Airport Biometrics: A Primer (2021)

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.

66 Summary This chapter highlights the role of technology (such as the use of biometrics) in passenger terminal area operations and planning. More specifically, in considering the use of biometrics in process improvements, airport stakeholders are advised to ultimately balance the demand and capacity of a facility to achieve certain operational requirements and the desired level of customer service. The chapter provides a discussion of numerous factors for determining the applicability of biometrics in the airport setting, such as passenger demographics, airport size and geography, and the operational profile (e.g., primarily serving international or domestic traffic). Airports that are capacity constrained in some manner will likely be the early adopters with regard to the use of biometrics given the imperative that any incremental benefit, regardless of magnitude, may offer a meaningful overall improvement. While discussed in more detail within the chapter, critical factors to be considered are: • Would passenger or facility security (e.g., identity assurance and accuracy) be enhanced? • Would a small increase in capacity or level of service be meaningful to the overall experience of the population affected? • Are there reasons besides capacity enhancement and security to implement biometrics, such as the desire to reduce staffing costs or improve the reliability of certain processes? • Are the stakeholders required to implement the changes supportive of the goals? Other questions that airport decision makers may address include: • In what parts of the passenger or employee journey should the use of biometrics be considered? • What are the potential benefits to the airport and associated stakeholders from implementing biometrics? • Given the potential costs associated with making enhancements through the use of biometrics, where will it have the most impact for the least amount of investment? • How are biometrics successfully implemented in an airport environment? • Do the passengers using the airport have a high rate of passport ownership or Trusted Traveler program membership? • Do the airlines wish to implement biometrics at the airport, and who is paying for the up-front costs of capital investment and the ongoing operations and maintenance of the equipment? Airport operators are advised to review the pros and cons of specific biometric imple- mentations to decide whether an implementation is warranted. In most cases, the return on investment (ROI) for the airport operator goes beyond strictly financial considerations for the implementation of biometric solutions. Instead of making decisions based solely on the finan- cial ROI, airports are evaluating several additional considerations such as customer service, airport technology goals, passenger safety, operational efficiency, and competitive concerns. C H A P T E R   4 Planning and Process Considerations

Planning and Process Considerations 67   Introduction: Biometrics Will Disrupt Traditional Airport Planning Terminal planning in the airport environment is ultimately an exercise in balancing between the demand and capacity of a facility to achieve certain operational requirements and the desired level of cus- tomer service. Traditionally, capacity could be gained by adding new processing capability, which often involved physically expanding the size of facilities, with an overview of the different processing steps at an airport shown in Figure 4-1. While these static planning decisions were sometimes easier to make, building expansion requires a significant time and financial investment to implement. These expansions were also often purpose-built to serve a specific need in the terminal such as airline check-in or security screening and could not be repurposed as demand changed. More recently, technology has been integrated into facility planning to increase capacity and improve processes while lessening the need for more expensive and time-consuming expansions. This shift toward technological solutions requires that future terminal design deliver flexi- bility instead of simply physical purpose-built expansion. Technology and innovation have changed and will continue to change how terminals function. Increased throughput at various passenger processing functions, for example, leads to less processing space required. This pro- vides new opportunities to transform unused processing space into more valuable passenger dwell space, preferably airside rather than landside, as was formerly the case with many pre- September 11th terminal designs. Biometrics are one of those recently deployed technological innovations that are influencing the way airport terminals are designed and operated. Biometric use has been a part of everyday life for many years, including in personal banking, building access, smart home devices, hands- free cars, and access control and single sign on. It is not uncommon to use a fingerprint scan to Key Takeaway Technologies such as biometrics are changing how terminals function, requiring that future terminal design delivers flexibility instead of simply physical purpose-built expansion. Figure 4-1. Airport overview of several passenger touchpoints in the departure process.

68 Airport Biometrics: A Primer access a secure building or to use your voice to unlock your car or make a Bluetooth phone call. These concepts are now being expanded in application to airport facilities. As discussed in Chapter 2, there are a number of use cases worldwide and within the United States. Of particular note for the planning of terminal facilities: • An example of recent biometric implementations, which have been driven primarily by airlines, is JetBlue’s first fully integrated biometric self-boarding gate (see Figure 4-2) for use by international flights. Developed in partnership with CBP, JetBlue started trials on select international flights at Boston Logan International Airport (BOS) and Fort Lauderdale– Hollywood International Airport (FLL) in 2017, before permanent installation began at John F. Kennedy International (JFK) in late 2018. • Delta Air Lines’ biometric Terminal F at Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL): In partnership with CBP, this curb-to-gate program uses facial recognition for all Source: JetBlue 2017. Figure 4-2. JetBlue self-boarding process.

