 Prioritization of Structures and 16.2 Structures (Waterways Action Plan)]
Graph 2: Heat Map for Marine Structures [Source: 16.1 Prioritization of Structures and 16.2 Structures (Waterways Action Plan)]

In summary, based on the heat maps, the channel monitoring survey and marine structure risk-based prioritization assessments demonstrate that, WMP is delivering its services at its minimum level according to the allocated budget. Any further funding reductions may result in a reduction of services and ultimately impact the programs ability to achieve its expected outcomes.

Waterways Management Program Resources

To establish whether WMP minimized the use of resources in order to achieve its expected outcomes, the evaluation explored a comparison of the WMP allocated budget to the actual expenditures over a five year period. Results from the document review suggest that from 2005-06 ($5,136,470) to 2009-10 ($4,467,736), program funding is trending downwards with the exception of 2007-0825 (see chart below). In other words, WMP has been able to deliver its services each year with less and less funding. However, 16% (3 of 19) of all key informants interviewed stated that the program is achieving its expected outcomes, but the lack of funding may impact the future delivery of WMP services and ultimately impact its ability to achieve its expected outcomes. 14% (1 of 7) of program key informants stated that the program is achieving its outcomes, however, as a result of funding, it’s only delivering the core services necessary to ensure safety which may pose future operational risks to the program. From a partner perspective, 50% of partners interviewed noted that the program is not appropriately funded thus potentially impacting the level of service WMP is able to offer. For example, the level of program funding has remained unchanged, while costs to provide these services have increased.  

In summary, results from the document review and the key informant interviews suggest while WMP is achieving its expected outcomes, however, funding may pose future risks to the delivery of services and ultimately impact the program’s ability to achieve its expected outcomes. 

Graph 3: WMP Allocated budget compared to actual expenditures
Graph 3: WMP Allocated budget compared to actual expenditures

United States Dredging Program in comparison to WMP

The dredging program in the United States shares some commonalities with the way in which WMP manages their channel monitoring surveys and dredging activities; however the scope of the operation, overall cost and specific activities differ.

USACE is responsible for the United States navigation system and as such, responsible for maintenance dredging. USACE annually spends approximately $20 million for maintenance dredging at federally authorized Great Lake Harbours and Channels. Dredging needs are typically determined by USACE district offices through ongoing communication with commercial and recreational navigation users and local or state agencies responsible for harbour or port facilities. Several district offices collect depth data for many harbours and channels on an annual basis, and long-term trends for shoaling are determined from this data, previous dredging records and information supplied by harbour users.

The WMP dredging consists of dredging of Canadian portions of the Great Lakes interconnecting channels (St. Clair, Detroit and St. Mary’s Rivers) and the St. Lawrence River channel. The St. Lawrence River is dredged on a cost recovery basis while the costs are assumed by CCG for the Canadian portions of the Great Lakes interconnecting channels. Over a four year period, WMP spends on average, $1.9 million a year on dredging activities and $2.7 million on channel monitoring activities26. There is a significant difference in overall costs of dredging and channel maintenance activities between WMP and USACE.

In conclusion, the dredging program in the United States is much larger both in scope and resources than that of WMP. In addition to the difference in size and resources, WMP manages its dredging activities differently than the USACE by focusing on channel monitoring activities to determine where to dredge or to navigate as opposed to managing its waterways by dredging navigational channels. This finding further demonstrates how the WMP is operating in a way that minimizes resources to achieve its intended outcomes as it manages through the conduct of channel monitoring surveys rather than managing by dredging.

4.5.  Lessons Learned

The WMP is a program that provides services that are key for ensuring safe transits of vessels, as well as having a significant impact on the profitability of shipping companies, the success of the shipping industry overall and affects major Canadian Ports including the wealth they generate to the local and overall Canadian economy. Furthermore, there is currently no national strategy to oversee this sector of the economy.  Considering its importance to the Canadian economy, some thought should be given to study the situation further and consider the merits of adopting a national strategy with respect to the management of our waterways so as to achieve maximum economic production in this sector of the economy.

