Annual Report 2000-2001

Executive Director 

Directeur exécutif

Place du Centre
200 Promenade du Portage
4^th Floor
Hull, Quebec
K1A 1K8

28 August 2001

The Honourable Stéphane Dion, P.C.
President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6

Honourable Minister:

In accordance with subsection 72(1) of the Access to Information Act and subsection 72(1) of the Privacy Act, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada is pleased to submit to Parliament this report on activities relating to the application of these two Acts for the period 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001.

Sincerely,

1.0	Part I
	1.1	Introduction
	1.2	Delegation of Authority
	1.3	Formal Requests
		1.3.1	Disposition of Requests
		1.3.2	Clients
		1.3.3	Processing of Requests
	1.4	Negotiation and Consultation
		1.4.1	Consultation with Third Parties
		1.4.2	Consultation with Individuals
	1.5	Fees
	1.6	Informal Requests
	1.7	Complaints and Investigations
	1.8	Appeals to the Federal Court
	1.9	Training and Education
	1.10	Statistics Required by Treasury Board
	Appendix
	Appendix A - Report on the Access to Information Act 1  April 2000 - 31  March 2001
2.0	Part II
	2.1	Requests for Personal Information
	2.2	Delegation of Authority
	2.3	Complaints and Investigations
	2.4	Training

1.0 Part I

Transportation Safety Board of Canada
Annual Report 2000-2001
Access to Information Act

1.1 Introduction

Pursuant to section 72 of the Access to Information Act and section 72 of the Privacy Act, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) is pleased to table in Parliament this report on activities relating to the application of these two Acts. The report covers the period from 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001.

The TSB's administration of its Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) activities are in accordance with the government's stated principles that government information should be available to the public with only specific and limited exceptions. Furthermore, the TSB treats personal information in compliance with the code of fair information practice expressed in the Privacy Act.

1.2 Delegation of Authority

As required by the legislation, a delegation of authority is in place. For the purpose of the Access to Information Act, the "head of the institution" as defined in section 3 of the Act is the Executive Director. As of 10 July 2000, the Manager, Information Management Division, whose responsibilities include those of Coordinator, Access to Information & Privacy, has been delegated powers by the Executive Director deemed appropriate for the effective administration of the programs.

1.3 Formal Requests

1.3.1 Disposition of Requests

Fifty-one (51) requests were received under the Access to Information Act. Five (5) requests have been carried forward to the next fiscal year.

Forty-six (46) requests were completed during the reporting period. Of these, records were fully disclosed to twelve (12) applicants. Records pertaining to thirty-one (31) requests were released with some portions exempted under paragraphs 13(1)(a) and (c), 16(1)(a) and (c)(iii), 20(1)(a), (b) and (c), 21(1)(a), (b) and (c), subsection 19(1) and section 24 of the Act. Two (2) requests were exempt from any disclosure under subsection 19(1) and the TSB was unable to process one (1) request.

1.3.2 Clients

The majority of requests, thirty-one (31), came from business/legal firms representing clients who are affected by or involved in transportation occurrences. Eleven (11) requests were received from media sources. Six (6) requests were received from members of the public and three (3) requests were received from organizations.

With twenty-eight (28) formal requests received during 1999-00, the fifty-one (51) received this reporting period represent an increase of 82.14%. This number is in keeping with the fifty-three (53) requests received in fiscal 1998-99. In addition, the marked increase over last year's figures can be attributed to a variety of factors: a developing awareness of the role of the agency by an established client base, an increasing sophistication on the part of requesters, familiarity with TSB's records and an increased exposure of the Board by media sources during high profile aviation, marine, rail and pipeline occurrences.

1.3.3 Processing of Requests

Under normal circumstances, all requests are processed within the 30-day time limit as required by the legislation. Of the forty-six (46) requests processed during the reporting period, thirty-eight (38) were completed within the 30 days. Two (2) were granted extensions for 31 days or more; one extension was for a third-party consultation and one was required to perform a search for the records. Seven (7) other requests were granted 30-day time extensions. Three (3) of the requests were extended for searches and another three (3) were extended for consultations with another government agency and one (1) was extended for consultation with a third party.