Planning and Process Considerations 69   stages of the departure process, from check-in to security access to flight boarding, eliminat- ing the need for passport or boarding-pass verification. • Alaska Airlines’ and Delta Air Lines’ fingerprint access to airline lounges: For those members who opt in, both airlines partner with CLEAR and use fingerprints as a biometric token to grant access to their full network of domestic U.S. airline lounges. These individual implementations of biometrics have proven beneficial to passengers, airlines, and airports and have resulted in reductions in queuing, space required, staffing, and human error. To achieve maximum impact, however, it is important to think about the end-to-end journey. This may provide for the opportunity to reduce disparate terminal processes as well as improve the integrity of operations and the passenger experience. To facilitate this biometric journey, it would be ideal for solutions to be developed with an awareness of trends and standards addressed in Chapter 2 of this primer. As with most technological advances that change the functionality of a process or task, biometrics introduce new considerations for the airport facility. Some examples include the need to understand how to accommodate opt-out passengers, passengers who might require additional support or screening, and the premium passenger experience. Accommodating and troubleshooting passenger match errors, system errors, equipment failure, or other technology down-time scenarios are other new challenges that must be considered as part of the implemen- tation. Privacy concerns also need to be addressed early and incorporated into every aspect of the design and implementation of biometric solutions. It is important to note that airports are different in terms of size, airline market shares, passenger demographics, and the role each plays in the broader aviation system. For example, while the U.S. Department of State (DOS) reports that over 44% of Americans hold a passport, which is a key document for enabling biometrics without additional enrollment requirements, the rates of passport ownership are not consistent from state to state. High-population-density states like California and New Jersey have high rates of passport ownership, while states like Alabama and West Virginia have much lower rates. There is not a one-size-fits-all solution for biometrics implementation in every airport, but this primer is intended to inform airport decision makers on how the use of biometrics is evolving inside and outside the airport landscape and the associated impacts and benefits of biometric implementation at each stage in the passenger and employee journey. Important considerations for evaluating biometrics will be reviewed and used to evaluate potential biometric solutions in individual terminal processes along the passenger journey. Considerations for Evaluating Biometrics in the Airport Environment As with most emerging technologies, implementation of biometrics is a moving target that is constantly evolving and changing. In some airports, biometrics have been deployed or trialed in piecemeal imple- mentations by a diverse set of stakeholders, including CBP, airlines, and ground transportation providers. This reality can make it challenging to consider biometrics in a terminal operational solution because bio- metrics affect critical design decisions and may quickly be rendered obsolete if implementation is not planned properly. To better under- stand whether biometrics should be considered, airport decision makers may ask the following questions: • In what parts of the passenger or employee journey should the use of biometrics be considered? Key Takeaway Biometrics are an evolving and changing technology, so it is important to think about biometric implementations at each terminal process from varying perspectives, including space, security, staffing, and capacity, to evaluate the appropriate use case.

70 Airport Biometrics: A Primer • What are the potential benefits to the airport and associated stakeholders to implementing biometric technology? • Given the potential costs associated with making enhancements through the use of bio- metrics, where will they have the greatest impact for the least amount of investment? • How are biometrics successfully implemented in an airport environment? Since every airport is physically, geographically, and demographically different, it is important to think about biometric implementation at each terminal process in the passenger journey from several perspectives to evaluate the appropriate business case. The following questions have been developed to serve as a checklist when evaluating the business case for a biometric solution. • Who are the stakeholders that are involved with this terminal process? Are they willing to participate with airport management to make an investment of time and attention to enable the improvement to be realized or even piloted? • What are the space implications for a biometric solution? Consideration should be given to the type of furniture and equipment required as well as wayfinding to account for added passenger segmentation, such as non-enrollers, premium passengers, and mobility-impaired passengers. • Does the biometric solution reduce staffing expenditures and, if so, for which stakeholders? • Are there customer service benefits to the biometric solution, such as increased airside dwell time or fewer touchpoints? • Can a biometric solution improve the security or reliability of certain processes? • Does the biometric solution increase the capacity of the terminal to accommodate more passengers at improved levels of service? • Are the benefits of biometric solutions offset by the associated costs that are allocated to the affected airport stakeholder? • Are there governmental, regulatory, or other external considerations that necessitate a bio- metric implementation? This primer explores the opportunities and implications of implementing biometric tech- nology at each major terminal process in the passenger journey to provide a comprehensive understanding around these considerations. Applying Biometrics in Terminal Processes The airport terminal contains several functional areas that sup- port departing and arriving passengers in their journeys as well as the employees that work at the airport. The functional areas evaluated for biometrics in this primer are check-in, health screening verifica- tion, security checkpoint access, employee access and screening, air- line lounges, concessions and retail spaces, self-boarding, immigration and customs, baggage claim, and ground transportation facilities and modes. The applicability of biometrics for each of these functional areas is summarized in Table 4-1. Biometrics for Airline Check-In The airline check-in process can be disjointed since some parts of the process may occur remotely from the airport (e.g., at home or work) while others may occur inside the terminal. Additionally, unlike many terminal functions, check-in differs by airline and passenger profile (e.g., need to check a bag, obtain a boarding pass). The four primary check-in processes can be Key Takeaway Biometrics can play a role in almost all terminal processes, and in many cases, already does. This section identifies the stakeholders, space and capacity implications, and other benefits of biometric implementations at each terminal process in the passenger journey.

Terminal Process Can Biometrics Play a Role? How Are Biometrics Currently Accounted for or Potentially Accounted for? Stakeholders Space and Capacity Benefits Other Benefits (e.g., staffing, security, customer service) Check-in Yes, now Two models are being employed: ● Remote biometric enrollment – passenger arrives at the airport ready to fly as the biometric token is already created and is recognized at each check-in stage ● On-airport biometric enrollment – passenger has not enrolled in the biometric seamless journey in advance so enrollment must occur at kiosk or other check-in touchpoint Passengers, airport, airlines, government agencies (e.g., CBP) ● Remote biometric enrollment reduces requirements for check-in facilities in the lobby by shortening the processing times. ● On-airport biometric enrollment does not reduce processing time at enrollment touchpoint but does at all check-in touchpoints downstream. ● Spatial implications have to be analyzed case by case based on passenger mix and check-in channel distributions. ● Reduces airline staff, but reductions may be higher in some cases than others ● Enhanced passenger experience ● Shorter processing times at the airport (in most cases) ● Enhanced security with more accurate ID matching ● Postponement of capital investment in capacity enhancement Health screening verification Yes, future for integration with biometrics ● Programs in development to collect health information on passengers, with potential to leverage biometrics ● VeriFLY (see Case Study 2 in Chapter 2) passengers enroll their facial biometric and confirm their health status to receive personalized processing; potential to connect to passenger health records ● Airports and airlines providing medical testing resources in airport facilities Passenger, airport, airlines, government agencies, medical labs Smaller facilities dedicated to health screening are required if passengers are prescreened and approved. ● Reduced burden for health screening to occur on airport ● Enhanced passenger experience ● Reduced curb-to-gate time for passengers who do not require manual health check to be performed ● Enhanced verification process and increased accuracy Table 4-1. Considerations for processing of passengers and employees. (continued on next page)

