National Academies Press: OpenBook

Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging (2011)

Chapter: Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information

« Previous: Appendix B - Simulation Tool Industry-Based Data Values
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C - Assessment Tool Content Information." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14470.
×
Page 62

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

48 A P P E N D I X C Assessment Tool Content Information

Assessment Tool Content Information 49 Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impacts Is a common use system installed at the airport? An airport-owned and operated self-tagging implementation is based on a common use platform. Without a current common use platform in place, an airport must undergo additional cost and effort associated with the implementation of common use self- service (CUSS) kiosks, including gaining the support and cooperation of the airlines. The impact may also include common bag drop. The airport must develop a common use strategy as an underlying passenger processing methodology. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Transition costs from airline-dedicated kiosks to airport-owned CUSS kiosks 3. Infrastructure costs for common baggage handling system Are current airlines amenable to passenger self- tagging? The implementation of self-tagging directly impacts the business models and operational processes of the airlines. Without support and cooperation from the airlines, a self-tagging initiative is unlikely to succeed. The airport should seek to understand the concerns that the airlines have with self- tagging and seek to resolve them cooperatively. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and coordination Is there an airline-centric working group to support the self- tagging decision- making process? A passenger self-tagging working group that represents the airlines is an effective way to uncover and accommodate airline concerns and requirements. Without a working group, the airport will spend an excessive amount of time trying to uncover individual airline requirements and may end up with conflicting information. The airport should facilitate the development of a working group comprised of representation from each airline to provide input into the self-tagging decision- making process. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and ongoing meeting coordination Are current lease agreements expiring in the near term? Airport-owned self- tagging requires lease agreements with provisions similar to common use, enabling the airport to implement a self-tagging solution. Lease agreements not written to accommodate common use provisions limit the airport's ability to implement a self tagging solution. If the leases are expiring, the airport should work with the airlines to put language in the lease that will give the airport the rights it needs to implement a self-tagging solution. If the leases are not expiring in the near term, the airport needs to seek amendment options to long- term leases. 1. Airport management and business staff and consultant manhours for planning and reorganization of lease requirements Are the airlines' business drivers known? Supporting the airlines' business drivers are critical to the success of a self-tagging implementation. If the airport moves forward with self- tagging without an understanding of the airlines' business drivers, they will likely have significant pushback from the airlines, which may result in an unsuccessful initiative. The airport should seek to understand the airline(s) business drivers that may be affected by self-tagging, so as to develop a design to best accommodate each. 1. Airport management and business staff and consultant manhours for planning and business definition 2. Airport staff and consultant manhours for design work Table C-1. Commercial assessment. (continued on next page)

50 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impacts Are the airlines' customer service goals with respect to queuing times in the check-in lobby known? Queue times serve as a baseline measurement that enables resource planning for self-tagging. Without an understanding of the queue time goals, the ability to plan adequately for resources will be limited and the resulting implementation may not meet the passenger processing demand. The airport should work with each airline to uncover its queue time goals for each passenger processing function, and use that information in conducting self-tagging simulations. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, potential time- motion studies, and self- tagging simulations 2. Potential software costs for simulation tools Are the airlines' business practices for handling priority passengers and exceptions known? Supporting the airlines' business practices are critical to the success of a self-tagging implementation. If the self-tagging implementation is not based on an understanding of the airlines' practices for processing priority passengers and exceptions, an excessive number of failures requiring rework may occur. The airport should work with each airline to understand its specific handling processes for priority passengers and exceptions, and design a solution that accommodates each. 1. Airport management and business staff and consultant manhours for planning and business definition 2. Airport staff and consultant manhours for design work Are the airlines' current and projected passenger demographics known? Passenger demographics are an important informational input for resource planning for self-tagging. Without an understanding of the passenger demographics, the ability to plan adequately for resources will be limited and the resulting implementation may not meet the passenger processing demand. The airport should work with each airline to understand its specific passengers' demographic makeup, and use that information in conducting self-tagging simulations. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, potential time- motion studies, and self- tagging simulations 2. Potential software costs for simulation tools Are airline baggage payment and exception requirements known? Airline baggage exception rules, such as overweight fees are always subject to change. Payment options for baggage vary greatly, based on specific airlines and locations. Payment for baggage may occur at the self-service kiosk or at the common bag drop location. Each variation must be accommodated in an airport-owned self- tagging implementation. Not accounting for the baggage exception rules can severely impact the airlines ability to operate. The airport should work with each airline to understand its specific baggage exception rules, and use that information in the design of the self-tagging solution. 1. Airport finance and operations staff, and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential software, costs to implement payment scenarios Table C-1. (Continued).

Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impacts Are there contractual requirements for airline employees at ticket counter locations? Some airlines have union contracts in place that must be considered during the implementation of self- tagging. The implementation of self-tagging results in the modification of job duties for a portion of the airline agents. Making these modifications in practice may cause a breach in existing contract terms. The airport should have its legal department assess the potential impact and include the findings in the decision- making process. 1. Airport management and legal staff and consultant manhours for planning and impact assessment Is the funding for passenger self-tagging adequately understood and budgeted for? A self-tagging implementation requires investment in consulting, design, construction, equipment, and ongoing maintenance. Many of these costs are associated with necessary changes to existing equipment and infrastructure, such as with self-service kiosks and baggage handling systems. Unknown costs can severely affect the successful outcome of the self-tagging implementation. Using this Assessment Tool, the airport can establish a detailed matrix of costs for all areas of a self-tagging implementation. As the U.S. pilots for self-tagging mature, airports will have the opportunity of working through ACI to potentially obtain sample costs from these pilot locations. 1. Airport management and finance staff and consultant manhours for planning and financial impact assessment Assessment Tool Content Information 51 Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impacts Are customer service requirements understood? An airport-owned self- tagging implementation, where more than one airline is involved, results in the potential mixing of airline passengers at the same check-in locations, at the same time. Airlines struggle with how to properly service customers, where there is a mix of airline passengers. This can result in the potential mishandling of customers, and ultimately affect the “customer service” image of an airport. The airport should work with the airlines involved to establish a customer service plan to ensure proper customer service is applied. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and development of a plan 2. Potential airport staff in the execution of the customer service plan Are rules established for the use of common use kiosks in dedicated airline lease spaces? CUSS kiosks by definition are used by multiple airlines. Some airlines block the usage of the CUSS kiosks from other airlines' passengers. If there is not an established set of rules, then each airline may treat these differently. The airport should work with the airlines involved to establish a kiosk usage plan. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and development of a plan Table C-1. (Continued). (continued on next page) Table C-2. Legal/financial risk assessment.

52 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impacts Are liability issues resulting from impacting airline operations properly understood? An airport-owned self- tagging implementation can ultimately result in shared responsibility of the airport and airline in equipment reliability, baggage acceptance, and other operational issues. If failures in an airport-owned or controlled system cause a negative impact on airline operations, the airport may be at risk for financial damages. The airport should conduct a risk analysis to assess the potential impact on all process steps of the self-tagging implementation and include the findings in the decision- making process. If necessary, the airport should pursue the introduction of baggage handling service agreements. 1. Airport management and legal staff and consultant manhours for planning and impact assessment, and development of the agreement Can changes be made to rates and charges to support the implementation of self-tagging? The costs of implementing and supporting a common- use self-tagging implementation may be recuperated through modification to rates and charges. If the airport is not able to update the rates and charges to the airlines in a timely manner, the project may not have sufficient funding. The airport should have its finance department assess the capacity for increasing rates and charges and include the findings in the decision- making process. 1. Airport management and finance staff and consultant manhours for planning and rate and charges plan Table C-2. (Continued). Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Will self-tagging be implemented in an existing facility? Extensive facility modifications to the baggage handling system, check-in areas, and others may be required to accommodate self- tagging. The use of an existing facility limits the design possibilities of a self-tagging solution. The airport must thoroughly understand the facility limitations and develop a self- tagging solution that will provide the greatest benefit to passenger flow and check-in efficiency within the physical and resource constraints. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential significant costs in facility and infrastructure changes Is a significant increase in enplanements expected? As passenger traffic increases, the requirement for an efficiency-based self- tagging design becomes critical. If the self-tagging solution is not designed to reduce congestion, increase passenger flow, and reduce processing time, significant rework may be required as passenger traffic increases. The airport must evaluate the projected growth in volume of passengers and design a self- tagging solution that will draw passengers away from the traditional check-in areas to reduce congestion in the lobby. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes Is the check-in lobby area space constrained? Processing time at a self- tagging kiosk is generally longer than at a self- service kiosk without self-tagging. Also, space requirements around a self-tagging kiosk generally require a greater foot print than with a traditional self- service kiosk. If self-tagging kiosks are implemented in a space-constrained check-in lobby, congestion problems may actually increase. The airport must evaluate space requirements for placement of self-tagging kiosks within the check-in lobby area and design a self- tagging solution that will minimize space congestion. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes Table C-3. Facility impact assessment.

Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Is passenger flow congested? The efficiency of passenger flow can be improved through a strategic self-tagging implementation. If self-tagging kiosks are implemented without a strategic approach to improving passenger flow, the result may actually impede passenger flow. The airport must evaluate the current passenger flow and congestion and design a self- tagging solution that will draw passengers away from the traditional check-in areas. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes Are baseline measurements for passenger processing available? Baseline measurements for passenger processing are necessary for developing useful simulations to determine the appropriate self- tagging resource distribution. Designing a self- tagging solution without accurate baseline measurements will likely result in an implementation that does not meet the desired goals. The airport should conduct time and motion studies of the current check-in processes to establish a set of throughput baselines. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design, conducting time and motion studies 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes Is the security checkpoint area currently a point of congestion that is space constrained? An improvement in passenger processing throughput as a result of a self-tagging implementation can impact passenger flow patterns at the security checkpoint. As passenger throughput increases, queue line congestion/peaks at the security checkpoint may increase. The airport should work with the local TSA during concept design to study and monitor changes in passenger flow at the security check point, to ensure the TSA is prepared for potential passenger flow changes at the security checkpoint. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes 3. May also include staffing costs at the security checkpoint Is a centralized baggage handling system with baggage sortation available where self-tagging and common bag drop are being considered? A common bag drop system requires a means to sort and screen (tag status, etc.) baggage from any participating airline inducted at the baggage drop position(s). Without a centralized baggage handling system, and the means to effectively screen baggage, a self-tagging solution will be costly and limited. The airport should assess the baggage handling system requirements for the desired self-tagging implementation during the conceptual design phase to understand the limitations and potential modifications to the baggage handling systems. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in changes to the baggage handling system, including infrastructure, and screening equipment and software. Is the baggage makeup area space constrained? The physical space in the baggage makeup area must be able to may limit the airport’s accommodate any additional equipment that may be required for a self-tagging implementation, including injection belts, inline scales, bag-tag scanners, and baggage diverters. A lack of space in the baggage makeup area ability to make the necessary changes to the baggage handling system, to accommodate the self- tagging implementation. The airport should evaluate modifications needed to the baggage handling system during the conceptual design phase, to ensure the design is in accordance with the space limitations of the baggage makeup area. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs include facility, hardware, and software changes to the baggage makeup area. Does the baggage handling system have the capacity to accommodate demand at peak operations? The implementation of self-tagging will likely increase the peak demand on the baggage handling system. Due to the potential increase in peak demand, the capacity of the baggage handling system may need to be increased as part of the self- tagging implementation. The airport must assess the throughput capacity of the baggage handling system compared with peak- operations under the planned self-tagging model and plan to make modifications if required. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and throughput simulations 2. Potential costs in baggage handling system modifications. Assessment Tool Content Information 53 Table C-3. (Continued). (continued on next page)

54 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Can the baggage handling system accommodate additional induction points? To achieve passenger processing efficiencies, along with accommodations for airline locations, more than one baggage induction/acceptance point may be needed. Depending on the physical layout, more than one baggage induction point may not be possible, or may result in significant costs. The airport must assess the accessibility to the baggage handling system for the location in which the self- tagging bag drop is designed. If additional induction belts are required, these should be included in the design. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in baggage system modifications. Table C-3. (Continued). Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Are performance criteria, such as time and motion studies, for current check-in processes available? To make an informed decision as to the benefit of a self-tagging installation, time and motion information of current check-in processes (desk check-in, self-service kiosks, bag drop) is necessary. Designing a self- tagging solution without accurate time and motion information will likely result in an implementation that does not meet the desired goals. The airport should work with the partnering airlines to obtain/conduct time and motion studies for use in process modeling and layout in the self-tagging and bag drop implementation 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design, conducting time and motion studies 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes Are check-in kiosks (airline- dedicated or common use self service) currently in use for the areas or airlines where self-tagging is under consideration? A self-tagging solution requires the use of self- service kiosks for check- in. The placement of self- service kiosks is a significant planning component of passenger self- tagging. The airport should account for the costs of self-service kiosks. The airport should involve the airlines with the planning phases of the kiosk design and placement. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and design 2. Potential costs in hardware and software costs for kiosks. Can current self service check-in kiosks accommodate printers for bag tags? Self-tagging requires the printing of bag tags at the self-service kiosk. Without bag-tag printers, self-tagging is not possible. The airport should determine if the existing kiosks can be retrofitted or if new kiosks must be procured. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential costs in printers, paper stock, kiosks and/or kiosk upgrades. Can rebooking be moved to a location away from the ticket counters, to gate lounges or other locations? Rebooking operations require the use of staff and facilities in a manner different from the standard check-in process. If not planned for properly, or removed from the check-in area, rebooking operations can result in long queue lines and disruption of the self-tagging process. The airport should work closely with its airline partners in reviewing all rebooking options, and establish a plan that best accommodates the entire check-in process. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of a rebooking plan 2. Potential costs in facility and infrastructure changes Table C-4. Operational assessment.