5.  Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1.  Relevance

The CCG has the mandate to provide waterways management services when the provision of that service has not been assigned by law to another department, board or agency of the government of Canada.  The evaluation found that the Constitution Act gave the Federal Government the general legislative authority for waterways management. The Oceans Act gave the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans the legislative authority to provide services for the safe, economical and efficient movement of ships in Canadian waters through the provision of various services, including channel maintenance. [Solicitor-client privilege]

The evaluation also concludes that the program is aligned with Government of Canada priorities as well as DFO priorities, and strategic outcomes. Indeed, WMP long term outcomes (Maritime Safety, Marine Trade and Commerce and Protection of the Marine & Freshwater Environment) are well aligned with DFO priority of safe and accessible waterways. They are also well aligned with federal government priorities such as stimulating the economy, developing a clean energy economy, expanding international trade, contributing to the reduction of Green House Gases and a transportation network for the 21st century.

Finally, this evaluation concludes that the WMP is needed as it is regarded as an important program that contributes to safe and efficient waterways and the role it plays in the economy. Indeed, WMP contributes to safe navigation of channels by providing multiple services such as guidance for channel design and essential information for planning and executing safe transits. WMP is also needed for commercial purposes particularly with respect to economic implications to shipping industry as well as the role it plays by providing access to ports and communities. In fact, maintaining channels at the advertised depth27 have significant impacts on the profitability of the shipping industry and on the sustainability of the economy as a whole.

5.3.  Effectiveness

Throughout this evaluation as well as on the basis of the facts pulled by the information at our disposal, we can conclude that overall, WMP is effective.

WMP contributes to marine safety by the establishment of channel guidelines to usage, safety information, as well as the sounding and monitoring of channel bottom conditions. The program also provides advice and guidance based on a per case basis concerning the application of the guidelines for the design, maintenance and safe use of waterways. In addition, according to all respondents interviewed, there is a risk to marine safety if the program does not conduct its activities; there is always a risk of vessels going aground if the channel is not surveyed, monitored or dredged accordingly.

However, the program cannot constantly guarantee safe transits and access to ports because the CGG cannot forbid the navigation in a channel that is considered unsafe for individuals and the environment; and because of the decline of the shipping channels due to the lack of dredging activities i.e. Miramichi River. Furthermore a variety of shoaling and restricted areas now exist, for example, in a number of major harbors in Atlantic Canada. Some clients interviewed felt that the current state of non-dredging could negatively impact safety, trade and commerce.

The evaluation findings identified that little investment has been made on the maintenance and refurbishment of marine structures and that this may impact the programs’ ability to achieve its outcomes in the future if appropriate actions are not implemented. Meanwhile, there is a document need to develop and implement an investment plan to address the marine structure maintenance issue.

The WMP contributes to marine trade and commerce by providing services (channel bottom monitoring, channel guidelines, water level forecasting and dredging) which play a significant role in Canada’s economic sustainability. For example, channel bottom monitoring is a key service to shipping companies, allowing them to determine the maximum loads and to plan safe and efficient transits. Furthermore, all the respondents interviewed confirmed that the program activities contribute to economic sustainability and any decrease of such activities will have a negative impact on the economy.

As well, it has been demonstrated through the Fraser River example that the impact of the cessation of dredging on economic sustainability of marine trade and commerce would be significant. Thus, many vessels would stop using ports because of channel sedimentation and consequently this would have a substantial negative impact on the Canadian economy. 

Nevertheless, the clients interviewed are satisfied overall with the work done by the program and affirmed that the transits and access to ports are safe. However, the program can improve the way it communicates the channel design guidelines and the survey information as some clients observed that they are not easily accessible and/or posted in a convenient way on a website or by any other electronic means.

WMP also contributes to the protection of the marine and freshwater environment by conducting its activities in compliance with environmental laws. The purpose of these assessments is to ensure that the dredging projects will not have any negative impact on the environment. Therefore, all WMP dredging projects are subject to an environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Federal Law) and to any provincial laws where the dredging is conducted (Quebec’s Environmenl Quality Act in Quebec region for example). However, these laws have lead to additional operational fees as there is a shortage of confined disposal facilities for dredging spoils.