Terminal Process Can Biometrics Play a Role? How Are Biometrics Currently Accounted for or Potentially Accounted for? Stakeholders Space and Capacity Benefits Other Benefits (e.g., staffing, security, customer service) Airline lounges Yes, now ● Airlines (Delta, Alaska) partner with CLEAR to use fingerprint biometric to validate lounge access. ● Third-party operators like American Express are getting closer to biometric implementation by using QR code but still require physical ID check. ● Lounge access could be incorporated in the seamless journey using single biometric token. Airlines or third-party lounge operators, passengers Negligible ● Reduces airline or third-party lounge staff ● Faster check-in process, no need to provide membership cards and IDs ● Enhanced verification process and increased accuracy Employee access/ screening Yes, now ● Biometric access control is already in place through SIDA badging. ● Programs like VeriFLY expand employee screening facilities to members of traveling party using biometric token. Airport, employees, DAC vendor services Negligible, though some space savings possible if programs like VeriFLY can divert some traveling employees to other facilities ● Additional staff reduction if biometric access is extended to additional access points ● Enhanced security with more accurate ID matching Security checkpoint access Yes, now ● Biometric token used to verify ID at travel document checker, prior to entering screening lane, as modeled at ATL Terminal F ● Pre-enrollment programs such as CLEAR and VeriFLY provide expedited access through checkpoint queue. ● Checkpoint access could be incorporated in the seamless journey using single biometric token. Passengers, airport, government agencies (CBP and TSA) ● Processing times will be reduced, resulting in fewer access points required, but flow will still be metered by the checkpoint lanes themselves. ● Queue area could potentially be reduced. ● Reduced security staffing ● Enhanced passenger experience (seamless and touchless) ● Enhanced security with more accurate ID matching Table 4-1. (Continued).

Self-boarding Yes, now ● Biometric boarding currently for international flights with both U.S. and foreign-flag airlines ● E-gate or camera-on-a-stick approach to validating credentials ● Location of gate podium, security around boarding door, and electrical connections require consideration. Airports, airlines, passengers, government agencies (CBP) ● Could require more space than the traditional boarding to account for exception processing and mobility considerations as well as barriers to prevent passengers from bypassing. ● Faster boarding process could reduce space required for queue (9 minutes saved on wide-body boarding). ● Reduces airline staff required for a flight departure, allowing them to focus on customer-service issues ● Faster boarding times allow passengers to spend more time relaxing or spending money in the terminal. ● Turning aircraft more quickly could allow for gates to be available for additional flights. ● Enhanced verification process and security Immigration and customs Yes, now ● CBP Simplified Arrivals process uses photographs to match against biometric token to complete passenger inspection. ● Traditional static booths can transition to podia and potentially to mobile units. ● Trusted traveler programs such as Global Entry and NEXUS process low-risk travelers using biometrics. Airports, airlines, governmental agencies (CBP), passengers ● Shift from kiosks and counters to podia and mobile units will decrease overall size of immigration halls. ● Increased capacity expected since CBP can clear arriving flights an average of nearly 12 minutes faster than through using traditional processing methods. ● Secondary screening area for customs is still required. ● Staff spend less time on low-risk passengers and more time on higher- risk ones; could present staff savings. ● Faster processing time for passengers, especially those who are low risk ● Enhanced passenger experience (seamless and touchless) ● Standardized process with increased identity assurance and accuracy that reduces the imposter threat Concessions/ retail Yes, future for integration with biometrics ● Amazon Just Walk Out technology is shifting from supermarket application to airport application. ● Payments and remote ordering or delivery-to-gate apps can be expanded to include biometric token. ● Lines blurred between concession areas and holdrooms Airports, passengers, concessionaires ● Ability to create more open-space concessions not bound by physical barriers ● More shared common space between airside terminal functions could reduce overall space needs. ● Reduces concessionaire staffing ● Seamless shopping without having to queue at checkout; fewer touchpoints ● Better tracking of food/retail purchase trends ● Push coupons or advertising based on traveler behavior (continued on next page)

Terminal Process Can Biometrics Play a Role? How Are Biometrics Currently Accounted for or Potentially Accounted for? Stakeholders Space and Capacity Benefits Other Benefits (e.g., staffing, security, customer service) Baggage claim Maybe, but benefits may not outweigh capital costs ● Matching passengers with bags upon arrival has traditionally been a manual process. ● A passenger’s biometric token would be required to call for the specific bag to be delivered to bag claim, requiring replacement of traditional claim units with more of a baggage storage and recall system. ● A less-intensive biometric implementation could simply identify stolen or mismatched bags. Airport, airlines, passengers ● Incorporating biometrics could require significant physical modifications that may replace the area currently allocated to baggage-claim belts. ● Batching of arriving passengers may drive up requirements for bag retrieval points in baggage claim. ● Staffing at bag claim is not significant (bag service counter, tug operator, bag porters), so minimal savings are expected. ● Improves the security of the process because it is less likely for passengers to take the wrong bag or for bags to be stolen, but these percentages are likely fairly low. Ground transportation Yes, with more integration possible ● Hertz partnership with CLEAR to expedite vehicle rental process trialed ● Biometric token could be used to bypass transit ticket purchase or eliminate pay gates in an on-airport parking facility, expanding beyond toll tags. Airport, passengers, concessionaires (rental cars, parking, transportation network companies, transit operators) ● Smaller footprint for passenger processing in ticket lobbies ● Reduced size exit plazas at parking and rental car facilities ● Staff reduction at parking exit plazas, for example ● Faster and enhanced (touchless) passenger processing ● Enhanced verification process and increased accuracy Table 4-1. (Continued).

