Advocate for improvements to border crossings

Transcription

Advocate for Improvements to Southern
Ontario Border Crossings
Discussion Paper
Partnership, Communication and Advocacy
Part of the Goods Movement Strategic Plan
Action Number 6
May 2014
1
Table of Contents
1
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 8
1.1
Study Scope ................................................................................................................................................. 8
1.2
The Importance of Peel Region in Canada’s International Trade......................................................... 10
1.3
Competitiveness Framework for Cross-Border Goods Movement Analysis ........................................ 13
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3
3.1
3.2
4
Key Issues in Cross-Border Goods Movement ............................................................................ 15
Policy Issues and Challenges: Road Border Crossings .......................................................................... 15
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
Infrastructure and Background ............................................................................................................................... 15
Policy Issues and Challenges: Border Crossing ..................................................................................................... 18
Policy Issues and Challenges: Border Access ....................................................................................................... 19
Policy Issues and Challenges: Trade ...................................................................................................................... 20
Policy Issues and Challenges: Rail Border Crossings ............................................................................. 20
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
Policy Issues and Challenges: International Airports ............................................................................. 22
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
Policy Issues and Challenges: International Seaports ........................................................................... 23
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
Summary: Border Crossing Policy Issues and Challenges..................................................................... 26
Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 28
Improve Data Availability and Planning for Cross-Border Goods Movement..................................... 28
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.1.5
Gather Data on Border Crossing Performance .................................................................................................... 28
Develop a Commodity Flow Survey and Freight Analysis Framework ............................................................. 28
Expand MTO Commercial Vehicle Survey to Cover Peel Region Roads ......................................................... 29
Develop a Commercial Multimodal Forecasting Model .................................................................................... 29
Take a Multimodal Corridor Perspective on Transportation Planning .............................................................. 29
Improve Border Infrastructure and Highways Connecting the GTHA to Border Crossings ................. 31
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
Improve Key Truck Routes to Border Crossings ..................................................................................................... 31
Complete the New International Trade Crossing ................................................................................................ 32
Invest in Border Technology..................................................................................................................................... 32
References ...................................................................................................................................... 33
Appendix A: Overview of Key Southern Ontario Border Crossings ..................................................... 1
Truck Border Crossings .............................................................................................................................................. 1
Ambassador Bridge ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Blue Water Bridge ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Peace Bridge ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Lewiston-Queenston Bridge ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Thousand Islands International Bridge ...................................................................................................................................... 6
Rail Border Crossings ................................................................................................................................................. 7
Detroit River Rail Tunnel (CP) ...................................................................................................................................................... 8
Paul M. Tellier Tunnel (CN) .......................................................................................................................................................... 9
2
International Railway Bridge ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
Rail Intermodal Terminals ............................................................................................................................................................ 9
Air Border Crossings ................................................................................................................................................. 10
Toronto Pearson International Airport ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Hamilton John C. Munro International Airport ...................................................................................................................... 12
Marine Border Crossings.......................................................................................................................................... 13
Southern Ontario Marine Ports ................................................................................................................................................. 13
Summary of Current Infrastructure Issues and Planned Future Improvements by Crossing ............................. 16
Appendix B: Data Sources ....................................................................................................................... 1
MTO Commercial Vehicle Survey (CVS) ................................................................................................................. 1
US Bureau of Transportation Statistics: North American Transborder Freight Data .............................................. 1
Transport in Canada (herein referred to as Transport Canada (2012)) ................................................................ 1
Peel Forecast Model .................................................................................................................................................. 1
3
Abbreviations
APGCI
BIT
CBP
CBSA
CN
CP
CRG
CVS
DRIC
FAF
FBCL
GGH
GTA
GTAA
GTHA
JIT
MTO
NGTA
NITC
PGMTF
RFID
TC
TCOD
TMG
VIT
Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative
Brampton Intermodal Terminal
(US) Customs and Border Protection
Canada Border Service Agency
Canadian National Railway
Canadian Pacific Railway
Continental Rail Gateway
(MTO) Commercial Vehicle Survey
Detroit River International Crossing
Freight Analysis Framework
Federal Bridge Corporation Limited
Greater Golden Horseshoe
Greater Toronto Area
Greater Toronto Airports Authority
Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area
Just in time (delivery)
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
Niagara-to-GTA
New International Trade Crossing
Peel Goods Movement Task Force
Radio-frequency identification
Transport Canada
Trucking Commodity Origin Destination (Survey) of Statistics Canada
Travel Modelling Group
Vaughan Intermodal Terminal
4
Executive Summary
Ontario is the hub of Canada’s international trade, and Peel, at the centre of the Greater
Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), is the hub of Ontario’s international trade. In 2013, Ontario
accounted for more imports of goods than the rest of Canada combined, totalling almost $270
billion by value. Exports from Ontario are also significant, and totaled $165 billion in 2013.
While Peel Region is home to only 10% of Ontario’s labour force, it is home to 20% of the
province’s transportation and logistics labour force, some 60,000 people. Peel also has a
significant manufacturing base with 93,000 workers representing 13% of the province’s
manufacturing labour force. 1 The Region produces approximately 15% of Ontario's exports. 2
While compelling, these figures probably understate the importance of Peel to Canada’s
international trade.
Peel serves as a transportation hub for southern Ontario. Its transportation network includes
Pearson International Airport (Canada's largest cargo airport), seven 400-Series highways, and
the two largest intermodal rail terminals in Ontario. This strategically important transportation
network facilitates the entry of goods into the Ontario and Canadian markets and the export of
goods to the United States and overseas.
Overall, trucking is the dominant mode for Ontario’s international trade in terms of value,
accounting for $262 billion or 59%, compared to air ($72 billon, 16%), rail ($65 billion, 15%), and
water ($44 billion,10%). Unsurprisingly, Canada’s trade with the United States is dominated by
trucks with imports of $117 billion and exports of $98 billion, respectively 79% of imports from the
US and 66% of exports.
This paper approaches cross-border goods movement in terms of the issues associated with
crossing the border, the issues associated with travelling between the GTHA and the border,
and some broader issues about cross-border trade, as relevant. 3 Every mode faces different
challenges and opportunities in terms of travelling to and crossing the border. Given the
importance of trucking, this paper gives special attention to the issues facing cross-border
trucking.
The key border crossing issue facing trucking is the unreliability of travel times owing to delays
associated with border crossing processes. The most important border access issue for the
trucking industry is congestion and the lack of resilience in the highway network linking Peel
Region with Michigan and Niagara border crossings.
Other transportation modes also face cross-border and other challenges that negatively
impact trade. Notably the air freight industry faces high costs in the form of taxes on fuel for
international flights, whereas most other provinces provide an exemption. Air cargo customs
and security processing are also driving up costs and increasing travel times. In the marine
Statistics Canada (2012)
Peel Region Public Works (2012)
3 In April 2012, Peel Regional Council endorsed the Region’s Goods Movement Strategic Plan
2012-2016. The Plan incorporates 23 action items, which have the objective of improving the
efficiency of goods movement, managing congestion, and mitigating its effects on health and
the environment. One of these actions requires the Region to take an active role in advocating
in border crossings bottlenecks from the cross-border movement of goods on the GTHA road
network.
1
2
5
industry, the 24-hour advance notice of arrival requirements creates a deterrent to making
greater use of the marine mode for cross-Lakes trade. All of these issues negatively impact
trade, to the detriment of the economies of Peel, Ontario, and Canada.
This paper recommends a number of actions that could be taken to better inform cross-border
transportation policies and action, and ultimately help improve cross-border goods movement
in Southern Ontario.
Improve Data Availability and Planning for Cross-Border Goods Movement
The data available in Ontario on cross-border goods movement could be improved
significantly, and the actions below would go a long way to remedying this deficiency.
•
Gather Data on Border Crossing Performance. An area of clear weakness in the data
currently available is border crossing performance, including in particular data on
border crossing times. Only with good data can the Government of Canada and other
partners undertake cost-benefit analysis to prioritize investment in border crossings.
Efforts are underway at Transport Canada to collect data on road border crossing
performance.
•
Develop a Commodity Flow Survey and Freight Analysis Framework. One of the key
challenges faced by policy makers in regard to cross-border goods movement is
obtaining data on the initial origin and final destination of cross-border goods flows.
What is needed in Canada is an extension of the Freight Analysis Framework (FAF)
already in use in the United States. The FAF integrates data from a variety of sources to
create a comprehensive picture of freight movement among states and major
metropolitan areas by all modes of transportation. Using data from a national
Commodity Flow Survey and additional sources, FAF provides estimates for tonnage,
value, and domestic ton-miles by region of origin and destination, commodity type, and
mode, and forecasts through 2040. These data can in turn be used to inform priorities
and plans with respect to border crossing-related infrastructure.
•
Expand MTO Commercial Vehicle Survey (CVS) to Cover Peel Region Roads. The MTO
CVS only captures trips on provincial highways. For this reason, it does not capture trips
between locations in Peel and rail intermodal terminals or the Toronto Pearson
International Airport. Expanding the coverage of the CVS to include Peel’s road network
would greatly improve the data available to policy makers and planners.
•
Develop a Commercial Multimodal Forecasting Model. The lack of a multimodal
forecasting model, which also incorporates cross-border goods movement, is a major
gap in our ability to plan multimodal infrastructure. We suggest that a multimodal
forecasting model be developed and that it cover all of Southern Ontario. The
implementation of a multimodal forecasting model would be complementary to the
development of a Canadian or at least an Ontario FAF, as it has been in the United
States.
•
Take a Multimodal Corridor Perspective on Transportation Planning. Shippers and their
logistics partners determine how, and over what mode(s) their goods are moved to
market. These decisions are made in light of the relative travel time, cost, reliability,
information and risk (collectively the transportation value proposition) that come with
each mode or combination of modes. There is no direct role for public policy in this
choice. Public policy can however influence modal choice. It is important that
