Correctional Service Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada

Common menu bar links

Sustainable Development Strategy 2007-2010

Warning This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Evaluation of our SDS 2003

After evaluating the SDS Revision 2003, we noted that most of our goals, objectives and targets with regard to the scope of CSC’s mandate are still in keeping with key SD issues. As a result, in preparing our SDS 2007-2010, we concluded that relatively few changes were necessary to the general aspects, to which we can make a significant contribution. However, as some of our targets were mainly based on modeling exercises so as to quantify our progress, we did our best this time to establish commitments that would be more aligned with our current ability to achieve or surpass the set targets, while being able to easily assess our progress along the way.

Progress and limiting factors

The following table outlines each of the targets of our SDS 2003, assesses our performance and provides a brief summary of the progress made and the limiting factors found.

Goals, Objectives and Targets – SDS 2003

Performance measurement


OBJECTIVE 1.1: CSC’s contributions to climate change are minimal.

Target 1.1.1: Emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) from all sources of combustion are reduced 8% by 03-2010 from the 2000 baseline.
In progress
Comments: Even though many energy-saving projects and electricity conservation measures were implemented, the latest estimates of our energy consumption indicate a slight reduction (1 to 2%). In light of this finding, we agreed to revise this target on the basis of more realistic objectives.

Target 1.1.2: Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor and the Fraser Valley are reduced 10% by 03-2007 from the 2004 baseline.
Target achieved
Comments: Following the 2006 review conducted as part of the audit by the Office of the Auditor General on our performance concerning this target, we were able to show that the target had been surpassed, particularly through many improvements to the performance of our institutional boilers and retrofit of our largest central heating plant (at Leclerc Institution, Laval Complex, QC). Total reduction from 1998 to 2005 amounts to 29%.

OBJECTIVE 1.2: CSC’s contributions to smog are minimal.

Target 1.2.1: Emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from fugitive vapours in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor and the Fraser Valley are reduced 20% by 03-2007 from the 2000 baseline.
Target achieved
Comments: Since in 2005-06 we installed and started up four phase 1 and 2 VOC recovery systems for our petroleum storage tanks in Quebec (Quebec City-Windsor corridor) as well as a project in BC (Fraser Valley), we estimate that this target was surpassed by about 10%.


OBJECTIVE 2.1: CSC’s contributions to water pollution are minimal.

Target 2.1.1: Releases of leachate and runoff containing chemicals from contaminated sites are reduced 5% by 03-2007 from the 2000 baseline.
Target not achieved
Comments: The slow administrative processes to award contracts for rehabilitation work on contaminated sites and the limited access to necessary expertise in this field prevented us from making any tangible progress. However, we conducted a number of environmental site assessments that, in due course, will allow CSC to accelerate site rehabilitation activities.

Target 2.1.2: Releases of effluent containing bacteria, fertilizers, and/or pesticides from farm operations are reduced 10% by 03-2007 from the 2000 baseline.
In progress
Comments:To achieve this target, we developed and, with our CORCAN partners, began implementing an environmental farm plan (EFP) at Westmorland Institution in New Brunswick (one of five farms run by CORCAN). As the implementation of the EFP (which is expected to be an exportable model for other sites) has not been completed, we are unable to accurately establish our performance on this target. There is tangible evidence however that significant progress is being made in implementing the EFP.

Target 2.1.3: Releases of off-specification effluent at sewage treatment outfalls and sewage leaks are reduced 20% by 03-2007 from the 2004 baseline.
Target achieved
Comments: Replacing the wastewater treatment system at Joyceville Institution in Ontario (project completed in June 2005) with a system that meets current needs, we improved our performance with regard to treated wastewater flow by 11.7%, which is an average of wastewater flow of 700 m3/day for a corporate total of 6,000 m3/day. Furthermore, we invested in many improvement projects for our wastewater treatment systems in the following institutions:
  • Pê Sâkâstêw Centre (AB) in 2004, average waste of 45 m3/day, about 0.8% of total corporate treated flow;
  • Bowden (AB) in 2004, average waste of 270 m3/day, about 4.5% of total corporate treated flow;
  • William Head (BC) in 2006, average flow of 200 m3/day, about 3.3% of total corporate treated flow.

Lastly, on a smaller scale, several other improvements to our wastewater treatment systems have been made between 2004 and 2006. However, results relating to the increased performance achieved through these measures are difficult to quantify.


OBJECTIVE 3.1: CSC’s contribution to depletion of individual physical resources is minimal.

Target 3.1.1: Use of water is reduced 15% by 03-2010 from the 2003 baseline (from 800 L/day/occupant to 680 L/day/occupant).
Target achieved
Comments: Through our corporate tool used to monitor our water consumption, we were able to establish that, during the most recent quarter for which reliable data is available (April to June 2006), our average corporate water consumption was approximately 665 litres per day per occupant, a 17% decrease compared to the 2003 reference year. We attribute this success to the many projects we completed since 2004 to replace water-cooled systems with air-cooled systems, thereby reducing our water consumption.

Target 3.1.2: Disposal of solid waste in landfills is reduced 20% by 03-2007 from the 2000 baseline (from 1.6 kg/day/occupant to 1.3 kg/day/occupant).
In progress
Comments: In 2005, we conducted an extensive survey on solid waste management. All 51 institutions completed a thorough questionnaire on this topic. Consequently, we were able to determine that the average amount of corporate solid waste sent to the landfill was 1.36 kg per day per occupant, a 15% decrease compared to the reference year. We will be continuing our efforts in this regard during the next cycle of our SDS.

OBJECTIVE 3.2: Inmates’ contribution to depletion of individual physical resources is minimal.

Target 3.2.1: 30% of inmates released every year, i.e. in March of each year from the 2004 baseline, have participated in awareness sessions on environmental issues, provided during their academic upgrading (Grade 9 to 12).
Target achieved
Comments: According to data we have in this regard, it appears that this target was systematically achieved over the past three years. The recent results for fiscal year 2006-07 are 36% of inmates released during the year. As this practice seems to now be well established within our inmate training programs, we will remove this target from the upcoming SDS.

Most of the data and assessments presented in the above table were taken during the summer of 2006. Consequently, it is possible that the above results and conclusions may change slightly by April 2007.