Planning and Process Considerations 75   summarized as (1) online/remote check-in, (2) self-service kiosk, (3) self-service bag drop, and (4) full-service counter. Biometrics can streamline this complex, multistep process while pro- viding a faster and more secure experience for passengers (see Figure 4-3). Currently, there are two high-level scenarios for enabling a biometrics component to improve the check-in process: remote biometric enrollment and on-airport biometric enrollment. Under the remote scenario, biometric check-in begins at home with online check-in. At Delta Air Lines’ biometric check-in for international departures from ATL, for example, passengers confirm their passport information remotely during online check-in (see Figure 4-4). This enables the passenger to be ready to fly on arrival at the airport. The passenger can approach a self-service kiosk at the airport and be immediately recognized, so boarding passes and checked baggage tags can be seamlessly obtained without interaction with airline customer service representatives and without the presentation of any documentation. The biometric token is used again when passengers drop their bags at baggage drop. Under the on-airport scenario, for passengers who did not check in online to confirm their biometric token, the passport can be scanned at the self-service kiosk, and the passengers can continue the biometric check-in experience from that point forward. This process requires a longer trans- action time at the self-service kiosk, however, to account for the document verification process. At any step in the check-in journey, passengers can opt out of the biometric check-in process and continue to use the self-service kiosks and counter bag drops using the traditional process. The traditional process at check-in involves physical interaction with airline customer service rep- resentatives to verify identification rather than the use of biometrics to obviate the need for such interaction. While biometric check-in in the United States has predominantly been applied to international flights because of the use of passport data as the biometric check, developments to allow bio- metrics for domestic flights are underway. Delta Air Lines is trialing curb-to-gate biometrics for domestic passengers at Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW). Passengers with a passport and Known Traveler Number from enrollment in Global Entry or TSA PreCheck can store these identification documents in their SkyMiles profile and opt in at check-in on the Delta mobile app. Delta is not planning to save the biometric data used. This trial is limited in scope since only domestic passengers who have both a passport and Known Traveler Number can participate. Figure 4-3. Traditional check-in (left) and modernized check-in (right).

76 Airport Biometrics: A Primer The use of biometrics for domestic flights on a larger scale without a separate enrollment process would likely require access to additional databases of biometric information (such as state-issued drivers’ licenses) to be able to make the facial biometric match. Leveraging drivers’ license data could expand the numbers of stakeholders, which currently include passengers, the airport, airlines, and government agencies (e.g., CBP, TSA), to include state agencies as well. There are three primary benefits that could accrue though the use of biometrics in the check-in process: 1. Biometric use at terminal check-in can reduce the space required for the queuing of passengers. There are benefits to both remote biometric enrollment and on-airport biometric enrollment for check-in, but remote biometric enrollment provides the most benefit to the overall check-in process because it affects more steps in the process. Reduced transaction times at kiosks, bag drops, and counters should reduce the overall space requirements to accommodate these processors in the check-in lobby. Even if passengers need to register their biometric on-airport at the kiosk, the remaining downstream processors can benefit from reduced transaction times. Regardless of the scenario, the spatial requirement of the check-in hall should decrease, which can postpone costly capital expansion or reconfiguration of facilities. 2. Biometric use at terminal check-in can reduce the number of staff in the check-in area. From a staffing perspective, biometrics in the check-in lobby should reduce airline staffing requirements. While some airline agents would still be required to roam the lobby and assist passengers who require exception handling, the number of passengers requiring direct agent interaction should be reduced. For passengers, the shorter processing times at the airport provide for an enhanced customer experience and reduced stress. In severely congested terminals, airports may also be able to reduce operational staff that are deployed to manage overflowing passenger queues. 3. Reducing the reliance on human interactions in the form of ID checks can create enhanced security for all users by providing for more accurate identification matching. Source: Van Wert 2018. Figure 4-4. Biometric check-in kiosk at ATL Terminal F.

Planning and Process Considerations 77   Biometrics and Health Screening Health screening has received heightened attention given the COVID-19 pandemic, and bio- metrics can play a role in this emerging function. While solutions are in early development, health screening now plays a role in the passenger travel experience. Currently, most U.S. airlines ask passengers to self-certify their health status during the check-in process. This process involves answering a few questions on the airline mobile phone application or at the check-in counter. While not time-intensive, this self-certification does take longer and depends, without external verification, on the passenger providing accurate and honest responses. As the process of health screening is better understood and more widely adopted, it is reasonable to assume that bio- metrics will eventually contribute to the process (see Figure 4-5). Programs such as VeriFLY at Denver International Airport (see Figure 4-6) have taken the first step of identifying passengers who are willing to enroll. The program uses their facial Figure 4-5. Health screening touchpoint that may leverage biometrics. Source: Denver International Airport 2020. Figure 4-6. VeriFLY e-gate access to security queue.

78 Airport Biometrics: A Primer biometric template and enables confirmation of their health status on the day of travel to receive security screening and concourse train access isolated from the general traveling public. Future capabilities of VeriFLY could include a connection to a passenger’s health records to confirm testing certifications or vaccinations required to travel to certain destinations. Airports and airlines are also beginning to provide medical testing resources as well. As these solutions continue to evolve, biometrics could be used to link these results to passengers’ profiles to allow them access to security or to board the aircraft. Benefits in the area of staffing levels or terminal space are difficult to estimate because they would vary on the specifics of the implementation and the unique circumstances, but it is anticipated that biometrics may reduce the burden for health screening to occur on the airport since passenger records could be made available more easily through a biometric token. One potential benefit in times of severe outbreaks would be the ability to determine a passenger’s identity through technological interfaces rather than through interaction with airport or air- line personnel. Biometrics and Security Checkpoint Access Biometrics are currently being used to enable priority security checkpoint access by low- risk passengers to enhance the overall customer experience. Biometrics are deployed prior to the security checkpoint to verify a passenger’s identification and acceptance into security screening (see Figure 4-7). In some cases, programs like CLEAR or VeriFLY go a step further and allow enrolled low-risk passengers to use their biometric token to bypass the queue and reach the checkpoint faster than other passengers. As with upstream processes such as check-in, biometric identification of passengers that are not part of a membership program such as CLEAR is currently limited to international departures and domestic trusted travelers. Expan- sion to additional domestic passengers is under development and is a TSA goal, as stated in its September 2018 TSA Biometrics Roadmap: For Aviation Security and the Passenger Experience (TSA 2018b). TSA and CBP have developed proofs of concept to explore expanded use of the TVS at the security checkpoint through data integration between the TVS and TSA Secure Flight. Additionally, in September 2018, TSA began collecting photos of travelers who renewed in person or were enrolling in TSA PreCheck for the first time. As an initial step, in 2020, Figure 4-7. Security checkpoint touchpoint that may leverage biometrics.