Finally, throughout the evaluation, there was no evidence indicating that the program activities have a major negative impact on the environment.

5.3.  Efficiency

During the course of the evaluation, the areas of particular focus with regards to efficiency were; the perception with respect to the way the program was implemented including the roles and responsibilities with its partners; and the relevance and usefulness of the PM Strategy.

The evaluation findings suggest that WMP demonstrated some efficiencies especially with respect to planning with the development of an Action Plan and the development and implementation of a risk-based approach to prioritize channel monitoring survey activities and maintenance and refurbishment activities of marine structures. Opportunities for improvement were identified and include clarification of WMP roles and responsibilities with its partners and the development of a PM Strategy and subsequent data collection strategy.

As a result of the development of the WMP Action Plan in 2009, the program has been able to identify several program inefficiencies and is in the process of improving them. Although the Action Plan contributed to the identification and improvement of program inefficiencies, the plan itself does not guarantee those inefficiencies will be addressed. The development and implementation of a reporting strategy would allow the program to monitor the Action Plan on a regular basis in order to demonstrate they have completed the actions in the plan.

WMP developed and implemented a risk-based approach to prioritize activities and allocate resources for channel monitoring survey activities and to assist DFO-RP, as the custodian, in the maintenance and refurbishment of marine structures. The purpose of this exercise was to prioritize activities according to risk analysis criteria in order to contribute to the annual planning and management of activities according to available budget. The use of program personnel’s knowledge and experience in conducting the risk-based prioritization exercises demonstrated effective decision-making. This approach will allow the program to use risk rated information to support decision-making with respect to which activities it should undertake within the allocated budget.

The development of the WMP Action Plan allowed the program to identify several WMP roles and responsibilities that require clarification. The program is in the process of clarifying those identified roles and responsibilities. The evaluation findings suggest that although some WMP roles and responsibilities with partners are clearly defined further clarification is needed. Further clarification could occur by establishing clear MOUs between the program and some of its partners or more clearly communicating WMP roles and responsibilities to its partners.

Recommendation #2: We recommend that the WMP clarify and document by establishing clear MOUs the roles and responsibilities between itself and other federal government partners (PWGSC, CHS, and DFO RP).

The relevance of the current WMP PM Strategy was assessed according its coherence with TBS guidelines and to the accuracy, quality and availability of performance data. The current WMP performance measurement indicators do not align with the outputs and expected outcomes of the program, and as a result, the evaluation was unable to determine the relevance of the PM Strategy. Given the incomplete PM Strategy, performance data has not been consistently collected across regions.

To assess usefulness, the evaluation focused on the extent to which the performance data supports decision making. Given the PM Strategy is incomplete and yielding limited performance data, there was no evidence found during the course of evaluation to support that performance data is formally being used in program decision-making.

Recommendation #3: We recommend that the WMP develop and implement a Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy with clearly defined indicators that align with the outputs and expected outcomes of the program. This PM Strategy would include a program profile, a logic model, a performance measurement framework, an evaluation and reporting strategy and a data collection strategy.  

5.4.  Economy

WMP is operating in a way that minimizes the use of resources to achieve its intended outcomes; however, any further reductions in resources may result in a decrease of services and ultimately impact the program’s ability to achieve its outcomes.

During the course of the evaluation, the area of particular focus with regards to demonstrating economy was the risk-based approach used by WMP to prioritize activities and allocation of resources for channel monitoring survey activities and the maintenance and refurbishment of marine structures. The evaluation findings suggest that this approach has contributed to the programs ability to deliver its services within the allocated budget and has most importantly contributed to the programs ability to minimize the level of resources required to achieve its outcomes.

The WMP allocated budget was compared to the actual expenditures over a five year period and the results suggest that although program funding has been consistently reduced over the past five years, WMP has been able to deliver its core services each year. While WMP has demonstrated its ability to achieve its intended outcomes with minimal level of resources, the gradual decrease in funding may impact the level of service offered by WMP and ultimately its ability to achieve its expected outcomes.