6
transportation policy consciously take into account multimodal impacts and
interlinkages. As such, Ontario’s multimodal transportation strategy is certainly a step in
the right direction.
To take multimodal corridor planning a step further, an institutional structure could be created
to analyze the performance of Southern Ontario’s multimodal transportation system and to
make evidence-based recommendations for how investments in infrastructure and ancillary
systems (such as supporting technology) should be prioritized. The model of the Asia-Pacific
Gateway and Corridor Initiative (APGCI), described herein, would be interesting to examine
and, given the success of the APGCI, such an initiative would be very likely to resonate with the
Governments of Canada and Ontario.
Improve Border Infrastructure and Highways Connecting the GTHA to Border Crossings
This set of three recommendations pertains to physical infrastructure investments that would
improve the speed and reliability of cross-border goods movement, while reducing costs.
•
Improve Key Truck Routes to Border Crossings. Trucks not only handle more cross-border
trade than any other mode in Ontario ($262 billion in 2012 relative to $187 billion for all
other modes combined), they also provide essential connectivity to other modes of
transport and shipper facilities. As such, in our view, improving the speed and reliability,
and reducing the cost of trucking between the GTHA and border crossings, is of
paramount importance. The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has in place
multimodal transportation development strategies for the two key corridors of relevance
to cross-border goods movement to and from Peel Region (the GTA West Corridor and
the Niagara-to-GTA Corridor). It is critical that improvements in these corridors be
realized to improve goods movement between the GTHA and key border crossings.
There is also an opportunity to do better. The construction of a new high capacity, high
speed highway between the Niagara frontier and Highway 401 would provide not only
additional capacity, but crucially, resilience of key trade infrastructure.
•
Complete the New International Trade Crossing (NITC). The NITC project (formerly the
Detroit River International Crossing or DRIC) project remains important as it will provide
needed capacity and increased resilience of border crossing infrastructure over the
Detroit River. The age and load restrictions of the Ambassador Bridge as well as the fact
it is the single most important border crossing in Canada (in 2013 handling 37% of all
trucks crossing Ontario’s borders), argue strongly in favour of completing the NITC as
soon as possible.
•
Invest in Border Technology. New technology in terms of biometrics for people and
better scanning for goods have the potential to materially improve the speed and
reliability of border crossing, while reducing the cost. Radio-frequency identification
(RFID) technology is an example of a technology that could be explored further. US CBP
already has RFID readers in all lanes, and this technology can significantly improve
processing times. The Governments of Canada and the United States should work
together to develop RFID or other appropriate technology to improve the flow of goods
vehicles. As new technology can raise concerns over privacy and dignity,
implementation would likely be more successful if such new technologies were
accompanied by an improved approach to privacy and respect for the human rights of
travelers.
7
1 Introduction
The Region of Peel is located in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) in Southern
Ontario. With a population of 1.3 million, the Region comprises three municipalities: the Town of
Caledon and the Cities of Brampton and Mississauga. Peel is Ontario’s hub for goods
movement, and indeed one of Canada’s most important hubs for goods movement, because
of three essential characteristics: 1) the importance of manufacturing and transportation to the
Region, 2) the central location of Peel in North America, close to large Canadian and
American markets and Canada’s most important border crossings, and 3) the integration of
Peel Region with the rest of the GTHA.
Figure 1: The Peel Goods Movement Strategic Plan 2012 to 2016
In 2012 the Peel Goods Movement Task Force (PGMTF) released a Goods Movement Strategic
Plan. The PGMTF includes private stakeholders and regional, municipal, provincial, and federal
government departments. The PGMTF oversees a Goods Movement Program, which is aimed at
1) supporting and influencing a transportation system that makes sure goods are transported in
“an efficient and timely manner”, and 2) optimizing the use of existing infrastructure and
capacity, while minimizing social, environmental, and economic impacts of goods
transportation. The Strategic Plan calls for actions that involve advocacy, systems optimization
of existing infrastructure, and effective planning and forecasting. The Strategic Plan makes
several recommendations, including improvements to goods transport access to air and rail
termini, improvements at rail crossings and to accident and road construction oversight,
establishing a Strategic Goods Movement Network, a Regional Information Technology Services
Strategic Plan and Network, and to “advocate for the improvement of Ontario border
crossings.” 4
1.1
Study Scope
This paper reviews the goods movement between Ontario – Peel Region in particular –and
other countries, and related border-crossing issues and opportunities. It is multimodal in nature,
covering goods movement across borders by air, marine, rail, and road. 5 Exhibit 1 shows the
study areas as well as key border crossings and associated infrastructure connecting border
crossings with Peel Region. This infrastructure will be described in greater detail in the following
chapters.
4
5
Pipeline movements are excluded.
8
Exhibit 1: Study Area and Key Border Crossing Infrastructure
Source: CPCS
9
1.2
The Importance of Peel Region in Canada’s International Trade
The importance of Peel Region to Ontario's and to Canada's trade is centred on two elements
in the region's economy: 1) its importance as a transportation hub and 2) its importance in
export manufacturing. Peel serves as a transportation hub for southern Ontario. Its
transportation network includes Pearson International Airport (Canada's largest cargo airport),
seven 400-Series highways, and the two largest intermodal rail terminals in Ontario. This network
facilitates the entry of goods into the Ontario and Canadian markets and the export of goods
to the United States and overseas. Every day 3,300 trucks carry commodities valued at over
$160 million between Peel and United States, 14% of the $600 million worth of goods carried on
23,000 daily truck trips to and from Peel Region. 6
Foreign countries including the United States buy more than one-quarter of the goods Canada
produces and supply more than one-quarter of the goods Canada consumes (in 2013 exports
of goods totalled $479 billion and imports of goods totalled $486 billion). This immense flow of
goods improves the quality of life of Canadians in many ways. By selling our oil, gas, forest
products, machinery, and consumer goods (to name just a few) abroad, we are able to buy
the very best products from around the world, from cars to oranges to clothing to medicines. All
of these products flow between Canada and our trading partners (Exhibit 2) by the various
modes of transportation: air, marine, pipeline, rail, and road. 7
Ontario is responsible for the largest share of Canada’s international trade. In 2013 Ontario
accounted for more imports of goods than the rest of the country combined, totalling almost
$268 billion. Lacking energy exports, Ontario had smaller exports, $165 billion. Ontario’s exports
of goods overwhelmingly went to the United States with 79% finding markets in there. The United
Kingdom was by far the second most important buyer of Ontario products, purchasing 8% of
Ontario’s goods exports in 2012. Ontario’s sources of goods imports were more diverse, with only
56% coming from the United States, 11% from China, 7% from Mexico, 4% from Japan, and 3%
from Germany (Exhibit 3).
6
7
MTO (2006)
Pipelines are not examined in this paper.
10
Exhibit 2: Canada and Ontario’s International
Trade in Goods, 2013
$350
$279
$268
$300
$207
$200
Trade in Billions of Dollars
Trade in Billions of Dollars
$250
$164
$150
$100
$50
$150
$100
$50
$0
Export
Ontario
Rest of Canada
Source: Statistics Canada
Source: Transport Canada (2012)
Exhibit 4: Ontario’s Trade by Mode, by Value
2012*
Exhibit 5: Ontario’s Trade by Mode, by Value
2012*
$160
$300
United States Imports
$140
$250
$120
United States Exports
Billions of Dollars
Billions of Dollars
Imports
$200
$0
Import
Exports
$250
United States
China, P. Rep.
Mexico
United Kingdom
Japan
Germany
Korea, South
Switzerland
Italy
Peru
Other
$300
Exhibit 3: Ontario’s International Trade in
Goods, Ten Largest Trading Partners, 2012
$200
$100
Other country Imports
$150
Other country Exports
$100
$80
$60
Water
Road
Rail
Other
Air
$40
$20
$50
$0
Exports
$0
Air
Other
Rail
Road
Source: Transport Canada (2012) 8
Water
Imports
Other country
Exports
Imports
United States
*Note that for exports, the mode of transport represents the mode by which the international
boundary is crossed. This may be different from the mode of transport within Canada. For
imports, the mode of transport represents the last mode by which the cargo was transported to
the port of clearance in Canada and is derived from the cargo control documents of customs.
This may not be the mode of transport by which the cargo arrived at the Canadian port of
entry in the case of inland clearance. This may, therefore, lead to some underestimation of
Canadian imports by the marine and air transport modes.
8
11
Overall, trucking (road transport) is the dominant mode for Ontario’s international trade in terms
of value, accounting for $262 billion or 59% (Exhibit 4). Air ($72 billon, 16%), rail ($65 billion, 15%),
and water ($44 billion, 10%) accounted for much lower values. Unsurprisingly, Canada’s trade
with the United States is dominated by trucks with imports of $117 billion and exports of $98
billion, respectively 79% of imports from the US and 66% of exports (Exhibit 5). Also unsurprisingly,
trucking is much less important in trade with other countries. By value, Ontario’s $39-billion worth
of exports to countries other than the United States are carried primarily by air (58%) and marine
(33%). Ontario’s $114 billion in imports from other countries are roughly evenly split between air
(30%), road (39%), and marine (24%).
Ontario’s trade, in value terms, is dominated by manufactured products and manufacturing
inputs (Exhibit 6). However, consumer goods, which also include manufactured consumer
goods, and metallic mineral products are also very important.
Exhibit 6: Ontario’s International Trade by Commodity, 2013
Motor vehicles & parts
Consumer goods
Metal & non-met mineral products
Electronic and electrical equipment & parts
Basic & industrial chem., plas. & rubber products
Industrial machinery, equipment & parts
Forest products, building & packaging materials
Farm, fishing & intermediate food products
Domestic export
Aircraft and & trans. equipment & parts
Import
Other
Metal ores & non-met minerals
Energy products
$0
$20
$40
$60
Billions of Dollars
$80
Source: Statistics Canada
Note: Merchandise imports based on the province of clearance, and domestic exports based
on the province of origin.
12
Peel Region lies at the heart of Ontario’s, and to a great extent Canada’s, international trade.
While the region is home to only 10% of Ontario’s labour force, it is home to 20% of the
province’s transportation and logistics labour force. In total in 2011, Peel had 60,000 people
working in transportation and logistics. Moreover Peel has a significant manufacturing base with
93,000 workers representing 13% of the
province’s manufacturing labour force. 9 The
Region produces approximately 15% of
Ontario's exports. 10 While compelling, these
figures probably understate the importance
of Peel to Canada’s international trade.
Exhibit 7: Population and Employment Growth
Projection for the GTHA, 2011-2031
600
Population
Millions of People or Jobs
500
Peel is likely to experience continued
population and economic growth. Peel’s
population growth rate is expected to
exceed that of every other region in the
GTHA except adjacent York (Exhibit 7).
Population and economic growth in both
Peel Region and the GTHA are likely to
contribute to increasing traffic at Ontario-US
border crossings.
1.3
Employment
400
300
200
100
-
Competitiveness Framework for CrossBorder Goods Movement Analysis
Source: Hemson Consulting Ltd. (2013),
When transportation options are efficient and
Reference Scenario
competitive, shippers benefit from lower
transportation costs, faster and better service,
and increased reliability, which in turn contribute to their competitiveness, growth and that of
the region.
There are added costs associated with moving goods across borders. These include border
crossing and customs-related charges, as well as costs associated with border delays or the
variability in travel times associated with moving goods across borders. These costs have the
potential to make Canadian exports less competitive in foreign markets and imports more
expensive for Canadian consumers and businesses. For example extra costs associated with
crossing the border mean that Canadian auto parts are that much more expensive for a US
auto maker. Poor reliability can also frustrate just-in-time delivery of automotive parts, leading to
missed delivery times, the need for more inventory, or potentially lost contracts. This can result in
higher cost for end consumers, and lost Canadian trade-related jobs.
Overall, Anderson (2012) estimates that in 2009 crossing the border adds 40% to the cost of
export shipments and 75% to the cost of import shipments. He estimates that these costs equate
to a premium of 0.5-1.0% on the value of goods being shipped. An older estimate of the cost of
delays at the border pegged the cost to the Ontario economy alone at $5.25 billion annually. 12
Statistics Canada (2012)
12 Ontario Chamber of Commerce (2004), p. 4.
9
10
13
Ontario’s economy depends on trade. When the costs of trading increase, cross-border
shippers become less competitive; this in turn hurts Peel’s economy and the economies of
Ontario and Canada. This discussion paper is fundamentally concerned with identifying these
costs and proposing ways to reduce them, specifically as they pertain to those businesses in
Peel Region that move goods across borders, and their ability to reach cross-border markets
competitively.
The costs to be explored in this discussion paper are two-fold:
Border Crossing Costs. These are costs associated with border functions and are generally