Planning and Process Considerations 79   TSA piloted a touchless self-service technology at the checkpoint to match a traveler’s real-time photo with the photo on their government-issued identification. These photographs are not being stored and are only used for identity verification. Expanding to a larger pool of domestic passengers without requiring a separate enrollment process requires additional coordination and access to a biometric database larger than federally issued passports, such as state-issued drivers’ licenses. Notably, the emergence of REAL ID, on its own, does not create a centralized database that enables the ability to match a person to their biometric data; rather, the purpose of REAL ID is to make identity documents more consistent and secure. Stakeholders involved in the use of biometrics at security screening include the airport, passengers, TSA, and any governmental agencies that may be required to verify identification for entry/exit purposes (e.g., CBP). The benefits of deploying biometrics at the entry to security are primarily security driven and include: • There is enhanced security and more accurate identification matching from biometrics than from manual review of a photo ID. • Biometrics also reduce touchpoints to create a more seamless process and one that should verify a passenger’s identity in less time. • The number of staff required to verify passenger identification and documents may also be reduced because of the increased throughput. The increased throughput generated from reduced transaction times at ID check, however, is still metered by the capacity of the security checkpoint lanes themselves, so close coordination is required to ensure that the screening lanes are providing sufficient capacity to avoid queues between ID check and the lanes themselves. As a result, there may be limited space savings in the terminal. Biometrics and Employee Access and Screening Biometrics are already in place for employees working in an airport environment. All employees who are allowed access to the secured areas of an airport must be approved for a SIDA badge. While these badges are issued by the airport and require employees to meet certain TSA requirements, additional identification verification is required to prove the person’s identity. In addition, fingerprints are taken as part of background checks. Telos ID and the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), through the Trans- portation Security Clearinghouse, handle the biometric background checks for aviation workers at many airports. As of 2015, AAAE had processed more than 15.6 million fingerprint-based criminal history records and 6.8 million STAs (AAAE n.d.). Doors and access points in the airport environment are controlled in several ways, depending on access purpose. Some access points, such as passenger boarding bridges, may require a badge scan and a multi-digit access code to allow for non-domicile airline crew to access. Others, however, may require a badge scan plus fingerprints or iris scan to gain entry, especially between non-secure and secured areas of the airport. Given that airports are accustomed to rolling out access control for employees, operators may wish to trial equipment and processes associated with biometrics for enhanced employee access points. For one, the privacy concerns of passengers are different from those associated with employees who undergo background checks and documentation for the purposes of obtaining an airport badge. Secondly, airport operators can observe the performance of the equipment and the enhanced process to address (1) whether the enhanced process is faster, and if so, how much faster, (2) what the equipment’s performance is in terms of maintenance, (3) what the backup process is when equipment fails, and (4) what process exceptions must be addressed. Finally,

80 Airport Biometrics: A Primer if airports are to gather biometric data beyond that already on file, airports will have a trial experience for a smaller population with respect to how much effort will go into enrollment, in terms of labor, equipment, and space requirements. Biometrics and Airline Club Lounges Biometrics have long been used by airlines to provide access to a smaller subset of passengers who use airline club lounges (see Figure 4-8). Starting in 2014, Alaska Airlines trialed opt-in fingerprint scanning to provide access to passengers at the airline’s four Board Room airport lounges. In mid-2017, Delta Air Lines introduced biometric check-in for Delta Sky Club guests with CLEAR memberships at its Ronald Reagan Washington National (DCA) Sky Club (see Figure 4-9). The biometric check-in option rolled out to all 50 U.S. Sky Club locations in Figure 4-8. Airline lounge touchpoint that may leverage biometrics. Source: Future Travel Experience 2018. Figure 4-9. Delta Sky Club fingerprint access scanner.

Planning and Process Considerations 81   early 2018 and is free for Delta Sky Club members who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents (those who are not already paying members of CLEAR). Other lounge providers have taken steps toward biometric access. These steps include providing QR codes as part of the access credential; however, a positive ID check is currently still required. Lounge access could eventu- ally be incorporated into the biometric seamless journey, where one biometric token is used to verify access, including for lounge entry. Lounges are unique compared to other terminal functional areas in that they affect a smaller number of passengers and are largely controlled by an airline or third-party operator. The stakeholders involved in the biometric deployment are primarily passengers, airlines, or third- party lounge operators. Unlike in other terminal functional areas, biometrics applied to the airline lounge environment are not likely to reduce the space required. There may be a staff savings, but this would only apply to the airline or lounge operator. Passengers benefit from the use of biometrics at lounge check-in. The process is faster and does not require the passenger to produce an ID or membership card. Additionally, this provides an enhanced verification process and reduces any potential membership errors. Biometrics and Airport Concessions and Retail Biometrics have not yet been integrated into the airport concessions and retail environment and do not currently play a large role in this area. While self-checkout and app delivery services have been introduced in the airport environment, these services have not yet been tied to a biometric token. In Schiphol Plaza, located at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (AMS), Dutch supermarket chain Albert Heijn trialed a digital store accessed by customers with their contact- less debit card. A future step could involve adding a biometric token to increase security and further expand mobile payments. Additionally, technologies, such as that used in Amazon Go convenience stores, are being made available for adaptation to other environments. For example, the Just Walk Out technology could shift from a supermarket application to an airport retail environment. As with Amazon Go stores, access could be controlled at an e-gate to restrict those travelers who do not have the biometric token (see Figure 4-10). Figure 4-10. Concession and retail stores that may leverage biometrics.