To demonstrate the program is operating in way that minimizes the use of resources in order to achieve its expected outcomes, a heat map was produced for both channel monitoring surveys and marine structures using the identified risks from the risk-based exercise. With regard to channel monitoring surveys, the heat map illustrates the program is economical, yet with the majority of channels in the high risk category, it suggests that the program is at risk of not achieving its outcomes due to the inability to conduct all of the necessary channel monitoring surveys of its current inventory of channels.

Recommendation #4: To ensure safe navigation, now and in the future, we recommend that the CCG communicates to users the status of its mandated channels such as the results of sounding activities and relevant information in order for mariners to make informed navigational decisions

A comparison was done between the dredging program in the United States (U.S.) and the dredging activities of the WMP. Although the dredging program in the U.S. is much larger in scope and resources, WMP responds to its mandate of channel maintenance by conducting channel bottom monitoring rather than dredging. WMP’s approach to managing dredging demonstrates the program is operating in a way that minimizes resources to achieve its intended outcomes.
Similar to channel monitoring surveys, the heat map for marine structures demonstrates the program is economical; however, the reduction of resources may impact the program’s ability to achieve its outcomes as illustrated by the majority of structures in a high risk category. Results indicate that marine structures have reached such a state of poor condition that there are significant risks that the structures may not be able to carry out their functions thus threatening the program’s ability to achieve its expected outcomes. Any further funding reductions may result in a reduction of services and ultimately impact the programs ability to achieve its expected outcomes.

Recommendation #5: To ensure safe navigation, now and in the future, we recommend that the CCG and DFO-RP collaboratively develop and implement a maintenance and/or refurbishment plan in order to ensure the suitable performance of its marine structures.

6.  Management Action Plan

Management action plan – Waterways Management Program (Feb 1 2011)

Recommendations

Management Action Plan

Status Report Update

Actions Completed

Actions Outstanding

Target Date

[Solicitor-client privilege]

The CCG supports the need for a review of its services delivered within the limits of Canadian Port Authorities. However, this work has implications outside of the boundaries of the WMP since every CCG programs may be potentially affected by this initiative since most provide services within the limits of Port Authorities. For example, this may apply to the provision of aids to navigation, marine structures, channel bottom monitoring and vessel traffic service within ports limits.
CCG is proposing two actions to deal with this recommendation: Action 1.1 and action 1.2.

 

 

 

Action 1.1: As recommended, the CCG has examined in 2009 the legislative mandate of Port Authorities. This examination has led to the conclusion that the mandates of Ports Authorities vary from one entity to the other. There is no standard mandate.

[Solicitor-client privilege]

Completed

Completed

Action 1.2: Enter into discussions with respect to clarifying roles and responsibilities and ultimately develop Memorandum of Understandings (MOU’s) between CCG and Port Authorities.

Work has begun in December 2010 to set-up a task force involving CCG, Transport Canada and Port authorities.  The objective of this task force is to reach consensus on strategic direction for the following operational areas: aids to navigation, vessel traffic management data, search and rescue, waterways management services, management of oil spills, financial responsibilities and legal liabilities.

By September 2011, the task force intends to agree on policies, guidelines or agreements of understanding on the operational areas, covering the 2012 to 2022 period. This task force is co-chaired by DG Maritime Service and Port Metro Vancouver.

September 2011

2. We recommend that the WMP clarify and document by establishing clear MOUs the roles and responsibilities between itself and other federal government partners (PWGSC, CHS and DFO-RP)

The CCG agrees on the need to clarify the roles and responsibilities with PWGSC, CHS and DFO-RP, mainly on the channel bottom monitoring services and the marine structures. The WMP will work with its counterpart to set up specific MOU with PWGSC, CHS and DFO-RP.
 

 

 

 

Action 2.1: CCG has annual contract arrangements with PWGSC for the provision of survey works in Maritime and Pacific Region, which are the only regions dealing with PWGSC.  When revising the next contracts, CCG will ensure that roles and responsibilities between the two organizations are adequately defined for the next contract arrangements.