incurred directly at the border; or put another way, costs that would not exist if the border did
not exist. 13 For example, delays waiting in lineups at the border, tolls and fees to cross the
border, customs duties, and the cost of compliance
with trusted trader and traveller programs. They can
be understood in terms of their impact on travel time,
cost, level of service (including reliability), and the
information available to those moving goods. These
Travel
costs are largely driven by the policies of the
Time
Governments of Canada and the United States. The
focus in this report will be on the policies of the
Government of Canada, since the ability of Peel to
influence US Government policy is very limited.
Informa
-tion
/Risk
Border Access Costs. These are costs of travelling
Level of
between Peel Region and Southern Ontario’s border
Cost
Service
crossings. They can also be understood in terms of
travel time, cost, level of service (including reliability),
and the information available to those moving goods. These costs are largely driven by the
Government of Ontario and the municipalities that maintain access roads to land, sea, and air
ports.
13
Anderson (2012), p. 18.
14
2 Key Issues in Cross-Border Goods Movement
This chapter discusses the key issues in cross-border movement that are relevant to Peel Region.
It is structured by mode: road, rail, air, and marine. The final section provides a summary.
2.1
Policy Issues and Challenges: Road Border Crossings
Trucks tend to provide relatively short distance transportation for all types of goods. They also
often provide first- and last-mile connections between others modes and the ultimate origin
and destination of goods.
2.1.1
Infrastructure and Background
Owing to Ontario’s location on the northern fringe of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River,
the vast majority of cross-border truck movements occur at a small number of bridges and one
tunnel (Exhibit 1). Of these the Ambassador Bridge (Windsor-Detroit), the Blue Water Bridge
(Sarnia-Port Huron), the Peace Bridge (Fort Erie-Buffalo), the Lewiston-Queenston Bridge, and
the Thousand Islands Bridge saw 97% of truck crossings in Southern Ontario in 2013 (Exhibit 8).
Appendix A provides additional background information on Southern Ontario road border
crossings.
There has been a considerable decline in cross-border truck traffic in recent years (Exhibit 9), in
large part a reflection of the recession of 2008-2009. From 2006 to 2013 all of the major truck
crossings have seen declines ranging from 33% at the Ambassador Bridge and 28% at LewistonQueenston to 15% at the Thousand Islands Bridge to roughly 5% at the Blue Water and Peace
Bridges.
While dated, the 2006 Commercial Vehicle Survey (CVS) allows us to see which border crossings
are being used by trucks originating in or destined to Peel (Exhibit 10). Cross-border truck traffic
from Peel seems to follow the same pattern as overall traffic, with the Ambassador Bridge being
the most important crossing (Exhibit 11). It is notable that Niagara frontier crossings see a higher
share of their traffic to/from Peel than those on the Michigan border, which is likely a reflection
of greater proximity. Exhibit 12 shows the locations within Peel at which cross-border trips
originate or to which they are destined, by border crossing used.
It is important to note that trucks play a very important connecting role in international trade.
Even when goods ultimately originate or are destined overseas, they are often trucked via the
United States. For example, when originating in Canada and destined to locations in the United
States, goods could first be trucked across the border then put on to rail for a move within the
United States. 14
14
We are unaware of data on the magnitude of such movements.
15
Exhibit 8: Road Border Crossing Traffic, 2013
4
Trucks
5
Other vehicles
4
Millions of Truck Crossings
Millions of Crossings
6
Exhibit 9: Truck Border Crossing Traffic Trends,
2006-2013
3
2
1
0
3
2
1
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Ambassador
Lewiston-Queenston
Thousand Islands
Source: Public Border Operators Association
(2014)
Source: Public Border Operators Association
(2014)
Exhibit 10: Peel Share of Total Crossings, 2006
Exhibit 11: Peel Originating/Destined Truck
Crossings, 2006
35%
30%
1,400
25%
1,200
Daily Crossings, Trucks
Share of Total
Blue Water
Peace
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1,000
800
600
400
200
-
Share of Daily Trips
Share of Value
Source: MTO CVS
Source: MTO CVS
16
Exhibit 12: Daily Truck Trips between Peel Region and Border Crossings
Source: Region of Peel based on MTO (2006)
17
2.1.2
Policy Issues and Challenges: Border Crossing
Delays
Delays result when vehicles arrive more quickly at a border crossing than capacity exists to
process them. Generally, border delays became very severe in the immediate aftermath of
September 11, 2001, and then lessened as more resources were devoted to border security. The
summer of 2007 saw delays return to 2002 levels, but subsequently the recession caused delays
to decline, 15 and delays have been relatively consistent since 2007. In the context of falling
truck traffic, the most significant impediment to movement through road border crossings is the
burden of border functions that occur within inspection plazas 16 and not the bridge
infrastructure itself. The bridges are seeing less traffic, but inspection processes seem to have
become more onerous.
Exhibit 13: Average Weekly Cross-Border Truck Trips on the Ontario Highway Network
Source: MTO (2006)
Predictable delays are far less costly than unpredictable delays. If a delay is predictable, the
overall travel time for a cross-border shipment rises, but this can be built into production
schedules. The cost of such delays is roughly $75/hour accounting for wasted labour, fuel, and
the opportunity cost of having a truck sit idle rather than moving goods. 17 Unpredictable delays
can have far more costly effects, largely because trucks crossing the border are often carrying
manufacturing inputs that are part of just-in-time supply chains. Estimates of the cost to delaying
a just-in-time shipment range as high as $13,000/minute as production lines have to be idled for
lack of materials. 18 In order to avoid such catastrophic delays to their just-in-time production
processes, business tend to build buffer time into their planned travel times. As an example,
Anderson (2012) uses 2007 data from the Ambassador Bridge to show that to arrive with 90%
Anderson (2012), p. 20.
Anderson (2012), p. 11.
17 Anderson (2012), p. 21.
18 Intervistas Consulting (2009)
15
16
18
certainty a buffer of 30 minutes is required, and to arrive with 99% certainty a buffer of one hour
is required. Building in buffer time has a significant cost, but far less cost than incurring
production delays.
Resilience
The fact that there are so few bridges between Southern Ontario and the United States means
that the closure of any one bridge can lead to significant economic disruption. Given the
importance of the Ambassador Bridge in terms of value of goods transported, the fact that no
alternative crossing is available in the immediate area, and the fact that the bridge is old and
not entirely under public control, the resilience of the Windsor-Detroit crossing seems particularly
at risk. This reason is no doubt behind the urgency the Governments of Ontario and Canada
have attached to the New International Trade Crossing (NITC), a new bridge between Detroit
and Windsor that has been under development for many years.
2.1.3
Policy Issues and Challenges: Border Access
Congestion
Without doubt the most important issue related to accessing border crossings from Peel is
congestion. This is a major concern for shippers and truck carriers alike. Congestion currently
occurs on the QEW/Highway 403/Highway 407 interchange in Burlington through St. Catharines.
The recent MTO Niagara-to-GTA (NGTA) Corridor Planning and Environmental Assessment Study
found that there are “capacity constraints on the QEW through St. Catharines, on the Burlington
Skyway and through Halton Region. Even with widening to six lanes through St. Catharines,
capacity problems on the QEW are experienced at various times through the year.” 19 MTO also
noted that these constraints could increase with the growth in the economy, population and
employment in the Niagara-to-GTA Corridor. 20 In the absence of significant improvements, MTO
projects that by 2031 most of the highways in the NGTA area would be congested during peak
periods and increasingly throughout the day. 21
Highway 401, west of Peel, is also expected to face significant congestion in spite of a number
of improvements to the regional and provincial transportation system. For this reason, MTO is
recommending expansions of Highway 401 from six to 10 or 12 lanes through Peel and Halton
Regions and the protection of a new corridor to the north of Highway 401. 22 Many of the
proposed improvements are many years away.
Resilience
As with border crossings themselves, the resilience of the highway network is also a concern.
Between Peel and the Michigan frontier, Highway 401 is the only high capacity, high speed
road between Woodstock and London. West of London Highway 401 and 402 provide a
degree of resilience. East of Woodstock Highway 401 and 403 provide alternative routes to Peel.
Between Peel and the Niagara frontier, between the QEW-Highway 405 interchange and
Burlington the only high capacity high speed road is the QEW. Between Burlington and Peel
Highways 403/QEW and 407 provide resilience. From this perspective the lack of alternative high
capacity, high speed roads between Woodstock and London and between Burlington and
MTO (2013), p. 18.
MTO (2013), p. 17.
21 MTO (2013), p. 22.
22 MTO (2012), pp. v-vi.
19
20
19
Highway 405 represent a risk to the resilience of the highway network between Peel and the
important border crossings for trucks.
2.1.4
Policy Issues and Challenges: Trade
Cabotage
At present US truckers are generally not permitted to transport loads between two points in
Canada and Canadian truckers are not permitted to do so in the United States. 23 This activity is
called cabotage, and it is prohibited. For example, if a trucker takes a load from Brampton to
Chicago, he or she may pick up a load in Chicago and return to Canada. However, if that
trucker does not have a load in Chicago, but rather in Columbus, the trucker is not permitted to
carry a load between Chicago and Columbus to cover the cost of the trip. The ChicagoColumbus leg must be run empty, eating into profits and forcing truckers to charge higher rates
on their paid runs. American truckers face parallel restrictions on domestic moves in Canada,
with some exceptions that are not reciprocated in the US. Cabotage is an issue that goes far
beyond Peel Region, but it is nonetheless an important reason for higher cross-border trucking
costs.
While not cabotage, there are also restrictions on the repositioning of foreign empty trailers by
foreign drivers in Canada and the United States. Such restrictions increase costs. The
Governments of Canada and the United States are committed to reviewing this policy. 24
2.2
Policy Issues and Challenges: Rail Border Crossings
Rail tends to provide long haul transportation of bulk (e.g. coal, grain, ore, chemicals) or
containerized products.
2.2.1
Southern Ontario is served by two Class I freight railways that operate cross-border services: CN
and CP. The railways are fundamentally different from trucking companies in that the
infrastructure over which they travel is privately owned by the railways. 25 CN operates a more
extensive network than CP serving Canada from Halifax to Vancouver, and the Mississippi
Valley of the United States including key points of Chicago, Memphis, and Gulf Coast ports. CP
operates a network that stretches from Montreal to Vancouver and into the United States.
Because the infrastructure of the railways is privately owned, there is little to no role for
government in planning, funding, or operating the infrastructure, beyond certain areas where
rail infrastructure crosses public infrastructure (e.g. road/rail crossings). The Government of
Canada does regulate CN and CP, but regulation is generally limited to safety and the
enforcement of competition policy.
Both CN and CP own border crossings in Southern Ontario. CN owns the International Railway
Bridge in Fort Erie and the Paul M. Tellier Tunnel in Sarnia. CP owns the Detroit River Rail Tunnel in
Windsor. Beyond these physical border crossings, CN and CP also operate intermodal terminals
in the GTHA, which are very important transfer points between truck and rail (and vice versa) for
23 There are exceptions when a US carrier can pick up a load in Canada and drop it off in
Canada, if on route to next pick-up. This is not reciprocated in the United States.
24 Today’s Trucking (2013)
25 There is a significant exception in the Greater Toronto Area, where many rail corridors are
owned by the Government of Ontario through Metrolinx.
20
containerized shipments, including cross-border containerized shipments. Appendix A provides
additional background information on Southern Ontario rail border crossings.
Rail trade between Ontario and the United States was hit hard in the recession but has
recovered on the Niagara frontier and at Windsor-Detroit, but not yet at Sarnia-Port Huron
(Exhibit 14). In weight terms, data on imports to Canada are not available, but data on imports
to the United States (Canadian exports) show that traffic has not recovered fully from the
recession (Exhibit 15).
Exhibit 15: Rail Shipments from Ontario to the
United States, by Weight, 1995-2013
Exhibit 14: Total Rail Trade between Ontario
and the United States, by Value, 1995-2013
8
7
$20
6
Millions of Tonnes
Billions of US Dollars
$25
$15
$10
$5
4
3
2
1
0
$0
Windsor-Detroit
Sarnia-Port Huron
Windsor-Detroit
Niagara Frontier
Sarnia-Port Huron
Niagara Frontier
Source: US Bureau of Transportation Statistics
2.2.2
5
Source: US Bureau of Transportation Statistics
There is a general view that rail faces lower border costs than trucking because a single set of
entry documents are required for a very large shipment. Rail crossings also involve fewer workers
(usually two per train), and therefore present fewer immigration issues. 26
Both railways face some infrastructure constraints. CP faces a constraint at its Detroit River Rail
Tunnel owing to the tunnel’s inability to handle double-stacked, high cube containers, which
are now industry standard. This situation means that CP faces much higher costs per railcar to
ship from Southern Ontario into the US than does CN. This capacity constraint extends far
beyond the border. For example, it also reduces the capacity of the Port of Montreal to build
CP container trains that are destined to markets via the Detroit Tunnel. CN also faces tunnel