82 Airport Biometrics: A Primer Additionally, third-party programs such as CLEAR have been using biometrics at conces- sion stands in baseball and football stadiums. In Seattle, for example, fans can link their driver’s license and a credit card to their CLEAR account and use their fingerprint to purchase food and drinks. At Citi Field in New York, concession items are placed on a self-checkout unit where they are scanned and charged to the CLEAR account associated with the fingerprint. The primary stakeholders for integrating biometrics into concession and retail areas are passengers, concessionaires, and the airport. Removing traditional cashier positions and payment systems provides the ability to break down many of the physical barriers separating concession spaces from other functional areas like the holdroom to create a more open-space and open-flow concept. Biometric payment systems would also reduce the staffing needs of the concessionaire and allow employees to focus their time assisting customers. As has been seen in Amazon Go convenience stores, a seamless, touchless shopping experience reduces queues, reduces stress, and increases the time pas- sengers have available to spend money before departure. Biometrics and Self-Boarding Self-boarding has been using biometrics for several years, and its deployment may be accelerated. In recent years, biometrics have been applied to the aircraft boarding process with a focus on international departing flights. American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and JetBlue are among the U.S.-based airlines using biometric boarding for international departures. In addi- tion, there has been participation by foreign-flag carriers such as British Airways and Lufthansa. There are two primary biometric boarding systems being used at U.S. airports: (1) e-gates and (2) camera-on-a-stick. In both models, passengers walk up to a camera, where their photo is compared against the biometric templates of other passengers on the flight. No passport or boarding pass is required. Once a match is made, either the e-gate opens, or an airline gate agent allows the passenger to board (see Figure 4-11). If a passenger chooses to opt out or if there is an error in the matching, the passenger must see an airline gate agent for manual processing of the boarding pass and passport. Figure 4-11. Boarding gates may leverage biometrics.

Planning and Process Considerations 83   It is important to understand these two self-boarding systems as they relate to exclusive- use and common-use terminal systems. Many airlines prefer to use their own equipment and have exclusive connections to their departure control systems (DCSs), limiting access to other airlines. Common-use facilities require connections to multiple DCSs and must accommodate different airline operating procedures. For the e-gates installed at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Tom Bradley International Terminal (see Figure 4-12), a common-use facility, airlines are enabling use of the system on an individual basis. While installation of the e-gates was funded by the airport authority as part of a terminal capital project, planned recovery of full projects costs would occur through landing fees, terminal rates and charges, and other non-aeronautical revenues. As a result of the extra equipment required to accommodate biometric boarding, the loca- tion of the customer service podium may need to be relocated to ensure that there is sufficient clearance around the boarding door for the camera podium and possibly the e-gate. Electrical connections are also required in this area, although some may exist already to accommodate the boarding-pass scanner and agent computer. If e-gates are used as the preferred process, additional factors require consideration, including providing an Americans with Disabilities Act–compliant lane as well as barriers to prevent passengers from bypassing the e-gate. Participation by several stakeholders is required to successfully implement biometric boarding: the airport, airlines, passengers, and CBP in the case of international departing flights. There are three primary benefits that could accrue through the use of biometrics at boarding: • Biometric boarding can improve the passenger experience and enhance security. Passengers are provided with a touchless experience without the need to present identification or boarding passes. There is also the added level of security and safety in ensuring that the correct passengers are boarding the aircraft. • Biometric boarding can help airports with constrained gate facilities. According to initial feedback from Delta Air Lines, biometric boarding reduced each passenger’s boarding time by 2 seconds, which resulted in 9 minutes of savings for a wide-body aircraft. For Lufthansa, its trials showed that 350 passengers could be boarded onto an Airbus A380 in 20 minutes. Reducing aircraft ground time and gate occupancy time could allow for additional flights to be accommodated at airports with constrained facilities. • Biometric boarding can reduce holdroom congestion. Faster aircraft boarding times could reduce the space required for passenger queuing inside the holdroom, allowing that space to be used for seating or other purposes. Source: Vision-Box Pressroom 2018. Figure 4-12. Self-boarding lanes at LAX TBIT.

84 Airport Biometrics: A Primer Biometrics and Immigration and Customs CBP has been a recent model for biometric adaptation through Simplified Arrival and Trusted Traveler programs (see Figure 4-13). At the time of this writing, over 50 million passengers have been processed on entry to the United States through what CBP refers to as the “Simplified Arrival” process. Using an airline manifest and a cloud-based matching service, CBP retrieves existing traveler images from government records and builds a photo gallery of expected travelers prior to a flight’s arrival. As arriving passengers approach the primary inspection booth, CBP takes a photo of each traveler and compares it against the pre-assembled gallery to find a match. With a match, the CBP officer can complete the inspection in a few seconds. If a match cannot be made, the CBP officer reverts to the original process and manually inspects the passenger’s travel documents. Biometrics are also currently implemented as part of Global Entry, NEXUS, and other CBP trusted traveler programs as a way of processing low-risk travelers to the United States. Recent updates to Global Entry have created a more streamlined process where, in addition to shifting from fingerprint to facial biometrics, the typical customs-related questions put to passengers have been eliminated. The primary stakeholders for biometric implementation at immigration and customs are the airport, airlines, passengers, and CBP. There are three primary benefits that could accrue though CBP’s use of biometrics: • Integrating biometrics into the immigration process will reduce the spatial needs within the terminal. Large, fixed immigration booths organized in a linear fashion can be replaced by smaller podia and eventually by mobile units. These touchpoints can shrink in size over time since less of the passenger processing will need to occur at the booth or podia. • Biometrics increase throughput capacity and reduce passenger processing time. Under Simplified Arrival, CBP can clear arriving flights an average of nearly 12 minutes faster than using the traditional manual processing methods. In addition to the savings generated by Simplified Arrival, CBP says the new Global Entry kiosks have reduced the processing time of eligible passengers by nearly 90%, from 45 seconds to less than 6 seconds. Passengers benefit from faster processing times and an increased touchless experience. Figure 4-13. CBP leveraging biometrics.