Assessment Tool Content Information 55 Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Are airport responsibilities for passenger rights regarding checked bags understood? If the airport is going to take over a portion of the rules of carriage, then the airport may need to comply with passenger rights regarding checked bags. Not being able to comply with these rights will limit the ability of the airport to pursue self-tagging and bag drop. The airport should work with risk management and legal departments to resolve any issues that are identified. 1. Airport legal and management staff and consultant manhours for assessing risk and developing a plan Does airport IT currently support operational systems for the airport? Self-tagging and bag drop require new IT systems and support. Airports not prepared for providing IT support can affect the successful operations of the self-tagging implementation The airport should analyze and plan for the appropriate level of IT support, internal and/or outsource staffing. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of IT support 2. Potential costs in IT infrastructure upgrades 3. Potential costs in additional airport staff and/or outsourcing contracts 4. Potential cost in training Are the airline service level requirements in supporting a self- tagging implementation known? An airport owned and operated self-tagging system requires ongoing maintenance of self- service kiosks and baggage induction / handling systems (depending on the level of implementation). If maintenance requirements of the airlines cannot be accommodated, the airport is at significant risk for adversely affecting airline operations. The airport should review the airlines' current support agreements to uncover requirements that will be impacted by self-tagging and make accommodations to provide the necessary level of service. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of IT and maintenance support 2. Potential costs in infrastructure upgrades 3. Potential costs in additional airport staff and/or outsourcing contract 4. Potential cost in training Is the number of bag tags printed for each passenger accounted for today by the airlines or airport (included unused tags)? Self-tagging increases the chances of "user error" in the number of bags printed and discarded. Document control of the bag tag impacts the design of the self- tagging and bag drop implementation. The airport should analyze and establish accountability policies and procedures for bag-tag printing. Bag-tag status (active or inactive) should be considered in the resultant procedures. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of procedures Are there adequate airport service management processes and on-site technical support to maintain systems and hardware (kiosks, bag drops, technology infrastructure)? A self-tagging implementation shared by more than one airline necessitates the shared responsibilities for service and maintenance between airlines and/or airport staffing. Service levels will not be met if the staffing is not appropriate. Any implementation of this nature would require an analysis of processes and on-site technical support. The airport should analyze what staff is needed to support a self-tagging/bag drop implementation, and create appropriate management processes to meet the support needs of these systems. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of management processes 2. Potential costs in additional maintenance staff Table C-4. (Continued). (continued on next page)

56 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Are airport procedures in place to account for self-tagging during irregular operations? Service recovery is a key operations issue. When irregular operations occur, the airlines depend on their passenger processing systems to ensure passengers are processed on flights. Airlines typically resist any airport- provided service that can reduce the ability of the airline to meet operational needs. This is even more critical given new regulations that impact penalties that airlines have to pay for delays. The airport should create processes which will support service recovery and meet the airlines’ needs. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of procedures Are there plans for off-site check- in? Off-site check-in can enhance the performance of a self-tagging solution. Impact may be significant depending on the requirement for printing active or inactive bag tags. The airport should work with security authorities (TSA, local security staff, etc.) to resolve any open security issues. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential process or infrastructure changes to existing off-site check-in Is the current infrastructure to support self- tagging and bag drop (i.e., building, telecom, BHS, etc.) airport- owned? As with other common use systems, an airport- owned self-tagging and common bag drop system necessitates the ownership of airport infrastructure. The impact varies due to ownership and implementation decisions. Any time there are two parties involved in the ownership of the system and infrastructure, the impact increases. The airport must develop a common use strategy, defining infrastructure ownership. It may be necessary for the airport to take ownership of the various infrastructure components, but it depends on the implementation. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Transition costs from airline-dedicated to airport-owned infrastructure Is there a configuration and change management process already established to track the infrastructure configuration changes? Configuration and change management is key in an IT system to ensure that changes are made in a manner that limits the impact to operational activities. Not having a configuration and change management process established will adversely impact airline operational activity. The airport should create a configuration and change management process according to a standard such as IT infrastructure library (ITIL). 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of change management procedures 2. Potential training costs Can the airport support the airlines' current processes for mishandled bags? A common bag drop solution must be prepared to support the various airline processes for mishandled bags. Airline operation is affected if the bag drop implementation cannot support airline mishandled bag rules. The airport should work with the airlines to ensure airline rules for mishandled bags are supported in the self-tagging system and the designs account for dynamic changes of these rules. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of procedures Can the airport support the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements for special needs travelers in the self-tagging and bag drop implementation? Accessibility guidelines, as given by ADA must be considered when undertaking any project that impacts passenger processing in the U.S. If the processes are unable to support ADA requirements, the overall implementation of self-tagging and bag drop could be adversely impacted. The airport should identify all ADA requirements and work with the local ADA community to determine a resolution. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning and preparation of procedures airport’s Table C-4. (Continued).

Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Can location signage for self- tagging and bag drop be clear and prominent, as well as conforming to the airports signage requirements? Signage is required both to provide branding for the airlines and/or services provided, as well as to provide way finding and instruction. Poor signage or conflicts with the airport signage program can cause confusion with the passengers and may also cause concerns with the airlines. The airport should work with the airlines to determine their needs for signage and ensure that these needs can fit within the airport signage program. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential software, hardware, and infrastructure costs for dynamic signage components Can the airport support presenting airlines in particular kiosk locations (i.e., are all airlines active on all kiosks, or are some blocked in particular locations) in the self-tagging implementation? Each airline may have varying requirements impacting the use and placement of kiosks throughout the facility (such as with location and presentation of airline brands), and may wish to restrict how their application is installed in the airport. Not understanding specific airline business rules for use on self-service kiosks can impact the success of airport-controlled self-tagging kiosks. The airport should work with the airlines to establish rollout plans to ensure the greatest success in kiosk usage. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential software, hardware, and software costs for kiosks Do bags need to be weighed in a specific area to accommodate all airline baggage acceptance and exception requirements? Airlines may require weight to be measured on bags within a certain proximity of their check- in desks. Locations of weigh stations could determine the locations of the self- tagging and bag drop systems. The airport should work with the airlines to determine their weighing requirements. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential hardware and infrastructure costs for bag scales Are airline employees required to activate the bag tag in the BRS and conduct a document check? If the self-tagging implementation uses active/inactive tags, there may be requirements (labor, other) that would allow only airline employees the ability to activate the bag tag. Tag activation may need to incorporate airline employees, which can impact the operations of an airport-controlled bag drop location. The airport should work with airlines to determine the impact of this requirement, and to help establish an airport plan. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design Are locations needed for passengers to weigh and possibly repack their bags prior to approaching the bag drop? Airlines may wish to have a separate counter for rework to allow passengers the ability to weigh their bags and then repack if necessary. Additional space may need to be allocated to support this activity. The airport should work with airlines to determine the impact of this requirement, and to help establish an airport plan. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential facility changes Does the airline have requirements for specialized passenger areas (i.e., business class, rework)? Airlines may wish to have separate areas to treat their premium passengers differently than the other passengers. Additional space may need to be allocated to support this activity. The airport should work with airlines to determine the impact of this requirement, and to help establish an airport plan. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential facility changes Assessment Tool Content Information 57 Table C-4. (Continued). (continued on next page)