constraints, in that its Sarnia-Port Huron tunnel is limited in the length of trains it can
accommodate.
26
Anderson (2012), p. 24.
21
2.2.3
The Peel Region Goods Movement Strategic Plan specifically addresses issues of access to the
CN Brampton and CP Vaughan intermodal terminals through Action 3. Therefore these issues
are not considered further here. Research for this paper has not uncovered any specific issues
associated with rail access between Peel Region and border crossings.
2.3
Policy Issues and Challenges: International Airports
Air cargo tends to be long distance movements of very high value and time sensitive products
such as electronics and pharmaceuticals.
The Peel Region is primarily served by two
international airports handling significant
volumes
of
cargo:
Toronto
Pearson
International Airport in Mississauga and
Hamilton John C. Munro International Airport
in Hamilton. Toronto Pearson handled the
most cargo traffic in Canada in 2012 (344,000
tonnes), and Hamilton handled the third most
(87,000 tonnes). 27 US airports in Detroit,
Buffalo, Niagara Falls, and even Chicago,
New York City, and New Jersey compete for
cargo in some cases.
Thousands of Tonnes of Revenue Cargo
Exhibit 16: Air Cargo Handled at GTHA
International Cargo Airports
Appendix A provides additional background
information on Southern Ontario international
cargo airports.
2.3.1
2.3.2
450
400
350
Pearson
Hamilton
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
In its 2008-2030 Master Plan, the Greater
Toronto Airport Authority (GTAA), the
organization that runs Pearson Airport,
forecast that air cargo volumes would rise
quickly. In 2006 the airport handled 383,000
tonnes of cargo, while by 2012 this volume had fallen to 344,000 tonnes. The Master Plan
concluded that the existing cargo throughput capacity of the airport was sufficient to handle
projected demand to 2023 (somewhere between 888,000 and 1,063,000 tonnes of cargo). 28
Since volumes have fallen, it seems unlikely that capacity will be a constraint until at least the
mid 2020s. That said, as commercial arrangements and technology change, investments will
likely be required to maintain the current level of service of Pearson Airport for air cargo traffic.
International airports are critical gateways for high value and time-sensitive products. Policies
that slow the flow of goods, introduce uncertainty into supply chains, or increase costs
adversely affect the competitiveness of Canadian businesses, especially businesses reliant on
air cargo, many of which are located adjacent to the airport in Peel Region. More competitive
airports will also attract more carriers and lead to more direct or same-plane services, reducing
27 Transport
28
Canada (2012)
Greater Toronto Airports Authority (2007)
22
travel times for air cargo and reducing the need to transfer cargo from plane to plane, which
can increase the potential for damage and theft. Since much cargo, particularly at Pearson, is
carried as belly cargo (in the hold of passenger aircraft as opposed to on dedicated cargo
aircraft), many of the policy issues that affect international passenger air service also affect
cargo. 29
Regulatory Compliance
According to carriers, regulatory compliance is becoming increasingly cumbersome. One
major airline noted that a key advantage of air freight is speed, but processes are increasingly
eating into this advantage. Broadly speaking, industry is seeking to address regulatory
challenges through improvements in technology: for instance, unlike cargo trucked across the
border, air cargo cannot currently clear customs electronically. In the meantime, regulatory
processes will continue to increase the travel time for air freight and to impact on-time delivery.
As an example of the cost imposed on business by changing security requirements, bonded
warehouses now require advance notification for contractor access to be provided to Canada
Border Services Agency (CBSA). Such requirements often result in contractors having to incur
extra costs by sending additional staff to complete work more quickly or by being denied entry
to facilities. The industry is keen to work with the Government of Canada to ensure that new
regulations do not adversely impact business.
Fuel Taxes
Aviation fuel is taxed in Canada by both the federal government and some provinces. Ontario,
along with Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland (for flights to the US only), are
the only provinces to levy a tax on aviation fuel for international flights. 30 This tax has been set at
$0.027/litre since 1992. The proceeds from these taxes are not generally reinvested in the
aviation sector, and the costs are likely passed along to shippers and passengers. 31
2.3.3
The Peel Region Goods Movement Strategic Plan specifically addresses issues of access to
Toronto Pearson International Airport in Action 2. Therefore these issues are not considered
further here.
2.4
Policy Issues and Challenges: International Seaports
The marine mode tends to handle heavy and bulky products that are not overly time sensitive,
such as grain, iron ore, coal, or project cargo (e.g. wind turbine components).
Southern Ontario’s marine ports handle a wide variety of commodities, largely bulk or breakbulk cargo, destined to and originating in other countries. At present there is no containerized
cargo being handled at Ontario ports, or in the entirety of the Great Lakes.
29 While not strictly related to border crossing, ground rent and the non-deductibility of interest
at the GTAA drive up the cost of air freight.
30 Lazar (2013)
31 Dachis (2014)
23
2.4.1
Exhibit 17 provides an overview of international tonnages loaded and unloaded at southern
Ontario ports in 2011 (the most recent year for which data were available) by origin and
destination. Exhibit 18 provides data on US imports by water from Ontario by weight from 2007
to 2013.
The Port of Hamilton handles the most international cargo of any port in Southern Ontario.
Hamilton handles an increasingly diverse range of cargos, while activities associated with steel
making remain important. Coal was by far the most important cargo handled. Coal is sourced
from the ports of Ashtabula, Sandusky, and Toledo in the United States. Iron ore (taconite)
comes from the twin ports of Duluth, Minnesota, and Superior, Wisconsin. These ports loaded ore
mined in the Iron Ore Range of Northern Minnesota. Slag, ash, and coke are all produced in
Hamilton, loaded at the port, and sent to a variety of US ports, primarily on the Great Lakes.
Fertilizers are imported from Russia, Eastern Europe, and South America. Corn and soya beans
are exported all over the world from Hamilton, primarily to Europe and the Americas, although
re-export from these locations is also possible.
Exhibit 17: International Tonnages Handled at
Southern Ontario Ports, 2011
Exhibit 18: US Imports from Ontario by Marine,
by Weight, 2007-2013
14
Hamilton
Nanticoke
Goderich
Windsor
Sarnia
Bowmanville
Toronto
Clarkson
Picton
Bath
Sombra
Courtright
Kingsville
Oshawa
Thorold
Prescott
Port Colborne
Oakville
St.Catharines
Morrisburg
Millions of Tonnes
12
Loaded
10
8
6
Unloaded
4
2
-
2
4
6
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Millions of Tonnes Handled
Source: Transport Canada (2012b)
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
(2014)
Other ports play a mix of niche and regionally important roles. Nanticoke is a significant
international port largely because of the presence of US Steel’s Lake Erie Works, a steel mill, and
Ontario Power Generation’s Nanticoke Generating Station, which closed at the end of 2013.
The vast majority of international tonnage is coal from Ohio and Superior, Wisconsin, and iron
24
ore and concentrates from Duluth-Superior. In terms of international cargo, the Port of
Goderich, located on Lake Huron, is primarily devoted to the export of salt from the local Sifto
Salt Mine, wheat, and soya beans. Windsor is a diversified port with salt and agricultural
products as the primary international export commodities. Appendix A provides additional
background information on the international traffic of Southern Ontario ports.
The Port of Hamilton has for a number of years been pursuing a strategy of diversification. Most
notably, from an international goods movement perspective, Hamilton is growing its inbound
fertilizer traffic and its outbound traffic of agricultural commodities, particularly corn and soya
beans. As part of its strategy, the Port has been developing significant rail infrastructure to
handle more diverse cargos, but also to offer increased modal choice to shippers.
2.4.2
Advanced Notice of Arrival Requirements
Marine carriers transporting cargo from the United States to Canada by water are required to
notify the CBSA 24 hours in advance of arrival at the first port called in Canada. Given the short
distances often travelled between the United States and Southern Ontario ports, this
requirement can increase the travel time, and therefore the cost of cross-border shipments by
water.
2.4.3
We were not able to identify any significant border access cost issues as they relate crossborder marine transportation.
25
2.5
Summary: Border Crossing Policy Issues and Challenges
This table summarizes the border crossing issues identified in this section. Red indicates the
nature of the negative impact of the issue on cross-border supply chains.
Mode
Issue
Road
Delays at border crossings
Primary Nature of
Negative Impact on
Supply Chains
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Cost
Resilience of border crossings
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Cost
Congestion on highways between Peel and border
crossings
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Cost
Resilience of highways between Peel and border crossings
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
26
Cost
Cabotage restrictions on truckers
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Rail
Minor infrastructure constraints including inability to
accommodate double-stacked container trains at the CP
Detroit River Rail Tunnel and the CN-CP International
Railway Bridge (Fort Erie)
Cost
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Air
Cost
Regulatory compliance costs and speed to customs
clearance
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Cost
Fuel taxes applied only to international flights
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
Marine
Cost
Airport access issues being considered in a separate study
Advanced notice of arrival requirements
Travel
Time
Inform
ation
/Risk
Level
of
Service
27
Cost
3 Recommendations
This final chapter proposes two sets of recommendations for improving cross-border goods
movement that will benefit Peel Region, Ontario, and Canada as a whole. The first set of
recommendations relates to better informing decision making relevant to cross-border goods
movement. The second set of recommendations addresses border infrastructure, infrastructure
connecting the GTHA to key border crossings, and the planning of infrastructure relevant to
cross-border goods movement. These recommendations are provided for future directions and
have not been formally endorsed by the government agencies mentioned.
3.1
Improve Data Availability and Planning for Cross-Border Goods Movement
The data available in Ontario on cross-border goods movement (as detailed in Appendix B)
could be improved significantly. At present the data are limited and poorly integrated across
modes, values, and weights (e.g. no single source integrates these data across modes, value,
and weights). Often data available for one mode are not available for another mode (e.g. US
import weights by mode and port of entry are available from the US Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, while export weights are not). Overall, the better the data, the better all levels of
government and the private sector can plan. There are five areas where we feel action would
be particularly beneficial.
3.1.1
Gather Data on Border Crossing Performance
An area of clear weakness in the data currently available is border crossing performance,
particularly as this relates to reliability. It is perhaps surprising that given the amount of concern
expressed over border delays that the actual data available are very limited. Most data on
delays are observations by CBSA, US Customs and Border Protection, and bridge and tunnel
operators or others. These data are generally of limited value because they are not collected
using a methodology that ensures a comprehensive appreciation of performance. The other
key source is GPS data that allow for the calculation of the amount of time taken to travel from
a point on one side of the border to a point on the opposite side. Such GPS data were
collected by Transport Canada between 2006 and 2009. 32 Transport Canada is currently in the
process of assembling detailed GPS-based data on crossing performance based on the earlier
work. 33 These efforts should be supported. Only with good data can the Government of
Canada and other relevant partners effectively undertake cost-benefit analysis to prioritize
investment in border crossings.
3.1.2
Develop a Commodity Flow Survey and Freight Analysis Framework
One of the key challenges facing policy makers in regard to cross-border goods movement is
obtaining data on the initial origin and final destination of cross-border goods flows. Most of the
goods traded between Canada and other countries, especially beyond the United States are
multimodal. Therefore, trucks might only carry goods for a part of a trip. Therefore, the reported
origin and destination might not show the origin and destination of the commodity, only the
truck making the first or last mile of a long trip. Knowing the origin and destination of the
commodity would help to better understand the modes of travel and also to distinguish trucks
Anderson (2012), pp. 20-21.
These efforts have started with the Peace Bridge in order to support evaluation of the
effectiveness of the Phase II of the Truck Cargo Pre-inspection Pilot.
32
33
28
carrying international goods to and from intermodal terminals and airports from trucks making
local, region, or interprovincial trips.
What is needed in Canada is an extension of the US Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) to cover
our country. The FAF integrates data from a variety of sources to create a comprehensive
picture of freight movement among states and major metropolitan areas by all modes of
transportation. Using data from a national Commodity Flow Survey and additional sources, FAF
provides estimates for tonnage, value, and domestic ton-miles by region of origin and
destination, commodity type, and mode for 2007, the most recent year, and forecasts through
2040. Also included are state-to-state flows for these years plus 1997 and 2002, summary
statistics, and flows by truck assigned to the highway network for 2007 and 2040. As Canadian