Planning and Process Considerations 85   • CBP offices can spend more time on higher-risk passengers. Shifting away from the longer manual process allows CBP officers to refocus their time from low-risk passengers to higher- risk passengers. This streamlines the passport check process and provides a safety and security benefit because there is reduced risk of the imposter threat and increased identity assurance. These efficiencies may provide a staffing benefit to CBP as it can be more efficient in its resourcing. The model CBP used for biometrics could serve as a basis for identity verification for TSA. Several airports already have systems deployed to use CBP’s model to facilitate touchless identity checks through security screening checkpoints. Biometrics in Baggage Claim Biometrics in baggage claim (see Figure 4-14) will require the largest structural modification to the arrival process. Reuniting passengers with their checked baggage has remained a largely manual process, requiring passengers to self-identify their bags from a wide selection on an arriving flight. This honor-system process has traditionally been validated, when necessary, by matching the serial number on the bag tag against the passenger’s receipt. For biometrics to be integrated into the baggage-claim process, a passenger’s biometric token would be required to call for the specific bag to be delivered. This would likely require the replacement of traditional sloped- or flat-plate baggage-claim units with something resembling more of a back-of-house baggage storage or locker system. Bags would be retrieved one at a time once called for using the passenger’s biometric token. While the elimination of baggage-claim belts would free up space in baggage claim, this space would possibly be replaced by the infrastructure required for baggage storage and retrieval systems. Passengers on arriving flights tend to approach baggage claim in a short time distribution, potentially driving up the baggage claim retrieval requirement. Stakeholders that might consider a biometric implementation at baggage claim are the airport, passengers, and airlines or their ground handlers. Unlike many other functional areas in the airport, incorporating biometrics would require significant physical modifications, so increased coordination among stakeholders would be required to ensure a successful deployment. Biometrics would improve the security of the baggage retrieval process because there would be fewer opportunities for bags to be stolen or picked up by mistake. Staff savings would not be Figure 4-14. Baggage reclaim leveraging biometrics for self-service.

86 Airport Biometrics: A Primer expected to be significant since the baggage-claim process is generally less staff-intensive than other functional areas. Staff would still be required at the baggage service desk as tug operators and bag porters. Given that the number of bags stolen or lost in baggage claim is relatively low, and limited airline resources are available at baggage claim, the true benefits of implementing a full biometric reclaim process may not outweigh the costs of added security patrols and the airline liability associated with baggage replacement. A less-intensive implementation of biometrics in the baggage-claim area could focus pri- marily on identifying bag thefts or mismatched bags as opposed to ensuring that the chain of custody between the bag and the passenger is maintained. Biometric readers and bag-tag scanners installed at the baggage-claim exits could be used to confirm that a bag that is claimed from the belt belongs to its owner. This concept would have significantly less capital cost and require less modification to the facility but would not completely ensure that the passenger receives the correct bag; it would simply identify mismatched or stolen bags. Facility modifica- tions could include creating a controlled access to the baggage-claim area and ensuring that bags are scanned when leaving the baggage-claim area. The cost of the biometric implementation would have to be weighed against the liability incurred with lost or stolen bags. Biometrics and Ground Transportation Ground transportation biometrics are being trialed using some modes such as rental cars and rail (see Figure 4-15). Ground transportation is the first and last stage in the airport passenger journey. Residents may use on-airport parking facilities, for example, while visi- tors may rent a car. Biometrics have had limited use in airport ground transportation. The most prominent example is in the rental car industry. At the end of 2018, Hertz announced a partnership with CLEAR to launch “Hertz Fast Lane powered by CLEAR” (see Figure 4-16), a service that used biometrics to speed up the car rental and exit process to get customers on the road in 30 seconds or less. Customers used their facial biometric to confirm iden- tity instead of showing the exit booth employee a driver’s license. This was the first use of biometrics by a major rental car company. The program was expanded to several airports, but in July 2020, due to the Hertz bankruptcy, it was announced that the program would be discontinued. Figure 4-15. Ground transportation touchpoints leveraging biometrics.

Planning and Process Considerations 87   It is anticipated that biometric tokens will soon allow passengers to pay for other ground transportation services such as parking transactions as well as train tickets. Biometric trials for train ticket checks and border exit processes are expected to start in March 2021 on the Eurostar departures from London St. Pancras. Biometrics could be expanded to parking facili- ties to allow passengers to pay for parking transactions without needing to stop at a pay station or pay gate. Stakeholders would include passengers, the airport, ground transportation operators and concessionaires (e.g., parking concessionaire, transportation network companies, rental car companies), as well as local transit agencies (e.g., bus, rail). Applying biometrics to ground transportation modes is not anticipated to provide a signifi- cant space savings, although the need for ticket lobbies could be reduced. The primary benefit would be felt by passengers, who would experience a faster, touchless, and more automated experience. Evaluation of Biometric Implementations in the Airport Environment Biometrics can be applied to several functional areas in the terminal and throughout the airport, but airport decision makers must decide if there is a strong business case to move forward with a biometric solu- tion and how to best accomplish it. One way to evaluate these ques- tions is to understand where biometrics provide the greatest impact and if there are trade-offs. As discussed, biometrics should be treated as an emerging technology that is a moving target and constantly evolving. Biometrics are a leading- edge technology in that: • There is not a complete U.S. database of biometrics since eligible passengers are currently limited to those with passports and Trusted Traveler program participation. • There is a patchwork of laws that must be navigated governing the collection and use of biometric data, adding to the complexity. • Biometrics are moving toward multi-stakeholder solutions, with the potential for future use cases to be added over time. Key Takeaway For airport decision makers, establishing a strong business case for biometrics is likely to extend beyond financial considerations to include customer service, airport technology goals, passenger safety, operational efficiency, and competitive concerns. Source: Corum 2019. Figure 4-16. Hertz Fast Lane exit.