During this reporting period, the ATIP section was involved in the search and preparation of 130 volumes of records, the review of 13,673 pages of information and the reproduction and release of 9,224 pages of information, 508 photographs and two videotapes. The average time taken to process a request during the 2000-01 reporting period was 30.1 calendar days. Forty-five (45) of the forty-six (46) requests were completed on time resulting in 97.8% of requests being completed on time.

This is an improvement from last year's average of 32.5 calendar days to process a request. Changes to the ATIP section during the fiscal year have contributed significantly to the delivery of the ATIP program. Firstly, the ATIP section was expanded and now consists of an ATIP Co-ordinator and two full-time ATIP officers. Secondly, in January 2001, the ATIP section installed the ATIPflow software application developed by MPRSYS Inc. to streamline both the case management and processing of ATIP requests. In addition, the ATIP section now resides in a new Information Management Division where a closer relationship can be developed between good records management and the ATIP function.

1.4 Negotiation and Consultation

1.4.1 Consultation with Third Parties

Consultations were undertaken in accordance with the statutory provisions set out in sections 27 and 28 of the Act.

Of the three (3) third party consultations undertaken, two (2) agreed to a full release while one refused the disclosure of information in its entirety.

1.4.2 Consultation with Individuals

When requests are made under the Act for access to witness statements taken during the course of a safety investigation, the ATIP section exercises its discretion, where possible, to contact those individuals, pursuant to paragraph 19(2)(a), to determine whether or not they voluntarily consent to the disclosure of personal information.

During this reporting period, the TSB contacted thirty-six (36) witnesses. Less than 15% agreed to the disclosure of their personal information (vs. 25% who agreed to do so in the previous reporting period). Many of the individuals contacted did not reply (they are under no obligation to do so) and their statements were not released.

1.5 Fees

Beginning 1 January 2001, the TSB implemented a fee policy and began to collect fees as prescribed in the Access to Information Act Regulations. The TSB maintains the right to waive fees and the decision to reduce or waive fees is made on a case-by-case basis according to the criteria outlined in its ATIP fees policy. As in most departments, the TSB waives the requirement to pay fees, other than the application fee, if the amount payable is less than $25.00. In 2000-01, the TSB collected $309.20 in application, reproduction and searching fees.

1.6 Informal Requests

During the reporting period, 519 requests were received and over 10,000 pages of information were sent to requesters. This represents a decline of 152 informal requests from the last reporting year and reflects an internal change in the way the TSB processes requests for its publications. As of 1 January 2001, this function was transferred to the Communications Division which now responds to all requests for TSB publications.

It is important to note that the figures for informal requests do not include those responded to by other administrative units other than the ATIP Section whether in the Information Strategies and Analysis Directorate or by the Investigative Operations Directorate, including its regional offices.

Many of the TSB's publications are also available on the TSB Internet site, such as the multimodal investigation reports (available from 1 January 1995), safety studies, statistical reports, communiqués, investigation updates, etc. An average of 6,500 pages are viewed daily on the Internet site which can be accessed at http://www.tsb.gc.ca.

1.7 Complaints and Investigations

Two complaints were filed during 2000-01. One (1) complaint was filed with the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) and one complaint was self-initiated by the OIC.

The complaint filed with the OIC pertained to a denial of records in response to a request for copies of all the Air Traffic Control (ATC) transcripts and audio tapes relating to an aviation occurrence, investigated by the TSB, near Clarenville, Newfoundland, in May, 1998. The TSB withheld the records in their entirety pursuant to subsection 19(1) of the Act.

During the course of the OIC's investigation, it was discovered that the TSB had previously disclosed these records on two separate occasions in response to requests submitted under the Act. In light of this information, the TSB initially agreed to reconsider its decision and provide the aforementioned records to the complainant. As a result, the OIC reported to the complainant that the material would be forthcoming and that the complaint was now considered resolved.