provinces are much larger geographically than US states, any FAF for Canada would need to
be constructed at the sub-provincial level, incorporating regions such as county or upper-tier
municipalities in Ontario, for example. Transport Canada would seem to be the organization
best placed to undertake the development of such an initiative.
3.1.3
Expand MTO Commercial Vehicle Survey to Cover Peel Region Roads
The MTO CVS only captures trips on provincial highways. For this reason, it does not capture all
trips between locations in Peel and rail intermodal terminals or the Toronto Pearson International
Airport. Expanding the coverage of the CVS to include at least Peel’s Strategic Goods
Movement Network would greatly improve the data available to policy makers.
3.1.4
Develop a Commercial Multimodal Forecasting Model
The lack of a multimodal forecasting model, which also incorporates cross-border goods
movement, is a major gap in our ability to plan multimodal infrastructure. The development of
such a model would require both cooperation between municipalities and adequate data,
such as that which would be included in a Canadian FAF (see Section 3.1.2, above). Peel
Region already works with other GTHA municipalities through the Travel Modelling Group (TMG)
at the University of Toronto in order to integrate the forecasting models for the transit and auto
modes. A few municipalities are developing commercial vehicle forecasting models. We
recommend that municipalities develop a centre similar to TMG to integrate a commercial
vehicle forecasting model into existing models to create a multimodal forecasting model. We
suggest that air, rail, and marine also be integrated into the model. We suggest that the model
cover all of Southern Ontario. Development of the forecasting model would assist decision
makers in improving not only goods movement, but also the movement of people. The
implementation of a multimodal forecasting model would be complementary to the
development of a Canadian or at least an Ontario FAF, as it has been in the United States.
3.1.5
Take a Multimodal Corridor Perspective on Transportation Planning
Shippers, their logistics providers, and consultants determine over which mode, or combination
of modes, goods are moved. These decisions are made in light of the relative travel time, cost,
reliability, information, and risk (collectively the transportation value proposition) that come with
each mode or combination of modes. There is no direct role for public policy in this choice.
Public policy does however greatly influence modal choice to the extent policy is not mode
neutral, i.e. changes the transportation value proposition of a mode. It is important that
transportation policy consciously take into account multimodal impacts and interlinkages. As
such, Ontario’s multimodal transportation strategy is certainly a step in the right direction.
To take multimodal corridor planning a step further, an institutional structure could be created
to analyze the performance of Southern Ontario’s multimodal transportation system and to
29
make evidence-based recommendations for how investments in infrastructure and ancillary
systems (such as supporting technology) should be prioritized. Such an institutional structure
would aid in discussions with the Government of Canada over the provision of infrastructure
funding, as was the case with the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor in Western Canada.
While a Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Goods Movement Corridor initiative is only beginning
to take shape, we believe that its scope should not be limited to one highway (the NGTA
Corridor). Currently, Peel Region is working with Hamilton, Halton, Niagara, and Waterloo as a
member of a group called the Western Golden Horseshoe Municipal Network. The Western
Golden Horseshoe Municipal Network is a regional alliance that is working together towards an
integrated multi-modal goods movement network. The Government of Ontario is aware of the
work that this group is doing to promote economic growth and infrastructure improvements.
The Western Golden Horseshoe Municipal Network is a step in the right direction and an
excellent starting point for future action.
The model of the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative (APGCI) would be interesting to
examine and, given the success of the APGCI, such an initiative would be very likely to resonate
with the governments of Canada and Ontario.
The Asia Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative
The Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative (APGCI) is an integrated set of investment and policy
measures focused on trade with the Asia-Pacific Region. Its mission is to establish Canada’s Asia-Pacific
Gateway and Corridor as the best transportation network facilitating global supply chains between North
America and Asia. The Initiative is led by the Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway.
With an investment of more than $1 billion from the Government of Canada, and significant investments
from other partners, the APGCI has targeted the following benefits:
•
•
•
•
Generating new business opportunities and creating new jobs for Canadians;
Reducing congestion and improving the flow of traffic;
Enhancing the efficiency and safety of the transportation system; and,
Contributing to Canada's competitiveness.
Partners include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Asia Pacific Gateway Skills Table
Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development
Western Economic Diversification Canada
Province of British Columbia
Province of Saskatchewan
Province of Manitoba
Province of Alberta
Vancouver-Fraser Port Authority
Prince Rupert Port Authority
Canadian National
Canadian Pacific Railway
Vancouver International Airport
Edmonton Airport
Calgary International Airport
30
•
•
Winnipeg Airports Authority
Regina International Airport
The APGCI consists of strategic transportation infrastructure projects including British Columbia’s Lower
Mainland, their principal road and rail connections stretching across Western Canada and south to the
United States, key border crossings, and major Canadian ports.
Source: http://www.asiapacificgateway.gc.ca/apgci.html
Part of the success of the APGCI is attributable to the inclusion of all major land-holding and
infrastructure-operating players such as the airports, railways, and ports. This partnership allowed
a prioritization of spending across all of western Canada with a focus on a specific set of goals.
This partnership and goal-focus has yet to take shape in Southern Ontario. The Southern Ontario
Gateway Council, in which Peel Region participates, is also a step in the right direction, but
seems to lack strong political backing at the federal and provincial levels. Strong federal and
provincial political leadership would be required to drive any APGCI-type initiative for Southern
Ontario.
Partnerships between major players are important, but it is also important to bear in mind the
constraints under which the partners must operate. For example, in the case of the provincial
government, it is important to understand that funding is generally available for road projects,
not for operating funding, and, as such, any approach to the provincial government should
focus on specific road infrastructure projects in the context of broader investments in any
APGCI-type initiative. The failure to identify specific road infrastructure priorities, with a strong
rationale, would be a roadblock to obtaining funding.
It is also worth noting that better multimodal data and a multimodal forecasting model would
facilitate taking a multimodal corridor perspective on transportation planning.
3.2
Improve Border Infrastructure and Highways Connecting the GTHA to Border
Crossings
This set of three recommendations pertains to physical infrastructure improvements that would
improve the speed and reliability of cross-border goods movement, while reducing costs.
3.2.1
Improve Key Truck Routes to Border Crossings
Trucks not only handle more cross-border trade than any other mode in Ontario ($262 billion in
2012 relative to $187 billion for all other modes combined), 34 they also provide essential
connectivity to other modes of transport and shipper facilities. As such, in our view, improving
the speed and reliability, and reducing the cost of trucking between the GTHA and border
crossings is of paramount importance. MTO has in place multimodal transportation
development strategies for the two key corridors of relevance to cross-border goods movement
to and from Peel Region. The GTA West and NGTA studies set out road and non-road (including
transit) improvements to the surface transportation systems in these corridors. It is critical that
improvements in these corridors be realized to improve goods movement between the GTHA
and key border crossings. There is also an opportunity to do better. The construction of a new
34
Transport Canada (2012)
31
high capacity, high speed highway between the Niagara frontier and Highway 401/GTA West
Corridor would provide not only additional capacity, but crucially, resilience.
As noted in Chapter 2, Peel Region is undertaking a separate study on ways to improve road
access to rail intermodal terminals and Toronto Pearson International Airport, and these issues
are not addressed here.
3.2.2
Complete the New International Trade Crossing
The NITC project (formerly the Detroit River International Crossing or DRIC) has already
consumed significant resources and time. In spite of declining traffic volumes, this project
remains important as it will provide for far more resilient border crossing infrastructure over the
Detroit River. The age and load restrictions of the Ambassador Bridge as well as the fact it is the
single most important border crossing (in 2013 handling 37% of all trucks crossing Ontario’s
borders), 35 argue strongly in favour of completing the NITC as soon as possible.
3.2.3
Invest in Border Technology
Across all modes, new technology in terms of biometrics for people and better scanning for
goods have the potential to materially improve the speed and reliability of border crossing,
while reducing the cost. Radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology (a system to
exchange information wirelessly using a combination of readers and tags or cards) is an
example of a technology that could be explored further. US CBP already has RFID readers in all
lanes, and this technology can significantly improve processing times. 36 The Governments of
Canada and the United States should work together to develop RFID or other appropriate
technology to improve the flow of goods vehicles. As new technology can raise concerns over
privacy and dignity, implementation would likely be more successful if such new technologies
were accompanied by an improved approach to privacy and respect for the human rights of
travelers. 37
Public Border Operators Association (2014)
One industry stakeholder told us that processing times could be improved by 1.5 minutes per
truck crossing through the use of RFID technology.
37 Anderson (2012), p. 42.
35
36
32
4 References
Airports Council International (2013) “2012 North American Airport Traffic Summary.”
http://www.aci-na.org/content/aci-world-traffic-statistics
Anderson, B. (2012) The Border and the Ontario Economy. Cross-Border Transportation Centre,
University of Windsor.
Blue Water Bridge Canada (2011).”The blue water bridge annual report.” Blue Water Bridge
<http://www.bwbc.gc.ca/reports/AnnualReport2011_e.pdf> (February, 2013).
Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (2013) April. Transport Canada, US Department of
Transportation, Canada Border Services Agency, US Customs and Border Protection.
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2014) “Ambassador Bridge Enhancement
Project.” https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=21100
CN (2011) “CN increases Brampton Intermodal Terminal capacity.” News
http://www.cn.ca/en/news/2011/05/media_news_bit_increases_capacity_20110517
Release
Continental Rail Gateway (2013). http://www.crgateway.com/
Dachis, B. (2014). “Full Throttle: Reforming Canada’s Aviation Policy.” CD Howe Institute,
Commentary No. 398. January. http://www.cdhowe.org/full-throttle-reforming-canadasaviation-policy/24514
Federal Bridge Corporation Limited (2014) “Corporate Plan Summary: 2013-14 to 2017-18.”
http://www.pontscanadabridges.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Corporate-PlanSummary-2013-14-E.pdf
Gill, Vijay and Alicia Macdonald (2013) “Understanding the Truck Driver Supply and Demand
Gap and Its Implications for the Canadian Economy.” The Conference Board of Canada,
February. http://www.conferenceboard.ca/e-library/abstract.aspx?did=5345
Government
of
Canada
(no
date)
http://www.continentalgateway.ca/intermodal-rail.html
Greater
Toronto
Airports
Authority
(2007)
“Airport
http://www.torontopearson.com/en/gtaa/master-plan/##
“Intermodal
Master
Plan
Rail.”
2008-2030.”
Greater
Toronto
Airports
Authority
(2013)
“Annual
Report
2012.”
http://www.torontopearson.com/uploadedFiles/GTAA/Content/Publications/GTAA_AnnualRep
ort_2012.pdf
Hamilton Airport (2010)” $8M Federal-Provincial Infrastructure Investment for Cargo
Development at Hamilton International Airport”< http://flyhamilton.ca/news/8m-federalprovincial-investment-for-cargo-development-at-hamilton-international/>
Hamilton
Airport
(2012)
“2012
Year
in
Review.”
http://flyhamilton.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2012/12/Hamilton-International-2012-Year-in-Review1.pdf
33
Hamilton Airport (2014) “Cargo
development/cargo-opportunities/
Opportunities.”
http://flyhamilton.ca/business/air-service-
Hemson Consulting Ltd. (2013) “Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041: Technical
Report (November 2012) Addendum.” June.
InterVISTAS Consulting (2009) Cross-Border Flow Analysis Report 5: Case Study for Company 5
(Automotive Parts Manufacturer) prepared for Industry Canada,
Jones Lang LaSalle (2012) “ An Overview of Toronto’s Intermodal Network System.”
http://kevinkelley.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/GTA-Intermodal-Overview-2013.pdf
Lazar, F. (2013) “The Case for Eliminating the Government of Ontario Tax on Aviation Fuel on
Transborder
and
International
Flights.”
National
Airlines
Council.
March.
http://www.airlinecouncil.ca/pdf/NACC_Submission_OntarioPFT_22Mar13.doc.pdf
McMaster Institute for Transportation and Logistics (2011) “Exploring the Freight Village Concept
and its Applicability to Ontario.” Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation.
http://mitl.mcmaster.ca/research/documents/MITL_Freight_Villages_January.pdf
Niagara Falls Bridge Commission. (2012). “Welcome to the Niagara Falls Bridge Commission.”
Niagara Falls Bridge Commission www.niagarafallsbridges.com (November, 2012).
Ontario
Chamber
of
Commerce
(2004)”Cost
of
Border
Delays
to