 

CCG Maritimes and Pacific region to revise the next annual contract arrangements with PWGSC for fiscal year 2011-2012, in order to ensure that roles and responsibilities are adequately defined.

June 2011

 

Action 2.2: The WMP will participate to the development of an agreement between CCG and DFO-RP covering assets of category 4, 5 and 6. Marine Structures which are part of Category 6 are the only assets from WMP that are being maintained by DFO RP.

In 2010-11, work has started at the CCG level on a review to clarify the roles and responsibilities and to define the working relationships with DFO-RP on the Category asset 4, 5 and 6. Terms of reference of the task force were developed.

The task force, involving DFO RP and CCG personel, intends to complete its work by end of fiscal year 2011-2012.

March 2012

Action 2.3: The CCG is currently working toward the implementation of a national MOU with CHS, involving Maritime Services, Fleet and the Integrated Technical Services. WMP will participate to the development of the MOU to ensure that roles and responsibilities are adequately defined.

An MOU was negotiated between CCG Fleet and CHS in the Fall 2010, coming into force on April 2011. This MOU will be used as a base to negotiate a more global MOU between CCG and CHS.

WMP to participate to the development of an overall MOU between CCG and CHS during fiscal year 2011-2012.

March 2012

3. We recommend that the WMP develop and implement a Performance Measurement (PM) Strategy with clearly defined indicators that align with the outputs and expected outcomes of the program. This PM Strategy would include a program profile, a logic model, a performance measurement framework, an evaluation and reporting strategy as well as a data collection strategy.

Action 3.1 The WMP supports this initiative and will develop a Performance Measurement Strategy (PMS) which deals with the management, accountability and risk factors related to the WMP.

Also as per DFO performance Measurement Action Plan, the program has submitted a PM Strategy to the DFO Evaluation Directorate.

Draft Performance Measurement Strategy (PMS) developed.

DFO Evaluation Directorate will review and provide comments on WMP updated PM Strategy.

 

March 2011

 

 

Action 3.2 The WMP will finalize and implement the approved (by CFO and Commissioner of CCG) Performance Measurement Strategy across the program.

 

The WMP will finalize and implement the approved Performance Measurement Strategy across the program.

March 2012

4. To ensure safe navigation, now and in the future, we recommend that the CCG communicates to users the status of its mandated channels such as the results of sounding activities and relevant information in order for mariners to make informed navigational decisions.

The CCG agrees with this recommendation. Mariners must be informed of the status of the surveys they use for their safe navigation.  According to our current Level of Service, channel bottom survey results are issued within 48 hours of survey, or next working day when a weekend intervenes.

 

 

 

Action 4.1: The WMP will develop a national web page where mariners can get the latest results of the surveys and most importantly, know when the last survey was performed.

The Québec and Pacific Regions currently share their survey results using internet web portal.

The WMP will implement a national web page to post the latest information of surveyed channels. This web page will be used as a first step toward the development of an information portal which will contribute to the implementation of e-navigation.

Sept 2012

Action 4.2: The WMP will develop and implement a communication strategy to inform mariners of this web page.

 

The WMP will develop and implement a communication strategy to inform mariners of this web page.

March 2013

5. To ensure safe navigation, now and in the future, we recommend that the CCG and DFO-RP collaboratively develop and implement a maintenance and/or refurbishment plan in order to ensure the suitable performance of its marine structures.

Action 5.1: Work will be done with DFO-RP to develop a maintenance and/or refurbishment plan, following the development and implementation of a MOU between CCG and DFO-RP on category 6 asset – as referred to in recommendation 2 above.

 

In 2009, WMP performed a risk evaluation profile of the marine structures.

The WMP will work in collaboration with DFO-RP to develop a maintenance and/or refurbishment plan on the marine structures. The first step of this plan will be to update the risk evaluation profile of the marine structures done in 2009.

The second step will be to put on paper the maintenance and refurbishment needs of all the structures.

The third and final step will be to evaluate the costs and prepare submission documents in order to get funding within the Department.