58 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Does the self- tagging application provide a receipt for baggage? Passengers will require a receipt for their baggage when they self-tag. This receipt may be used to find their baggage, verify that they are the owner, and other requirements, based on airline-specific rules. Receipt printers may be required, or the boarding pass printer will also need to produce receipts for baggage. The airport should work with airlines to determine the impact of this requirement. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential hardware and software changes to kiosks 3. Potential printer and paper stock costs Is there a formal process for kiosk moves, adds, changes (MACs)? Along with service level agreements, and change and maintenance management, the airport needs a defined process for MACs. If there is no formal process defined, changes could adversely impact airline operations. The airport should work with airlines to determine the impact of this requirement, and to prepare the plan. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and preparation of the plan Are criteria established to accurately measure and monitor queues? Queues are a critical impact to the overall success of a self-tagging project. If there are no criteria established, it will be difficult to determine how the self-tagging system is functioning and when to add additional resources to reduce queues. The airport should work with airlines to establish appropriate monitoring plans. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and preparation of the plan 2. Potential costs for airport staff towards the execution of the plan Do airlines offer a self-service irregular operations recovery process? Airlines are improving their self-service offerings and allowing passengers the ability to perform more tasks in a self-service mode. If the airlines wish to provide these services, then the self- service kiosks will need to be configured to allow irregular operations recovery processes. This may include additional locations and more support staff. The airport should work with airlines to establish appropriate plans. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and preparation of the plan 2. Potential costs for airport staff towards the execution of the plan Is the airport interested in a home printing tag solution? One method of self- tagging which is evolving includes printing tags at home on the passenger's personal printer. This emerging process will require a change in the airline system to support printing bag tags at home. The airport should work with airlines to identify requirements. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for long-term planning Is the airport pursuing or already have an RFID solution as part of its baggage system? Some airports are using RFID bag tags. This process may require special self- tagging bag tags, which may impact the current self-service kiosk configuration. The airport should work with airlines to identify requirements and research available RFID bag tags and their ability to function within the self-tagging kiosks. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential hardware and software costs to modify the kiosks 3. Special paper stock Can non-active or non-tagged bags be placed on baggage belts? Airlines, airports, and government regulators are very concerned that a non-tagged, or non- active-tagged bag can be introduced into the baggage system and ultimately make it onto an airplane. Allowing non-tagged or inactive-tagged bags into the baggage system would not meet the intent of the self-tagging, bag drop system. The airport should ensure that the system is designed to prevent non-active or non- tagged bags from being placed on the bag belt. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential hardware and software costs for scanners Do the kiosks need to filter out passengers with exception processing requirements? Some airlines would like to have the self-tagging kiosk operations "kick out" any exceptions to a special airline handling area to keep the bag drop moving efficiently. Additional kiosk logic and/or locations may need to be identified. Depending on the airport layout, exception handling locations may have impact on airline locations with relation to the distance a passenger may have to walk from the kiosk or bag drop location. The airport should work with the airlines to establish rules for handling exceptions. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design Table C-4. (Continued).

Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Can passengers place bags incorrectly onto bag belts? Different types of bags (e.g., wheeled, soft-sided) must be placed on the take-away belt in different ways, including the use of baskets. Incorrectly placing baggage on the baggage belt could cause baggage system jams downstream. The airport should work with airlines to establish appropriate plans and procedures. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and preparation of the plan 2. Potential costs for airport staff towards the execution of the plan Will operations need to continue in a manual mode if the system goes down? System outages are especially an issue in a small airport. In a large airport, there may be enough stations to ensure that there is a subset of the system working. If there is no manual process, all passenger processing could stop if the entire system is down. The airport should work with the airlines to define a manual 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and preparation of the plan 2. Potential costs for airport staff towards the execution of the plan Will the airline change their acceptance rules to allow printing of tags earlier? If all kiosks are able to print bag tags, it is possible that passengers may want to drop their bags earlier. Early bag drop requires larger amounts of hold space in the back for baggage. The airport should work with airlines to establish appropriate plans and procedures. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and preparation of the plan 2. Potential costs for airport staff towards the execution of the plan Is the airline producing a proper BSM (per IATA standards) for the BRS? Self-tagging relies on accurate BSM messages from the host system. If the airline is not sending proper BSMs, then a large number of bags will end up at manual encoding. Manual encoding could adversely impact the self- tagging operations. The airport should work with airlines to ensure that the proper BSMs are being sent. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and coordination Does your airport have room for a manual encode station? Because of the new process of adding active and inactive tags to the sortation system, any bag that does not have an active tag that is in the system would have to be manually encoded. If there is no room for manual encoding, encoding would have to be done at the loading pier, prior to loading on the aircraft. The airport should determine if space can be found for a manual encoding station. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential facility changes Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Impact Will a self-tagging implementation have a significant impact on current queue lines? The TSA views behavioral analysis of the queue line as a layer of security. Changes to the queue patterns have an effect on the way that the TSA performs behavioral analysis to detect potential threats. The airport should work with the local TSA during conceptual design to gain input on impacts to security. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design Will a self-tagging implementation have a significant impact on check- in processing times? The TSA staffs the security checkpoint based on an understanding of the current passenger flow rates. Changes to the processing times have an affect on the resource requirements at the security checkpoint. The airport should work with the local TSA during conceptual design to ensure that they are prepared to make necessary changes to the security checkpoint. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design Is a self-tagging implementation being considered? At the time this tool was developed, the TSA has not approved self-tagging in the United States, but is participating with ACI and IATA in the establishment of U.S. Airport pilot sites. Until the TSA has approved a set of self-tagging implementation protocols, implementation of self- tagging will not be permitted. The airport should monitor the TSA's position on self-tagging and be prepared to adhere to the procedural mandates made by the TSA. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design Assessment Tool Content Information 59 Table C-4. (Continued). Table C-5. Regulatory/security assessment. (continued on next page)