http://www.occ.ca/Publications/Cost-of-Border-Delays-to-Ontario_May-2004.pdf
Ontario”
Ontario Ministry of Transportation (2006) “Commercial Vehicle Survey.”
Ontario Ministry of Transportation (2012) “GTA West Corridor Environmental Assessment:
Transportation Development Strategy Report,” http://www.gta-west.com/reports.html
Ontario Ministry of Transportation (2013) “Niagara-GTA Transportation Development Strategy,”
http://www.niagara-gta.com/pdf/8-22September.
13/NGTA%20Transportation%20Development%20Strategy.pdf
Peel
Region
Planning(n.g.)
http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/residents/transportation/transdata/forecasting.htm
Peel Region Public Works. (2012). “Peel Region Moving into Action, Goods Movement Strategic
Peel
Region
Plan
2012-2016.”
http://www.peelregion.ca/pw/transportation/goodsmovement/pdf/PeelRegionGoodsMoveme
ntStrategicPlan-2012-2016.pdf
Public Border Operators Association (2014) http://www.publicborderoperators.org/
Public Safety Canada (2014) “Canada and the United States announce Phase II of Truck Cargo
Pre-inspection Pilot,” February 24, Press Release, http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/nws/nwsrlss/2014/20140224-eng.aspx
Research and Innovative Technology Administration. (2013). “North American Transborder
Freight
Data,
including
Port,
Commodity,
or
State
Origin/Destination.”
RITA,
http://transborder.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/TBDR_QA.html
34
Statistics Canada (2012) “National Household Survey.” https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhsenm/index-eng.cfm
Today’s Trucking (2013) “Outdated Foreign Empty Trailer Rules Under
http://www.todaystrucking.com/outdated-foreign-empty-trailer-rules-under-review
Review.”
Tofflemire, John (2011) “A Governance Review of International Border Crossings in Ontario.”
Cross-Border Transportation Centre, University of Windsor, Background Paper No. 2, September.
Transport Canada (2010). “Assessment of Access to Intermodal Terminals and
Distribution/Transload Facilities in the Province of Ontario: Identification of the Clusters and
Facilities.” Ontario-Quebec Continental Gateway Initiative.
Transport Canada (2012). “Transportation in Canada 2012.” Transport Canada.
Transport Canada (2012a). “Transportation and the Economy.”
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/anre-menu-3028.htm (February, 2013).
Transport
Canada,
Transport Canada (2012b). “Marine Database” Transport Canada.
Transport Canada (2013). ” Canadian Vehicle Use Study (CVUS) – Heavy Trucks”
United States Maritime Administration (2012) Status of the U.S.-Flag Great Lakes Water
http://www.marad.dot.gov/documents/USTransportation
Industry.
lag_Great_Lakes_Water_Transportation_Industry_Final_Report_2013.pdf. (February).
35
Appendix A: Overview of Key Southern Ontario
Border Crossings
This Appendix provides additional detail on key border crossings in Southern Ontario for trucks,
rail, air, and marine.
Truck Border Crossings
Section 2.1 provided an overview of the key border crossings used by trucks in Southern
Ontario. 38 This section provides further information on these crossings and on recent and
planned future improvements.
Exhibit 19: Truck Trade between Ontario and US
Regions, by value, 2012
Exhibit 20: US Imports from Ontario by Truck,
by Weight, 1995-2013
40
9%
Central
19%
49%
South
North-East
23%
West
Millions of Tonnes
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
-
(2014)
38 While not covered in this paper owing to its low volume of traffic, the Windsor-Detroit Truck
Ferry handles overweight trucks and trucks carrying dangerous goods, neither of which is
allowed to use the Ambassador Bridge. The ferry is privately owned and operated.
1
Ambassador Bridge
Exhibit 21: The Ambassador Bridge
Source: Ontario-Québec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor- Reproduced with the
permission of Transport Canada
Brief description
Completed in 1929 the Ambassador Bridge connects Detroit, Michigan with Windsor, Ontario,
over the Detroit River. The bridge connects Interstates 96 and 75 with Huron Church
Road/Highway 3 in downtown Windsor. Highway 3 connects with Highway 401. The four-lane
bridge is by far the single most important road border crossing between Canada and the
United States for both total vehicles and trucks. The bridge is owned by Manuel “Matty” Moroun
via private operating companies.
Current issues
The key issue with the Ambassador Bridge is that it is not connected directly with a high
capacity, high speed road on the Canadian side. Highway 3 runs through downtown Windsor
and has traffic lights and significant cross traffic. There are also weight and dangerous goods
restrictions on the bridge. Overweight trucks and trucks carrying dangerous goods must use the
Detroit-Windsor truck ferry. As noted above, comprehensive data to make an assessment of
congestion and delays are lacking.
Recent improvements
On the US side the Ambassador Gateway project was completed in 2009 and involved the
construction of direct access to the bridge from Interstates 96 and 75.
Future improvements
An 11-km extension of Highway 401 (Rt. Hon Herb Gray Parkway, formerly known as the WindsorEssex Parkway) is currently under construction between the current end of Highway 401 and the
planned Canadian inspection plaza for the New International Trade Crossing. This highway will
also improve access to the Ambassador Bridge as it will provide a high speed, controlledaccess facility as an alternative to Huron Church Road/Highway 3 between the current end of
Highway 401 and the E.C. Row Expressway.
2
The companies that own the Ambassador Bridge have proposed the construction of a second
span roughly parallel to the existing bridge. The new span would offer six lanes and would
connect to existing inspection plazas. This project has completed a transitional screening under
the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act in February 2014. 39
Blue Water Bridge
Exhibit 22: The Blue Water Bridge
Brief description
The Blue Water Bridge provides six lanes for vehicular traffic between Sarnia, Ontario, and Port
Huron, Michigan. It connects Highway 402 with Interstates 94 and 69. The Canadian portion of
the bridge is owned by Blue Water Bridge Canada, a federal crown corporation, and the US
portion is owned by the Michigan Department of Transportation. The bridge comprises two
spans, one built in 1938 and one built in 1997. The bridge is the second busiest Ontario
international crossing for total vehicles as well as for trucks.
Current issues
This border crossing was subjected to the worst summer on record for traffic congestion and
border wait times in 2007. In fact, congestion has been one of the main issues of this bridge
during summer. Therefore, commuters and trucks crossing decreased in some other seasons due
to the uncertainly of the timing and delivery of goods by taking this bridge. 40 Congestion has
almost certainly lessened since 2007, but, as noted above, comprehensive data to make such
an assessment are lacking.
Recent improvements
There have been significant recent improvements on both sides of the border at the Blue Water
Bridge. On the US side six additional inspection booths were added in 2012, funded by Blue
Water Bridge Canada. Connecting US highway infrastructure has also been improved. On the
Canadian side, seven new primary commercial inspection lanes were completed in 2011 as
39
40
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2014)
Blue Water Bridge Canada (2011)
3
well as a new CBSA commercial facility, inspection area, and loading docks and bays. Highway
402 and the approaches to the bridge were widened in 2009.
Future improvements
A number of improvements are planned for the Blue Water Bridge. On the US side, the focus is
on planning for commercial and non-commercial inspection capacity expansion. The feasibility
of the project is currently being assessed within the fiscal and regulatory environment. On the
Canadian side the Blue Water Bridge Canada master plan calls for the addition of 14 new
primary inspection lanes, construction of new CBSA traffic and secondary inspection facilities,
completion of a truck exit roadway from the commercial primary inspection lanes to Highway
402, and construction of a multi-purpose service centre for travel information, currency
exchange, and food service. 41
Peace Bridge
Exhibit 23: The Peace Bridge
Brief description
The Peace Bridge connects Buffalo, New York, with Fort Erie, Ontario, over the Niagara River.
Opened in 1927, the Peace Bridge is now the third busiest border crossing for trucks in Ontario.
The key approaches to the bridge are the QEW in Ontario and Interstate 190 in New York. The
bridge provides three vehicle lanes with the centre lane being reversible to accommodate
peak volumes. The bridge is tolled. The bridge is owned, operated, and maintained by the
Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority, an entity created by an agreement between the
State of New York and the Government of Canada. The Authority is governed by a 10-member
board consisting of five members from New York and five members from Canada.
41
Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (2013), pp. 13-14.
4
Current issues
There are reports of serious congestion on the Peace Bridge. However, as noted above,
comprehensive data to make an assessment of congestion and delays are lacking. A Transport
Canada study using GPS data to measure border performance is currently underway at the
Peace Bridge.
Recent improvements
Over the past five years there have been no significant infrastructure improvements to the
bridge itself, but the Canadian inspection plaza was redesigned to include security and
technology improvements, additional commercial capacity, and upgrade to support trusted
shipper programs. 42 In February 2014 the Governments of Canada and the United States
launched Phase II of the Truck Cargo Pre-inspection Pilot in Fort Erie. Phase I of the scheme was
undertaken on the border in British Columbia. The scheme allows US Customs and Border
Protection to conduct primary inspection of US-bound trucks on the Canadian side of the
border. The objective of this project is to reduce traffic congestion at the crossing. 43
Future improvements
A number of improvements to US infrastructure are proposed, including reconfiguration of the
inspection plaza, commercial warehouse expansion, improved Interstate access, and improved
access from bridge to plaza. A re-decking of the bridge is currently in the design phase. Design
and construction costs are being funded by the Authority. The Governments of Canada and
the United States note that twinning the bridge is an option for the future should traffic demand
and port of entry capacity warrant the expansion. 44
Lewiston-Queenston Bridge
Exhibit 24: The Lewiston-Queenston Bridge
Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (2013), p. 18.
Public Safety Canada (2014)
44 Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (2013), pp. 17-18.
42
43
5
Brief description
The Lewiston-Queenston Bridge connects Queenston, Ontario, and Lewiston, New York, and
Ontario Highway 405 with US Interstate 190. The bridge is owned, operated, and maintained by
the Niagara Falls Bridge Commission. The bridge was opened in 1962 and provides five
reversible lanes for vehicular traffic.
Current issues
As noted above, comprehensive data to make an assessment of congestion and delays are
lacking.
Recent improvements
There have been bridge reconstructions and rehabilitation undertaken over the past five years.
There have also been some improvements to inspection infrastructure. On the US side, the main
building security holding area was completed in 2010. On the Canadian side the Queenston
Plaza received five new commercial primary inspection lanes, a new toll house, and
maintenance facility in 2009, and new Canada Food Inspection Agency, CBSA facilities, and 10
new non-commercial primary inspection lanes in 2011. Highway 405 was also expanded to
provide two dedicated truck lanes leading to the bridge. 45
Future improvements
Further improvements to the Canadian Plaza are planned including east-bound road
realignment and improvements to retail and amenities. The project is funded, will cost $14
million, and was scheduled to be complete in 2013. On the US side more significant work is
planned to the inspection plaza. There are plans to reconfigure and expand the main building
to include additional space for adequate interview rooms and holding cells, to reconfigure the
non-commercial inspection garage and commercial dock, to build additional commercial and
non-commercial inspection booths, and to improve bus-processing capacity. 46
Thousand Islands International Bridge
*Source: Ontario-Québec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor- Reproduced with the permission of Transport Canada
45
46
6
Brief description
Originally opened in 1938, the Thousand Islands Bridge system is a series of bridges and
supporting structures extending from Collins Landing near Alexandria Bay, New York, to Ivy Lea
near Gananoque, Ontario, covering a distance of 13.6 km and providing a direct connection
between Interstate 81 and Highway 401. The bridge is managed by the Thousand Islands Bridge
Authority based in New York. Chaired by an American, the Authority includes equal numbers of
Canadian and American directors on its board. The Canadians are appointed on the
recommendation of the (Canadian) Federal Bridges Corporation Ltd. (FBCL). The bridge is
tolled and revenues cover operating, maintenance, and minor capital costs of the bridge.
Leftover revenues fund CBSA facilities, and any revenues remaining thereafter are held for
future capital uses. 47
Current issues
While recent inspection reports have found that the bridge is in good condition and that a
bridge maintenance program is in place, 48 the CBSA port of entry facility is at the end of its
economic life and needs to be replaced, and commercial secondary inspection is
congested. 49 As noted above, comprehensive data to make an assessment of congestion and
delays are lacking.
Recent and future improvements
The Beyond the Border Action Plan directly identified improvements at the Thousand Islands
Bridge. FBCL has begun planning the Customs Plaza Rehabilitation Project for CBSA. FBCL has
developed a conceptual plan to meet CBSA requirements and the project is in its initial
planning phase. The project is expected to cost $60 million and be complete in 2017. 50
Rail Border Crossings
As noted in Section 1.2, rail is second to trucking in terms of the value of trade it carries between
Ontario and the United States. Most goods carried by rail between Canada and the United
States are destined to or originate in the Central United States with one-fifth travelling to and
from the South and over one-quarter being shipped to and from the West (Exhibit 25). While the
volume of rail shipments from Ontario to the United States has recovered to some degree since
