Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix E - Technical Memorandum on Testing
Pages 103-119

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 103...
... . Results Passenger time spent queuing for and proceeding through CBP Primary processes versus the unload time and transportation time to baggage claim dictate whether bags or passengers are ready at the baggage claim carousel.
From page 104...
... Figure E-3. RFID reader locations for passenger carry-on timing (after CBP Primary and before CBP Egress)
From page 105...
... may proceed directly from CBP Primary to the exit point and will typically avoid the congestion caused by passengers leaving the FIS area with bags. For bag timing from flight arrival to bags ready at sortation, there is also a significant reduction in time for international-to-international connection passengers versus passengers making Figure E-4.
From page 106...
... . It appears that the baggage claim process adds a significant amount of time for both passengers in the FIS area and bags to be ready for sortation.
From page 107...
... Note that the airline's upstream operations prioritize the international-to-international connection bags so that they are available to be unloaded first and can be inducted into the hub airport's baggage handling before terminating or domestic connecting bags. If internationalto-domestic baggage recheck can be eliminated, bags can similarly be prioritized but would represent a significantly larger volume of bags for the airport and airline to facilitate.
From page 108...
... Table E-1 lists risk items that were tested through the bag screening equipment. Simulated contraband or illegal items were approximated with suitable replacements.
From page 109...
... Results Of the 84 bags, 26 had substances representing illegal or contraband items placed in them. The remaining 58 bags had no contents presenting an issue to CBP clearance.
From page 110...
... . The test team concluded, however, that the review of TSA EDS screening images provides a far superior risk management tool for CBP when compared to the current domestic connections process of viewing the exterior of passenger bags at the Egress Point from the FIS area.
From page 111...
... Technical Memorandum on Testing E-9 Figure E-10. SEA potential international-to-international connection bag and passenger flow.
From page 112...
... Checked baggage participating in the program will be unloaded from the aircraft and held at the ramp level on an unused carousel for possible delivery to the FIS Hall for CBP Secondary Processing. • Bag process: After a predetermined amount of time, if bags are not requested for retrieval by CBP, they may be transported by Alaska/Horizon ground handlers to the Main terminal to be inducted back into the baggage handling system using the same process as Preclearance connecting bags.
From page 113...
... Live data Passenger First off bridge First to CBP Primary Average/median to CBP Primary Last (95th percentile) to CBP Primary Time from CBP Primary to Egress Time for passenger screening Live data Live data and published Live data and published Live data and published Live data Operations estimate Bags Begin bag unloading End bag unloading Conveyor time from ramp to claim carousel First bag to claim carousel conveyor Number of transfer bags to Canadian destinations Transport time – South Satellite to Main Terminal Delivery time to CBP Secondary/FIS Hall Live data Live data Live data Live data Live data Operations estimate Live data Table E-4.
From page 114...
... on the same trip from the South Satellite to the Main Terminal • The possibility that bags might be transported to the Main Terminal before passengers are processed through CBP Primary or Egress during times of severe congestion and long wait times in the FIS Hall • Resource requirement to physically deliver bags to CBP Secondary • Congestion for one elevator used for oversize bag route (and personnel movement to/from ramp level to the South Satellite terminal) • Cooperation, training, and action required from participating airlines (i.e., informing passengers and marking bags as connections from origin airport)
From page 115...
... Other airlines at ATL currently have a MCT of 90 minutes. Results The total number of potential new connections by aircraft seat capacity under seven different scenarios of incremental minimum connection time reductions provided varying percentage increases (Figure E-12)
From page 116...
... is possible and would result in relatively larger gains for air carriers, whereas airports with low minimum connection times would only allow for minor reductions in MCT and smaller benefits to airlines. Simulation Modeling Discrete-event simulation models are useful for evaluating scenarios in which the results are driven by time-dependent interactions of events.
From page 117...
... • Wait times at baggage claim Several scenarios were conducted using the simulation; the results are shown in Table E-5. Relevance to Eliminating/Reducing Baggage Recheck While the simulation model provided results of predicted passenger and bag times under each scenario, the specific times themselves are specific to a particular facility and its configuration.
From page 118...
... Figure E-14. Simulation model interface screen capture.
From page 119...
... The storage area might be used before bag rescreening or after rescreening and after bag sortation. In terms of an overall decision whether to implement baggage recheck for either international or domestic connections, the simulation model results indicate that a small percentage of connecting passengers not required to recheck bags generally provides greater time benefits.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.