National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

ACRP Report 61: Elimination or Reduction of Baggage Recheck for Arriving International Passengers (2012)
Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP)

Citation Manager

Mann, Howard, Wong, Solomon, Tse, Stanley, Beeson, Aaron, Ristic, Henry, Transportation Research Board. "Appendix G - Industry Stakeholder Feedback." ACRP Report 61: Elimination or Reduction of Baggage Recheck for Arriving International Passengers. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
129
bottomleft bottomright
Page
129
Front Matter (R1-R9)
Summary (1-4)
What Mandates Baggage Recheck? (5-5)
Increasing Pressures (6-6)
Cost-Effective Risk-Based Solutions Needed (7-7)
Research Approach (8-9)
International Arrivals Connection Market (10-10)
Process Flows for Terminating and Connecting Passengers (11-15)
Case Study 1: Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (16-21)
Case Study 2: HartsfieldJackson Atlanta International Airport (22-27)
Case Study 3: San Francisco International Airport (28-33)
Case Study 4: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (34-36)
Activities Before a Flight Takes Off from a Foreign Airport (37-37)
Alternative Procedure 1: Exemption of Checked Baggage from FIS (38-38)
Alternative Procedure 2: Alternative Procedure 1 + New Airline/Airport Processes on Arrival (39-39)
Alternative Procedure 3: Alternative Procedure 1 + New CBP Processes on Arrival (40-40)
Alternative Procedure 4: Enhanced Pre-departure Information (41-41)
Alternative Procedure 5: Information Sharing with TSA Programs (42-42)
Alternative Procedure 6: Leveraging Other DHS Programs (43-43)
Alternative Procedure 7: Door-to-Door Baggage Service (44-44)
CBP Risk Management (45-45)
Test 1: Radio Frequency Identification Passenger and Bag Timing (46-47)
Test 2: Information Sharing Between TSA and CBP on Connecting Bags (48-48)
Test 3: Expansion of International-to-International Recheck Reduction Process (49-49)
Test 4: Minimum Connection Time Modeling (50-51)
Test 5: Simulation Modeling (52-53)
Generic Impact Analysis (54-56)
Solutions (57-62)
Evaluation Results (63-66)
Chapter 6 - Conclusions (67-67)
Applying Research to Practice (68-68)
A Path for Improvement (69-69)
Potential Additional Actions (70-70)
Notes and References (71-71)
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms (72-73)
Glossary (74-78)
Appendix A - Connecting Traffic Analysis (2008) (79-83)
Appendix B - Airport Profiles (84-93)
Appendix C - Inventory of Current Recheck Procedures (94-97)
Appendix D - Primer on Airport Processes and Border Risk Management (98-102)
Appendix E - Technical Memorandum on Testing (103-119)
Appendix F - Evaluation of Alternative Procedures (120-128)
Appendix G - Industry Stakeholder Feedback (129-130)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (131-131)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 129
Appendix G Industry Stakeholder Feedback Industry stakeholder feedback for six of the alternative procedures was sought during a peer review session in January 2011. The group consisted of nine airline, airport, and aviation asso- ciation representatives. Six of the seven alternative procedures were presented to the group and discussed. Participants were asked to consider and quantitatively rate each alternative as well as to provide qualitative pros and cons from their respective industry points of views. Tables G-1 and G-2 summarize the written responses received from stakeholders. Alternative Procedure 7 (door-to-door baggage service) was not reviewed by the industry stakeholder session in January 2011 as it did not directly affect airport-specific processes. Table G-1. Peer review session ratings of alternative procedures. Aviation Alternative Procedure Average Airline 1 Airport Airline 2 Association 1: Exemption of Checked 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 Baggage from FIS 2: AP1 + New Airline/Airport 2.5 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 Processes on Arrival 3: AP1 + New CBP Processes on 3.0 2.5 1.0 4.5 4.0 Arrival 4: Enhanced Pre-departure 2.1 2.5 1.0 3.0 2.0 Information 5: Information Sharing with 3.9 3.5 3.0 5.0 4.0 TSA Programs 6: Leveraging Other DHS 1.5 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Programs 7: Door-to-Door Baggage Service Not reviewed 5 = highest possible rating, 1 = lowest possi ble rating G-1

OCR for page 130
G-2Elimination or Reduction of Baggage Recheck for Arriving International Passengers Table G-2. Peer review session pros and cons of alternative procedures. Alternative Procedure Airport Airline 2 1: Exemption of Checked · "Cleanest" solution · Resistance of CBP to change and Baggage from FIS perceived "loss of control" 2: AP1 + New Airline/Airport · Reduced operational costs · Significant IT and infrastructure Processes on Arrival costs 3: AP1 + New CBP Processes on · Reduced baggage connection · Costly solutions Arrival times 4: Enhanced Pre-departure · CBP risk issues addressed · CBP resources required Information 5: Information Sharing with · Bag connect times reduced · Major investment by carrier or TSA Programs origin airport 6: Leveraging Other DHS · Bags could be treated similar to · Regulation issues or assent from Programs precleared Congress, TSA, DHS 7: Door-to-Door Baggage Service Not reviewed