the recession, it has not regained its peak of close to 20 million tonnes in 2004 (Exhibit 26).
Federal Bridge Corporation Limited (2014)
Federal Bridge Corporation Limited (2014), p. 10.
49 Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (2013), p. 24.
50 Federal Bridge Corporation Limited (2014), p. 14.
47
48
7
Exhibit 25: Rail Trade between Ontario and US
Regions, by value, 2012
Exhibit 26: US Imports from Ontario by Rail, by
Weight, 1995-2013
25
27%
Central
52%
South
West
Millions of Tonnes
20
15
10
5
21%
-
Note: Data not available for US Northeast, but
less than 9% of total traffic.
(2014)
Detroit River Rail Tunnel (CP)
Brief description
The Detroit River Rail Tunnel (actually two single-track rail tunnels) opened in 1909. The portals
are located in downtown Windsor and downtown Detroit, just east of the Ambassador Bridge. In
2001 CP purchased CN’s interest in the tunnel. In 2010, Continental Rail Gateway (CRG), a
partnership of CP, Borealis Infrastructure (a subsidiary of the Ontario Municipal Employees
Retirement System), and the Windsor Port Authority, took ownership of the tunnel. The current
tunnel carries over 400,000 rail cars annually representing approximately $21.8 billion in trade.
This volume of traffic is equivalent to 22-25 trains per day. The tunnel is exclusively used for freight
service. 51
Current issues
The current tunnels are unable to handle double-stacked, high cube containers and certain
other high-clearance cars, including some automobile-carrying cars, which are increasingly the
rail industry’s standard. As a result, the trains that run through the tunnel have much lower
productivity than would be the case with a double-stack capability. This situation has the effect
of increasing the cost of cross-border shipments.
Recent improvements
Security procedures since 2001 have required full vehicle and cargo inspections in Windsor on
behalf of US Homeland Security. This security system has enhanced the construction of two
51
Continental Rail Gateway (2013)
8
grade separations of the CP mainline at Walker Road and Howard Avenue in Windsor. These
grade separations were constructed in order to secure the corridor for train traffic.
Future improvement
CRG has developed plans to construct new a new rail tunnel next to the existing twin tunnels.
CRG is currently (March 2014) undertaking an Environmental Review of the project to identify
the potential for significant adverse environmental effects and appropriate mitigation
measures. The project requires federal approval in both Canada and the United States with
involvement of the Canadian Transportation Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. CRG is
seeking $200 million in government funding toward the $400-million cost of the tunnel. CRG
proposes to maintain the existing twin tunnels, but to use them only when the new tunnel is out
of service. CRG hopes to begin construction in 2014 and open in 2017, but a US Presidential
Permit and Government of Canada approvals (including approval under the Bridge and
Tunnels Act), and funding have yet to be obtained.
Paul M. Tellier Tunnel (CN)
Brief description
The Paul M. Tellier Tunnel under the St. Clair River connects Sarnia, Ontario, and Port Huron,
Michigan. The tunnel replaced an earlier tunnel and opened in 1994.
Current issues
The tunnel is a constraint on the length of trains.
International Railway Bridge
Brief description
CN owns the single-track International Railroad Bridge in Fort Erie. Both NS and CP have
trackage rights over this bridge, but it does not offer double-stacked container capacity. There
are currently five trains per day operating in each direction. From the International Bridge, CN
has trackage rights to the NS’s Bison Yard in Cheektowaga, NY, where it interchanges traffic
with NS. CN also owns and operates the single-track Whirlpool Bridge. 52 The current level of
traffic on the bridge means that there is no congestion. 53
Rail Intermodal Terminals
This section provides a description of the CN and CP intermodal terminals in and adjacent to
the Region of Peel. Collectively, the GTHA intermodal terminals handle two million containers
per year. 54
52 The Whirlpool Bridge carries the VIA/Amtrak Toronto-New York passenger railway service, but
does not at present carry freight traffic.
53 Consultation with CP.
54 Jones Lang LaSalle (2012)
9
CN Brampton Intermodal Terminal
CN’s Brampton Intermodal Terminal (BIT) is Canada’s largest intermodal terminal. 55 Sixty percent
of the railway’s system-wide intermodal traffic touches BIT. A 2010 Transport Canada study
found that the terminal receives and ships containers from all over North America, with
international traffic accounting for 69% of inbound and 43% of outbound container traffic,
though many distribution centres in the terminal’s periphery more than double this volume. 56
A 2010 study by the McMaster Institute for Transportation and Logistics found that major freight
generators adjacent to BIT were not well integrated into the terminal, constraining peak truck
capacity. 57 In response to demand in 2011, CN announced a capacity expansion at BIT
including:
•
•
•
•
The installation of new track and extension of existing track to increase rail capacity by
close to 15%;
Creation of approximately 25% more ground space for international containers by
staging CN containers offsite;
Purchasing five new cranes in 2011, after the acquisition of five new ones in fall 2010,
and;
Increasing the labour force by about 10% in 2011.
While data on volumes handled at BIT are not reported publicly by CN, in 2007 BIT was reported
to have handed 660,000 intermodal units. 58
CP Vaughan Intermodal Terminal
The CP Vaughan Intermodal Terminal (VIT) in York region opened in 1991 with a capacity of
110,000 units per year, and has been expanded to handle more than 700,000 containers per
year. Most freight is general freight from west coast ports, all of which is containerized.
International traffic accounts for 60% of inbound and 40% of outbound traffic. Sears and its
subsidiary SLH Transport and Consolidated FastFrate are co-located. The Coleraine business
park is nearby in Peel Region.
In May 2013, the Government of Ontario announced the extension of Highway 427 from its
current terminus at Zenway Boulevard to Major Mackenzie Drive, 6.6 km to the north.
Construction is currently scheduled begin in 2017. Once complete this project will significantly
improve truck access to the VIT.
Air Border Crossings
Movement of goods by air is a part of the intermodal transportation system of trade between
the Ontario and other countries as cargo has to be shipped to and picked up from airports by
means of other modes such as trucks and rail. Generally, air transportation is used for the
movement of light, high value, and time-sensitive goods.
CN (2011)
Transport Canada (2010)
57 McMaster Institute for Logistics and Transport (2011)
58 Government of Canada (no date)
55
56
10
Exhibit 27: Ontario’s International Trade by Air,
Top 10 Trading Partners, 2012
$14
60
Exports
$12
Imports
$10
50
Thousands of Tonnes
Billions of Dollars
Exhibit 28: US Imports from Ontario by Air, by
Weight, 2007-2013
$8
$6
$4
$2
Japan
France
Argentina
Mexico
Peru
Switzerland
Germany
China, P. Rep.
United Kingdom
United States
$0
40
30
20
10
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(2014)
Toronto Pearson International Airport
Toronto Pearson handled the most cargo traffic in Canada in 2012 (344,000 tonnes), and
Hamilton handled the third most (87,000 tonnes). 59
Pearson has three different cargo areas: the West Facility (infield), Cargo North, and Vista
Cargo. The West Facility handles Air Canada among other airlines. It has a 24/7 customs facility
on site. Cargo North is Fedex only. Vista Cargo is smaller, but handles many airlines.
In its 2008-2030 Master Plan, the Greater Toronto Airport Authority (GTAA), the organization that
runs Pearson Airport, forecast that air cargo volumes would rise quickly. In 2006 the airport
handled 383,000 tonnes of cargo, while by 2012 this volume had fallen to 344,000 tonnes. The
Master Plan concluded that the existing cargo throughput capacity of the airport was sufficient
to handle projected demand to 2023 (somewhere between 888,000 and 1,063,000 tonnes of
cargo). 60 Since volumes have fallen, it seems unlikely that capacity will be a constraint until at
least the mid 2020s. That said, as commercial arrangements and technology change,
investments will likely be required to maintain the competitiveness of Pearson Airport for air
cargo traffic. The GTAA will soon begin to update its 2008 airport master plan for 2017.
59 Transport
60
Canada (2012)
Greater Toronto Airports Authority (2007)
11
Hamilton John C. Munro International Airport
Hamilton John C. Munro International Airport (YHM), located in Hamilton, is fifth in Canada in
terms of cargo handled (86,000 tonnes in 2011). 61 Hamilton Airport handled 351,491 passengers
in 2012, an increase over 2011, but a decline from the 545,800 handled in 2008. 62
Hamilton Airport is served by three cargo airlines: CARGOJET, Purolator, and United Parcel
Service (UPS). The airport is a hub for CARGOJET’s
route network. International service is offered to
Exhibit 29: Hamilton International Airport
Bermuda, Newark (NJ), Brussels (Belgium),
Cologne (Germany), and Warsaw (Poland) and
international cargo is connected to 12 major
cities throughout Canada. The airport is the hub
of Purolator’s Canadian route network and the
international hub of UPS’s Canadian operations.
Unlike Toronto Pearson International Airport,
Hamilton International is not a National Airports
System airport. In 1996 TradePort International
Corporation (Hamilton International Airport
Limited) entered into a 40-year lease agreement
with the City of Hamilton to be the sole operator
and manager of Hamilton International Airport.
Source: Hamilton International Airport
TradePort is in turn owned by Vantage Airport
Group, an operator of 11 airports in Europe and the Americas, and a subsidiary of the
Vancouver Airport Authority.
The airport’s vision is “to be the ‘Airport of Choice’ in Southern Ontario for passengers, goods
movement, airlines, and service partners.” Its mission is that “Hamilton International consistently
provides its passengers, airlines, and business partners with a high-value, hassle-free experience
that maximizes stakeholder value”.
Hamilton describes itself as having the “best domestic cargo freighter distribution network in the
country.” 63 The airport has 24-hour operations, no slot restrictions or ramp congestion, quick
turnarounds, dual runway system (10,000 ft. and 6,000 ft.), and onsite Canadian Border Service
Agency operations. The airport claims to have lower aeronautical fees than Pearson. 64
In January 2013, the airport announced a $12-million infrastructure investment to develop onsite infrastructure to expand air cargo operations. Of this investment $8 million came from
Governments of Ontario and Canada and $4 million from TradePort. The project involves the
construction of 60,000 square feet of truck docks, refrigerated space for flowers, fresh produce
and pharmaceutical products, a centre for live animals, and courier facilities. The goal is to
allow the airport to provide an efficient cargo service on a much larger scale than before. 65
61 Transport Canada (2012). 2011 is the latest year for which Transport Canada data are
available.
62 Hamilton Airport (2012)
12
Marine Border Crossings
Southern Ontario Marine Ports
Southern Ontario’s marine ports (Exhibit 1, p. 9) handle a wide variety of commodities with both
international and domestic origins and destinations. At present there is presently no significant
amount of containerized cargo being handled at Ontario ports.
Exhibit 30 shows the Ontario’s marine trade with its top 10 marine trading partners. Notably
these data show the mode of import/export into Canada and not necessarily the mode by
which the goods entered or exited Ontario, and so these data are not directly relevant to
marine border crossings in Ontario. For instance, Ontario’s $9.3 billion in marine imports from
China likely largely arrived in Ontario by truck, rail, or air, as opposed to marine directly. Marine
trade value data are not available on the basis of shipments to and from Ontario ports.
Exhibit 30: Ontario’s Top 10 Marine Trading Partners, 2012
$10
Billions of Dollars
$9
$8
$7
$6
$5
$4
Exports
$3
Import
$2
$1
$0
Unless otherwise noted, the data in this section are drawn from Transport Canada’s Marine
Database. 66 The following subsections discuss in more detail the most important ports, by
international tonnage handled, in Southern Ontario.
Port of Hamilton
The Port of Hamilton handles both the most cargo and the most international cargo of any port
in Southern Ontario. Hamilton handles an increasingly diverse range of cargos.
Exhibit 31 shows international cargos handled in 2011, while activities associated with steel
making remain important. Coal was by far the most important cargo handled, with 2.3 million
tonnes being unloaded. Coal is sourced from the ports of Ashtabula, Sandusky, and Toledo in
the United States. Iron ore (taconite) comes from the twin ports of Duluth, Minnesota, and
66
Transport Canada (2012b)
13
Superior, Wisconsin. These ports loaded ore mined in the Iron Ore Range of Northern Minnesota.
Slag, ash, and coke are all produced in Hamilton, loaded at the port, and sent to a variety of
US ports, primarily on the Great Lakes. Fertilizers are imported from Russia, Eastern Europe, and
South America. Corn (200,000 tonnes) and soya beans (180,000) are exported all over the world
from Hamilton, primarily to Europe and the Americas, although re-export from these locations is
also possible.
With uncertainties in the global steel market and the associated uncertainties around steel
production in Hamilton, the Port of Hamilton has for a number of years been pursuing a strategy
of diversification. Most notably, from an international goods movement perspective, Hamilton is
growing its inbound fertilizer traffic and its outbound traffic of agricultural commodities,
particularly corn and soya beans.
As part of its strategy, the Port has been developing significant rail infrastructure to handle more
diverse cargos, but also to offer increased modal choice to shippers.
Exhibit 31: International Cargo Handled at the Port of Hamilton, 2011
Non-agglomerated bituminous coal
Iron ores & concentrates
Slag, ash, & residues
Coke of coal, lignite, peat & retort carbon
Nitrogenous fertilizers
Loaded
Corn
Unloaded
Soya beans
Iron or steel in primary forms
Other products of coal & petroleum refining
Silica & quartz sands (for construction)
-
1
2
3
Millions of Tonnes Handled
Source: Transport Canada (2012b)
Port of Nanticoke
Nanticoke is a significant international port largely because of the presence of US Steel’s Lake