June 2012

 

 

 

 

Sept 2012

 

 

March 2013

Example of WM Program marine structures

Maugher Beach Breakwater, Halifax Harbour, Maritimes Region

Maugher Beach Breakwater, Halifax Harbour, Maritimes Region

Livingstone Channel Cofferdams, Detroit River, C&A Region

Livingstone Channel Cofferdams, Detroit River, C&A Region

Annex A- Evaluation Matrix

Waterways Management Program (WMP) Evaluation Matrix

QUESTIONS

INDICATORS

METHODOLOGY

RELEVANCE

Is there a continued need for WMP?

Program stakeholders attest to the importance of the WMP in Canada, of the WMP

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Is the program aligned with Government of Canada priorities, and with DFO/CCG priorities and strategic outcomes?

Degree of alignment of WMP with Government of Canada objectives, priorities, etc.

  1. Document Review

 

Degree of alignment of WMP with DFO objectives, priorities, vision and mission

Is the current role of the federal government appropriate?

Program documentation provides rationale for current role of government

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

PROGRAM SUCCESS

IMMEDIATE OUTCOMES

Has WMP resulted in increased awareness of channel safety information?

WMP produced channel design, usage and safety information:

  1. Channel design guidelines produced
  2. Ability to provide advice on sage usage
  3. Number of forecasts produced
  4. Number of km2 sounded vs. planned
  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Stakeholder views on level of awareness of channel design, usage and safety information and its availability

To what extent has WMP led to reduced sedimentation and erosion in the Great Lakes connecting channels and the St. Lawrence River?

WMP conducted activities to reduce sedimentation and erosion

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Views on the extent to which WMP has led to reduced sedimentation and erosion

To what extent has ice jam and flood damage been minimized due to the WMP?

Evidence that WMP conducted activities to minimize ice jam and flood damage

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Views on the extent to which ice jam and flood damage has been minimized due to the WMP

To what extent has WMP led to optimized water flows and levels?

Evidence that WMP conducted activities to optimize water flows and levels

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Views on the extent to which water flows and levels have been optimized due to the WMP

INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES

To what extent has the WMP contributed to safe transits and access to ports?

Number of safe transits and access to ports by vessel

Percent of the time that ports were inaccessible as a result of accidents due to:

  1. Channels that are not dredged to advertised depths
  2. Groundings due to poorly controlled sedimentation levels
  3. Lack of awareness of usage and safety information
  4. Lack of confidence in channel design, usage and safety information
  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Views on extent to which WMP information and advice, and channel depth management activities have lead to safe transits and access to ports

To what extent has the WMP contributed to economic sustainability (of marine trade and commerce)?

Economic consequences that would result from not having the WMP

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Views on the extent to which WMP has contributed to economic sustainability

To what extent has the WMP contributed to environmental sustainability of commercial channels?

WMP activities are conducted in compliance with environmental law

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

LONG TERM OUTCOMES

Is the WMP contributing in the achievement of its ultimate goal of: maritime safety; marine trade and commerce; protection of the marine and freshwater environment?

View of not carrying out information and advice and channel depth management activities would have on maritime safety; marine trade and commerce; protection of the marine and freshwater environment

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

To what extent have there been unintended outcomes due to the WMP?

Stakeholders identify unintended positive or negative impacts with regards to information and advice and channel depth management activities

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

What external influences impact on the success of
WMP?

Number of DFO and CCG programs that influence WMP ability to achieve success of its outcomes

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Views on the importance of those interdependencies

 

EFFICIENCY

Does the WMP have management and administrative systems in place for an effective implementation?

Perception with regards to the way the program is implemented as well as roles and responsibilities with its partners

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

Relevance of the present performance measurement strategy:

  1. Extent to which the performance indicators accurately reflect outputs and results (accuracy)
  2. Extent to which WMP data capture and reporting capacity reflect TBS requirements (coherence)
  3. Extent to which the performance data being collected is accurate and complete (quality)
  4. Extent to which information and data can be collected (availability)

Extent to which the performance data supports decision-making and departmental accountability requirements (usefulness)

ECONOMY

Is the WMP operating in a way that minimizes the use of resources to achieve its expected outcomes?