60 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Are kiosks equipped with the ability to read standard forms of identification such as driver's licenses and passports? Verification of identification at the kiosk will help reduce the likelihood of an unauthorized person obtaining a bag tag. If kiosks are not capable of scanning standard forms of identification, then there is a potential for an unauthorized person to obtain a bag tag in the name of a different passenger. The airport should determine the passenger identification methods required by each airline and equip the kiosks with the required functionality. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software Is the current baggage handling system capable of scanning and diverting bags? The TSA is probably going to require the use of active/inactive bag tags to ensure unauthorized bags do not get loaded onto an aircraft. The airport's baggage system must be capable of removing bags with tags that are not "active." If the baggage handling system cannot identify and divert an "inactive" bag, the TSA will not likely approve of the implementation. The airport should monitor the TSA's position on self-tagging and be prepared to incorporate a baggage handling system if active/inactive tags are mandated by the TSA. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing baggage handling system equipment: hardware/software Does the planned self-tagging bag drop have a securely controlled induction point to the baggage system? The TSA is probably going to require that a passenger or unauthorized person not have access to baggage that has been accepted and the baggage tag activated, unless under supervision by the airline representative. If an unauthorized person is able to gain access to a bag that has been inducted into the baggage system, it will be considered a security breach. The airport should design into the bag drop area a secure induction point that can be physically controlled by the agent accepting and activating bags. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing baggage induction belt, and facility construction Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Has the potential of a self-tagging implementation been discussed with Local and corporate TSA? Primary concern from the TSA, regarding self-tagging is that the process for implementation across the U.S. be consistent and that each implementation meets or exceeds current security coverage. Proposed airport implementations that are viewed by the TSA as compromising current security operations will not be accepted by the TSA. Airports should establish a plan that identifies how security operations will be equal to or exceed current levels. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing security systems: hardware/software Are the requirements for the passenger selectee program understood? The TSA is probably going to want to extend its security selectee program to include the self-tagging process. The self-tagging implementation may be impacted if support for the selectee program has not been planned for. The airport should monitor the TSA's position on self-tagging and be prepared to incorporate process changes necessary to support the passenger selectee program. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, preparing changes to program Is the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) understood and planned for the acceptance of credit card information at self-service kiosks? Most airlines are working toward solutions to allow payment of baggage at the self -service kiosks. This will be a component of self- tagging. If not planned for properly, PCI audits can have significant negative impact on the self-tagging implementation. The airport should investigate PCI compliance and audit requirements. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential costs for conducting a PCI Audit Cost Impact Table C-5. (Continued).

Assessment Tool Content Information 61 Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Are current kiosks capable of scanning 2-D bar codes, airline frequent flier cards, credit cards, and passports to identify passengers as required by the airlines' check-in processes? If kiosks are not capable of using some form of automated data entry, then all data will need to be entered manually by the passenger. Manual data entry is prone to error and will slow the check-in process. The airport should determine if kiosks are capable. If they are not, then kiosks should be updated. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software Are bag tags for each airline standard? For common use installations, IATA recommends a 21 inch standard tag. However, airlines currently use several different bag- tag configurations. Different tag sizes would prohibit common use self- tagging. The airport should work with the airlines to establish a common size, acceptable to all. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning, and design 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software 3. Potential cost includes printers and paper stock Can airline software support self-tagging, including printing of bag tags, active/inactive tags, BSMs, etc.? Airport-owned self- tagging systems must support the transference of information to the airline host system for the proper production and monitoring of bag tags. Self-service common use check-in systems to be used for the self- tagging implementation may not be written to support all airline host requirements for the production and monitoring of bag tags. The airport should work with the airlines to determine specific requirements of the self- service check-in kiosk software. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software Can the requirements for interface between the self-tagging system components and departure control system be accomplished? Depending on the airline, a self-tagging system may not yet be an integral component of the departure control system. If the systems cannot be integrated, self- tagging may not work for this airport. The airport should work with the airlines to determine specific requirements of the self- service check-in kiosk software and departure control system. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software Can the requirements for interface between the self-tagging system components and baggage reconciliation system be accomplished? Depending on the airline, a self-tagging system may not yet be an integral component of the baggage reconciliation system. If the systems cannot be integrated, self- tagging may not work for this airport. The airport should work with the airlines to determine specific requirements of the self- tagging software and BRS. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software Can the requirements for interface between the self-tagging system components and BHS be accomplished? Depending on the airline, a self-tagging system may not yet be an integral component of the BHS. If the systems cannot be integrated, self- tagging may not work for this airport. The airport should work with the airlines to determine if this is a requirement. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing BHS: hardware/software Can the requirements for interface between the self-tagging system components and kiosk software be accomplished (such as with printing of bag tags)? Depending on the airline, a self-tagging system may not yet be an integral component of the kiosk system software and hardware. If the systems cannot be integrated, self- tagging may not work for this airport. The airport should work with the airlines to determine specific requirements of the self- tagging kiosk software. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes upgrades to existing kiosks: hardware/software 3. Potential cost includes printers and paper stock Table C-6. Technical assessment. (continued on next page)