Erie Works, a steel mill, and Ontario Power Generation’s Nanticoke Generating Station, which
closed at the end of 2013. Out of a total 4.5 million tonnes of international cargo handled in
2011, 3.8 million tonnes were coal from Ohio and Superior, Wisconsin, and iron ore and
concentrates from Duluth-Superior.
Port of Goderich
In terms of international cargo, the Port of Goderich, located on Lake Huron, is primarily
devoted to the export of salt (three million tonnes loaded in 2011), from the local Sifto Salt Mine,
and wheat (110,000 tonnes loaded in 2011) and soya beans (130,000 tonnes loaded in 2011).
14
The wheat is shipped through the Great Lakes to Toledo, Ohio, a centre of food manufacturing.
Soya beans were exported to destinations throughout Northern Europe. Salt was distributed to
the US, primarily the Great Lakes.
In 1999, the Town of Goderich purchased the Harbour from Public Works Canada (in
conjunction with Transport Canada). Industrial users of the Port formed the Goderich Port
Management Corporation, a not-for-profit organization, responsible for the management of
port facilities.
Port of Windsor
Windsor is a diversified port. Primary export commodities in 2011 were 1.3 million tonnes of salt
from the Windsor Salt mine. Agricultural products were the other major export cargo, totalling
more than 80,000 tonnes of wheat, oil cake, and flours and meals of oil seeds. Wheat was
shipped to Toledo, Ohio, while other agricultural products went to Europe. Inbound the port
handled 900,000 tonnes of aggregates and smaller quantities of a range of other commodities.
The port handled a total 1.1 million tonnes of inbound international cargo in 2011.
Port of Sarnia
The Port of Sarnia exported 195,000 tonnes of fuel oils, 225,000 tonnes of asphalt, and a variety
of other refinery products to the United States as well as 100,000 tonnes of wheat to Toledo,
Ohio. Imports were 290,000 tonnes of aggregate from the US, 240,000 tonnes of gasoline and
fuel oil from the US, and 18,000 tonnes of fertilizer from the Ukraine. This traffic reflects the large
presence of the petro-chemical industry in Sarnia, and the significance of agriculture in the
surrounding area.
Port of Bowmanville
The Port of Bowmanville handles international cargo for the cement plant and a small amount
of salt. In 2011 imports were 75,000 tonnes of coal from Ohio, 110,000 tonnes of coke from
Chicago, and 23,000 tonnes of salt from Ohio. Exports were 290,000 tonnes of cement to
Cleveland, 500,000 tonnes to Detroit, and 80,000 tonnes to Toledo.
Port of Toronto
Traffic at the Port of Toronto is dominated, in tonnage, by the import of 340,000 tonnes of raw
sugar for the sugar mill from Brazil, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua, and 175,000 tonnes of salt for
road de-icing from Cleveland. Some asphalt (from Detroit) and steel pipe (from South Korea)
were also imported. A small amount of cement was exported to Rochester, NY.
Port of Clarkson
Port Clarkson, the only marine port in Peel Region, exported 95,000 tonnes of lubricating oils and
greases (to the US and Europe) and 100,000 tonnes of cement (to Duluth, Minnesota). Imports
were 230,000 tonnes of lubricating oils and greases (from Europe and the United States), 27,000
tonnes of coal (from Ashtabula, Ohio), 72,000 tonnes of slag ash and residues (from Chicago
and Gary, Indiana). Lubricants are associated with Suncor’s Mississauga Lubricants Plant.
Cement is associated with the Holcim/Dufferin cement plant.
15
Summary of Current Infrastructure Issues and Planned Future Improvements by Crossing
The table below provides a summary of current infrastructure issues for all border crossings in
Southern Ontario of significance to goods movement stakeholders in Peel Region.
Crossing
Road
Ambassador
Bridge
Current Infrastructure Issues
Planned Future Improvements
The key issue with the Ambassador Bridge is that
it is not connected directly with a high capacity,
high speed road on the Canadian side. Highway
3 runs through downtown Windsor and has traffic
lights and significant cross traffic. There are also
weight and dangerous goods restrictions on the
bridge. Overweight trucks and trucks carrying
dangerous goods must use the Detroit-Windsor
truck ferry. As noted above, comprehensive
data to make an assessment of congestion and
delays are lacking.
An 11-km extension of Highway 401 (Rt. Hon Herb
Gray Parkway, formerly known as the WindsorEssex Parkway) is currently under construction
between the current end of Highway 401 and the
planned Canadian inspection plaza for the New
International Trade Crossing. This highway will also
improve access to the Ambassador Bridge as it
will provide a high speed, controlled-access
facility as an alternative to Huron Church
Road/Highway 3 between the current end of
Highway 401 and the E.C. Row Expressway.
The companies that own the Ambassador Bridge
have proposed the construction of a second
span roughly parallel to the existing bridge. The
new span would offer six lanes and would
connect to existing inspection plazas. This project
has completed a transitional screening under the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act in
February 2014.
A number of improvements are planned for the
Blue Water Bridge. On the US side, the focus is on
planning for commercial and non-commercial
inspection capacity expansion. The feasibility of
the project is currently being assessed within the
fiscal and regulatory environment. On the
Canadian side the Blue Water Bridge Canada
master plan calls for the addition of 14 new
primary inspection lanes, construction of new
CBSA traffic and secondary inspection facilities,
completion of a truck exit roadway from the
commercial primary inspection lanes to Highway
402, and construction of a multi-purpose service
centre for travel information, currency exchange,
and food service.
A number of improvements to US infrastructure
are proposed, including reconfiguration of the
inspection plaza, commercial warehouse
expansion, improved Interstate access, and
improved access from bridge to plaza. A redecking of the bridge is currently in the design
phase. Design and construction costs are being
funded by the Authority.
Further improvements to the Canadian Plaza are
planned including east-bound road realignment
and improvements to retail and amenities. The
project is funded, will cost $14 million, and was
scheduled to be complete in 2013. On the US
side more significant work is planned to the
inspection plaza. There are plans to reconfigure
and expand the main building to include
additional space for adequate interview rooms
and holding cells, to reconfigure the noncommercial inspection garage and commercial
dock, to build additional commercial and noncommercial inspection booths, and to improve
bus-processing capacity.
The Beyond the Border Action Plan directly
Blue Water
Bridge
This border crossing was subjected to the worst
summer on record for traffic congestion and
border wait times in 2007. In fact, congestion has
been one of the main issues of this bridge during
summer. Therefore, commuters and trucks
crossing decreased in some other seasons due
to the uncertainly of the timing and delivery of
goods by taking this bridge. Congestion has
almost certainly lessened since 2007, but, as
noted above, comprehensive data to make
such an assessment are lacking.
Peace Bridge
There are reports of serious congestion on the
Peace Bridge. However, as noted above,
comprehensive data to make an assessment of
congestion and delays are lacking.
LewistonQueenston
Bridge
As noted above, comprehensive data to make
an assessment of congestion and delays are
lacking.
Thousand
While recent inspection reports have found that
16
Island
International
Bridge
Rail
Detroit River
Rail Tunnel
Paul M. Tellier
Tunnel
International
Railway Bridge
Rail Intermodal
Terminals
Air
Toronto
Pearson
International
Airport
Hamilton John
C. Munro
International
Airport
Marine
the bridge is in good condition and that a bridge
maintenance program is in place, the CBSA port
of entry facility is at the end of its economic life
and needs to be replaced, and commercial
secondary inspection is congested. As noted
above, comprehensive data to make an
assessment of congestion and delays are
lacking.
identified improvements at the Thousand Islands
Bridge. FBCL has begun planning the Customs
Plaza Rehabilitation Project for CBSA. FBCL has
developed a conceptual plan to meet CBSA
requirements and the project is in its initial
planning phase. The project is expected to cost
$60 million and be complete in 2017.
The current tunnels are unable to handle doublestacked, high cube containers and certain other
high-clearance cars, including some
automobile-carrying cars, which are increasingly
the rail industry’s standard. As a result, the trains
that run through the tunnel have much lower
productivity than would be the case with a
double-stack capability. This situation has the
effect of increasing the cost of cross-border
shipments.
A group called Continental Rail Gateway (CRG)
has developed plans to construct new a new rail
tunnel next to the existing twin tunnels. CRG is
currently (March 2014) undertaking an
Environmental Review of the project to identify
the potential for significant adverse
environmental effects and appropriate mitigation
measures. The project requires federal approval
in both Canada and the United States with
involvement of the Canadian Transportation
Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. CRG is
seeking $200 million in government funding
toward the $400-million cost of the tunnel. CRG
proposes to maintain the existing twin tunnels, but
to use them only when the new tunnel is out of
service. CRG hopes to begin construction in 2014
and open in 2017, but a US Presidential Permit
and Government of Canada approvals
(including approval under the Bridge and Tunnels
Act), and funding have yet to be obtained.
No plans for substantial future improvements
have been identified.
The tunnel is a constraint on the length of trains.
The bridge does not offer double-stacked
container capacity. There are currently five trains
per day operating in each direction. The current
level of traffic on the bridge means that there is
no congestion.
None identified.
No substantial issues have been identified.
In January 2013, the airport announced a $12million infrastructure investment to develop onsite infrastructure to expand air cargo operations.
The project involves the construction of 60,000
square feet of truck docks, refrigerated space for
flowers, fresh produce and pharmaceutical
products, a centre for live animals, and courier
facilities. The goal is to allow the airport to
provide an efficient cargo service on a much
larger scale than before.
The Port of Hamilton continues to diversify cargos
and develop land and infrastructure as required.
17
Appendix B: Data Sources
The Appendix provides additional details on the key data sources used in this project.
MTO Commercial Vehicle Survey (CVS)
MTO undertakes the CVS every five years. The survey intercepts trucks at more than 100 sites 24
hours a day, seven days a week, throughout the province where infrastructure investment
priorities in support of freight are under consideration, such as truck inspection stations, some
roadside locations on the provincial highway system and international border crossings across
the province. Through roadside interviews, the survey collects information about trip
characteristics, vehicle classification, weights and dimensions, commodity details, border
crossing, routes, and trip origin and destination.
MTO uses the data obtained from the CVS to improve its understanding of current travel
patterns, characteristics, and trends in travel patterns of trucks moving not only within Ontario,
but also across borders. The info collected is also used to develop forecasts of truck travel
demand in support of transportation planning and policy development. Parallel to the survey,
categorized traffic counts are also collected at each survey site. The traffic counts are vital to
expand the sample to the population of multiple classes of trucks to represent total traffic.
The CVS is a very useful survey for the analysis of cross-border goods movement. It provides
origin/destination truck trip data between Canada at the regional level and the United States
at the county level. As the CVS operates on a five-year cycle, the value of the data for analysis
can degrade quickly. For example, the 2011-13 CVS data are not scheduled to be released
until early 2015. Given the dramatic changes that have occurred in cross-border goods
movement in Ontario since 2006, before the recession, relying too heavily on the CVS is likely to
provide a distorted picture of goods movement in 2014. Nonetheless, the 2006 CVS data remain
some of the most detailed goods movement data available.
US Bureau of Transportation Statistics: North American Transborder Freight Data
This website provides import values and weights by mode and commodity, together with export
value (but not weights) by mode for US border crossings (for both Mexico and Canada). All
data are available 2007-2013, with road and rail values and weights (not by commodity) going
back to 1994.
Transport in Canada (herein referred to as Transport Canada (2012))
Transport Canada produces an annual report covering all modes of transportation. This report
includes a variety of useful data on cross-border goods movement. Transport Canada also
provided supplemental information on the value of Ontario’s international trade by mode and
country of origin/destination.
Peel Forecast Model
Peel Transportation Planning staff developed the Region of Peel's Travel Demand Forecasting
Model in 1978. The model has been updated frequently. This model has been used in a number
of the Region’s transportation planning initiatives. Travel demand forecasting predicts how
various transportation policies and programs will affect travel patterns in the future. The
1
information in a travel demand forecast helps municipalities plan future transportation
improvements, policies, services, and programs. The model would be used to reflect the
changes in traffic volume changes in road network and also to forecast future traffic based on
the land use growth. The model does not forecast truck volumes; however it is helpful in
identifying congestion and in estimating travel times for truck planning.
Note: the data obtained for analysis in this paper has been summarized for discussion purposes.
2

Advocate for improvements to border crossings

Transcription

Similar documents

Playdium is pleased to present our new Education Program

Presentation to the Port Arthur Rotary Club

Working with the Media

Guide Map - Ontario Science Centre

Bob Rae-Levine: Confirm or Deny

KFYI - "The Valley`s Talk Station"

GRUE TOUT-TERRAIN DE 1500 TONNES PRÈS DE LA CHUTE

new diversity brochure.indd

Slides - Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior

London Bridge Redevelopment