Delivery modifications to the WMP that would make it more economical

  1. Document Review
  2. Interviews

1 No fee is payable by a ship that is travelling non-stop through Canadian waters to, or from, a port in the U.S. without a stop at a Canadian port.

2 Contribution assumed by the Industry is the difference between the total cost of maintenance dredging and the contribution of CCG for U.S. ship exemption.

3 Partners include Montreal Port Authority, Quebec Port Authority and Ultramar Ltd.

4 In 2003/04, CCG did a preliminary review of 35 marine structures to determine if they are still required. The study was conducted over a 9-month period beginning in June 2003 and ending in March 2004. A more detailed study, in 2005 was only partially completed due to termination of funding.

5 Since 2001, the CCG recommends that any further commercial usage of the Miramichi waterway, in its current condition, be solely at the discretion of vessel masters, captains, owners, agents and insurers.

6 The national policy for CBM was developed in 2008-09 in order to prioritize the channels according to risk analysis criteria. Those criteria are: grounding/collision, channel shifting, water conditions, environmental impacts, and reputation on the Government’s image.

7 There are 52 marine structures in all CGG regions. 22 of them contribute to channel/ erosion protection and 24 contribute to siltation/dredging reduction.

8 They are six marine structures in Quebec, including three ice booms.

9 A labour dispute occurred in 1993 which impacted installation

10 At that time, the CGG HS was questioning the basic utility of ice booms

11 Published June 2, 2010

12 Squat is the reduction in under keel clearance between a vessel at-rest and underway due to the increased flow of water past the moving body

13 The Fraser River is a major import and export port, specializing in container sized cargo, automobiles, steel and forestry products. The port generates 12,400 direct jobs, $900 million in GDP and $2.3 billion in direct economic output.

14 In Quebec, for example, dredging activities are subject to various laws and regulations applied by different levels of government various federal or province laws and regulations can be applied such as: Canadian Environmental Protection Act; Navigable Waters Protection Act; Fisheries Act or Species at Risk Act.

15 Due to the larger handling capacity ships compared to other modes

16 CCG withdrew its Channel Dredging Program nationally with the exception of the Great Lakes Connecting Channels under a Program Review initiative to adopt the recommendations of the SCOT that dredging should be the responsibility of teh ports and other beneficiaries where they could be identified.

17 Originally constructed by Public Works commencing in 1906, the Maughers Beach Breakwater is located at the entrance of Halifax Harbour, at the south west tip of McNabs Island. The protection works collectively provide wave and current protection of the lighthouse, strategic protection of the climate of the main shipping Channel entering Halifax Harbour, overall protection of Halifax Harbour, and erosion protection of McNabs Island. In addition, Maughers Beach is extensively used by local swimmers and recreational users

18 Maritime Services Program has on overall RMAF

19 All commercial shipping channels were included in this exercise with the exception of the St. Lawrence River and the interconnecting channels of the Great Lakes. These channels have to be surveyed yearly because they are maintained to advertised depths (dredging).

20 The 2009 Treasury Board Policy on Evaluation replaced RMAF with Performance Measurement Strategy

21 A revised performance measurement strategy is currently being drafted by the program.

22 As part of the DFO Performance Measurement Framework, a set of high-level outputs, expected outcomes and indicators exist for WMP. Many of the indicators are directly linked to the program’s level of service and service standards

23 As stated in the Program Logic Model

24 The Heat Map depicts the probability of a negative event against its potential impact with respect to channels the WMP is mandated to survey.

25 The variation from year-to-year is due to dredging in the Central & Arctic region as funding has not been consistent from year to year. In 2007-08, CCG allocated $4.5M to dredge the South East Bend section; this was an unusually high amount. Some of this funding remained in 2008-09. This accounts for both the increase in 2007-08 and the decrease in 2008-09

26 $1.9 million and $2.7 million are average estimates of dredging and channel monitoring costs over a four year period between 2005-06 and 2008-09.

27 WMP maintains channel depth at two locations: Great Lakes Connecting Channels and St. Lawrence Shipping Channel