Questions for Validation Basis Impact Resulting Action Cost Does airport telecommunications infrastructure meet the requirements for self- tagging, including the necessary capacity, resiliency, redundancy, security, etc.? The airport telecommunications infrastructure must be capable of being extended to the kiosks and bag drop locations. Airports must have adequate telecommunications infrastructure to support the project. The airport should assess the current IT infrastructure, with respect to expected kiosk and bag drop locations. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes changes/additions to the current IT infrastructure If active/inactive tags are required, can the software accommodate this requirement? The host software must support the production of active/inactive bag tags at the self-tagging kiosks and bag drop locations. If host software cannot support, self-tagging with active/inactive tags then self-tagging may not be possible at this airport. The airport should work with airlines to update software to support active/inactive tags. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes airline staff time to change software Can the BRS be used to send baggage sortation messages to identify active and inactive bags, if required? Active/inactive tags must be able to be identified to ensure that inactive tagged bags do not get loaded onto an airplane. If the BRS cannot be used to send BSMs, then the active/inactive process becomes a manual process. The airport should determine if active/inactive tags can be identified using a baggage reconciliation system. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes airline staff time to change software Is more than one DCS in use? Each airline may use its own departure control system. If multiple DCSs are in use at a given airport, then each DCS must support self-tagging from the kiosk and potentially bag drop locations. The airport should work with the airlines to determine specific DCS requirements for self- tagging. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes airline staff time to change software Can the protocols and messages required between the bag drop and the departure control system be supported, including the requirements for active and inactive tags, if required? Airlines are responsible for the DCS and whether or not they can support the protocols and messages required to support bag drop and self- tagging. This is out of the airport's control and could have a major impact on the implementation. The airport should work with the airlines to determine specific DCS requirements for self- tagging. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes airline staff time to change software Are the airlines certified on the CUSS system installed at the airport? There are multiple vendors of CUSS kiosks, and each requires specific certifications. If the airlines are not certified, then they will not have applications that work on the airport's kiosks to support self-tagging. The airport should work with the airlines to determine if this is a requirement. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes airline staff time to change software Can passengers add or remove bags from the self-tagging application? Passengers may make a mistake and put too many or too little bags on during their check- in process. If the system is not flexible enough to allow changes in baggage, then the potential for exception handling will increase. The airport should work with the airlines to determine if this is a requirement. 1. Airport staff and consultant manhours for planning 2. Potential cost includes airline staff time to change software 62 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Table C-6. (Continued).

Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging Get This Book
×
 Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging
Buy Paperback | $55.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Report 41: Guide to the Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating Passenger Self-Tagging provides the information and tools, included on and accompanying CD-ROM, necessary for an airport or airline to determine the appropriateness of pursuing passenger self-tagging should it be allowed in the United States in the future.

The tools, in an Excel Spreadsheet format, allow for the input of airport-specific information, such as facility size and passenger flows, while also providing industry averages to assist those airports and airlines that haven’t yet collected their individual information. The decision-making tools provide both qualitative and quantitative information that can then be used to assess if passenger self-tagging meets organizational needs or fits into their strategic plan.

Appendix A to ACRP 41 was published online as ACRP Web-Only Document 10: Appendix A: Research Documentation for ACRP Report 41.

The CD-ROM included as part of ACRP Report 41 is also available for download from TRB’s website as an ISO image. Links to the ISO image and instructions for burning a CD-ROM from an ISO image are provided below.

Help on Burning an .ISO CD-ROM Image is available online.

Download the .ISO CD-ROM Image.

(Warning: This is a large file that may take some time to download using a high-speed connection.)

A errata for the printed version of this document is available online. The errata material has been incorporated into the electronic version of the document.

View information about the February 9, 2010 TRB Webinar, which featured this report.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!