However, during further deliberations by TSB officials, the Board decided to withhold the records pursuant to subsection 19(1) as it was believed the documents fell within the definition of personal information and that there was insufficient justification for disclosing the records simply because the TSB had released them in the past.

Consequently, the OIC initiated its own complaint, pursuant to subsection 30(3) of the Act, into TSB's refusal to release the records. Since then, further representations made by senior officials of the TSB have been considered by the OIC. As part the resolution process, the TSB is undertaking to identify over twenty (20) different voices on the ATC recording, and, if possible, contact those individuals and request their consent to disclose their personal information under paragraph 19(2)(a) of the Act.

Two (2) other complaints, which were filed in the 1999-00 reporting year, were carried forward to this reporting period as they were still unresolved with the OIC. These complaints also concern the denial of access to ATC recordings and/or transcripts which were withheld pursuant to subsection 19(1).

In the case of the complaint regarding the TSB's decision to withhold the Flight Service Station (FSS) tape and transcript relating to a mid-air collision of two small aircraft in Penticton, British Columbia, August 1999, the Board maintained that these records contain personal information. As per the resolution process in the complaint relating to the non-disclosure of the records relating to the occurrence in Clarenville, efforts are underway to contact the individuals whose voices and words are captured on the recordings and/or transcripts and seek their consent, pursuant to paragraph 19(2)(a) of the Act, to release their personal information.

The other complaint involves the denial of the ATC audio communications involving a Fokker 28 runway overrun in St. John's, Newfoundland, August 1999. The TSB had obtained Nav Canada's original ATC recording as a precautionary measure, but the recording was not used during TSB's investigation process. Furthermore, the TSB does not have the required equipment to playback Nav Canada's Philips Logger tape. However, since the tape constituted a record under the control of the TSB at the time the request was made, it was exempted in its entirety under subsection 19(1). The TSB has since provided the OIC with Nav Canada's original ATC recording and the matter is still under investigation.

1.8 Appeals to the Federal Court

The OIC filed an application for review to the Federal Court in the matter of the Clarenville complaint on 16 March 2001 (Federal Court No. T-465-01).

1.9 Training and Education

The ATIP Co-ordinator and ATIP officers attended various workshops organized by the Treasury Board Secretariat throughout the fiscal year.

The ATIP section provides guidance and direction concerning access requests and other related queries to TSB employees on a daily basis. Formal training on the Access to Information Act is envisioned for all TSB employees during 2002-02. The training will also include coverage of the changes stemming from the section 67.1 amendment to the Act.

1.10 Statistics Required by Treasury Board

The statistics required by Treasury Board are found in Appendix A.

Appendix A - Report on the Access to Information Act
                      1 April 2000 - 31 March 2001

2.0 Part II

Transportation Safety Board of Canada
Annual Report 2000-2001
Privacy Act
Period Covering 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001

2.1 Requests for Personal Information

No formal requests for personal information were received during this reporting period.

The TSB's policy of openness allows for the disclosure of information to individuals without necessarily requiring that they invoke the Privacy Act. Personnel officers and support staff handle this kind of request as part of their routine duties.

Although no formal request was made, the TSB remains vigilant in meeting requirements under the Act to protect personal information under its control. This is achieved by ensuring that employees are cognizant of their responsibility to protect the personal information they handle in the course of their duties and by respecting the code of fair information practice enshrined in the legislation.

2.2 Delegation of Authority

As required by the legislation, a delegation of authority is in place. For the purpose of the Privacy Act, the "head of the institution" as defined in s. 3 of the Act is the Executive Director. As of 10 July 2000, the Manager, Information Management Division, whose responsibilities include those of Coordinator, Access to Information & Privacy, has been delegated powers by the Executive Director deemed appropriate for the effective administration of the programs and ensures that the TSB meets all of its obligations fairly and consistently.

2.3 Complaints and Investigations

No complaints were received during this reporting period.

2.4 Training

ATIP staff receives on-the-job training on an ongoing basis. ATIP staff attend the Canadian Access and Privacy Association (CAPA) workshop every year. Formal training on the Privacy Act is planned for all TSB staff next fiscal year. The training will also include the introduction of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.