88 Airport Biometrics: A Primer Since every airport is unique, biometric implementations that work at some airports may not be viable at others. What works at an airport could depend on several factors, including passenger demographics, airport size and geography, and the airport’s operational profile (e.g., primarily serving international or domestic traffic). Airports that are capacity constrained in some manner will likely be the early adopters of biometrics given the imperative that any incremental benefit, regardless of magnitude, may offer a meaningful overall improvement. Important factors to be considered are: • Would passenger or facility security (e.g., identity assurance and accuracy) be enhanced? • Would a small increase in capacity or level of service be meaningful to the overall experience of the population affected? • Are there reasons besides capacity enhancement and security to implement biometrics, such as the desire to reduce staffing costs or improve the reliability of certain processes? • Are the stakeholders required to implement the changes supportive of the goals? The most mature uses of biometrics at the airport involve (1) airport employees (e.g., access to secured areas), (2) self-boarding of international flights, and (3) the international passenger arrivals process (e.g., CBP’s Simplified Arrivals); these models are the most mature in that they have proven to provide greater benefits than other uses have. Many of these successful implementations have also been driven by airport stakeholders such as airlines and CBP rather than the airport operator. Accordingly, management seeking to implement changes at airport facilities may place a greater emphasis on these areas to derive the greatest benefits. Additionally, some airport operators may choose to simply participate in biometrics implementation rather than drive implementation because CBP, TSA, and the airlines control many of the facilities in the passenger terminal that would be affected by biometrics, and these stakeholders can access passenger biometric data via CBP/TVS and build an enrolled population of passengers more easily than airports can. In most cases, the ROI for the airport operator goes beyond strictly financial considerations for the implementation of biometric solutions. Instead of making decisions based solely on the financial ROI, airports are evaluating several additional considerations, such as customer service, airport technology goals, passenger safety, operational efficiency, and competitive concerns. To better understand these considerations, airport operators may consider the questions discussed in the following when evaluating implementation of a biometrics solution. Do the passengers using your airport have a high rate of passport ownership or Trusted Traveler program membership? Airports with high passport and Trusted Traveler program participation rates provide a significant population of passengers immediately eligible to par- ticipate in biometric programs. Further, no additional enrollment process is required for these passengers because the database of biometric data has already been developed and is being maintained. Airports with lower passport and Trusted Traveler participation can still consider biometrics, but operators should consider that an extensive effort to enroll the passenger popu- lation will be required. This is an important consideration for some states and may have a major impact on the ability of TSA or self-bag-drop processing (where biometrics are required) to use the TVS. If an airport operator cannot leverage the existing TVS, the case for a positive overall ROI will be more challenging since more labor, more space in the passenger terminal, and increased marketing of the program by the airport would likely be required. Do the airlines wish to implement biometrics at your airport, and who is paying for the up-front capital investment and the ongoing operations and maintenance of the equipment? In some instances, airlines may be willing to fund biometric implementations, including paying for new equipment, operations, and maintenance, thereby reducing the financial burden on

Planning and Process Considerations 89   the airport operator. If airlines are not willing to participate in the funding of the program, or if the potential biometric implementation occurs in a common-use facility, the ROI calculation is dramatically different. For example, if an airline wants to install biometric boarding at the gate, the airport may have to pay for the electrical infrastructure to enable the automated boarding gate equipment installation. If there are costs borne by the airport on either the capital or operations and management side, this should be a considered as part of the decision for implementation. Do biometrics significantly reduce processing time, staffing, or space needs? Labor savings may not directly accrue to the airport operator, but savings to airport stakeholders such as the airlines, TSA, or CBP can indirectly benefit the airport operator. A lower cost structure for airlines affects their decisions on whether to introduce additional service or, in more challenging economic circumstances, maintain existing service. In terms of customer service, reduced processing times improve the passenger experience and decrease passenger stress levels. Calm passengers who have additional free time beyond the security checkpoint have been shown to spend more money at airport concession offerings. Finally, if significant reductions in space would accrue as a result of biometrics implementation, the airport operator may be able to defer capacity expansion plans or lease newly available space to interested tenants. As discussed in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, biometric interoperability may provide for most gains in capacity and reductions in space needs. A biometric solution that is applicable to multiple processes along the passenger journey multiplies the benefits, however small they might be individually. Airport operators should review the pros and cons of specific biometric implementations to decide whether implementation is warranted. A graphical example of such a comparison is provided in Figure 4-17 for biometric self-boarding gates. Five dimensions for ROI calculations are advanced that can help assess the overall benefits of costs of biometric implementation. As described earlier, implementation of biometric self-boarding at the gate has been shown to reduce aircraft boarding time, which provides benefits to the airlines, since time is money, and also the airport, since expensive gate expansion projects might be deferred. Some airline customer-service staff savings are anticipated, or at a minimum, the reallocation of staff to serve other customer needs may be enabled. Depending on whether self-boarding is implemented in an exclusive-use or common-use facility, stakeholder involvement may be limited to one airline or may involve several airlines. The space required for self-boarding may increase, especially if e-gates are used, since additional space may be required to handle passenger exceptions. How- ever, the faster boarding times may reduce passenger queue length in the holdroom, providing needed space for other functions (e.g., increased seating or standing space). Finally, regardless of whether e-gates or camera-on-a-stick is selected as the preferred implementation, the equip- ment is largely fixed, which means that it is not easily moved during changes in facility layout or facility modifications. Source: InterVISTAS Consulting, Inc. Time Savings Low High Stakeholder Involvement High Low Equipment Fixed Mobile Space Savings Low High Staffing Savings (to airlines) Low High Figure 4-17. Sample evaluation of biometric self-boarding.

90 Airport Biometrics: A Primer This more-focused evaluation of a specific biometric implementation will also bring to light some unforeseen capital costs that could be required to implement the solution. Examples of these costs are expansion of communication rooms or network bandwidth to accommodate additional data feeds, tinting of windows to help the resolution of camera or document scanners, and the relocation of existing infrastructure. Reviewing the questions in this section and the spectrum of specific implementation consid- erations such those shown in the Figure 4-17 should help airport operators better understand whether to move forward with biometric implementations.