PGDS - V7

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards for
Checked Baggage Inspection Systems
Version 7.0
August 21, 2020
File 2600.3
Planning Guidelines and Design Standards for
Checked Baggage Inspection Systems
Version 7.0
Date: August 21, 2020
TSA approved this document on October 6, 2020.

GENERAL INFORMATION
FORE MATTER
VERSION HISTORY
Version Date Modifications
1.0 October 10, 2007 First published version
2.0 January 31, 2009 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 1.0
3.0 November 27, 2009 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 2.0
4.0 July 15, 2011 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 3.0
4.1 September 15, 2011 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 4.0
4.2 May 2, 2014 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 4.1
5.0 July 9, 2015 Update based on need for clear differentiation betw een requirements and best practices, follow -on studies and
comments on Version 4.2
6.0 September 29, 2017 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 5.0
7.0 August 21, 2020 Update based on recommended follow -on studies and comments on Version 6.0
Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems i August 21, 2020
GENERAL INFORMATION
DISCLAIMER
The Planning Guidelines and Design Standards (PGDS) for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems (CBIS) is being distributed under the
sponsorship of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the interest of information
exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use of this document.
The purpose of the document is to present TSA’s requirements and documented best practices for implementing a high-performance and
cost-effective CBIS. This document captures TSA’s requirements for a CBIS project from the beginning stages of design through commissioning of
the system. Best practices are meant to highlight practices that have proven successful during implementation and that TSA recommends for the
Project Sponsor’s consideration during the design and construction of a CBIS.
COMPLIANCE LANGUAGE DEFINITIONS
When used in the PGDS, the terms Requirement, Best Practice/Guidance, and Support statements shall be defined as follows:
Requirement – a statement of required, mandatory practice. All requirement statements are presented in underlined text. The verb “shall” is used.
The verbs “should” and “will” are not used in requirement statements.
Best Practice and Guidance – a statement of recommended, but not mandatory, practice. These statements are generated from lessons
learned. These statements are geared to inform the reader of known effective practices that have proven successful during implementation. Best
practice and guidance statements can be identified within the document by the use of the verb “should”. The verbs “shall” and “will” are not used in
best practice or guidance statements.
Support – an informational statement that does not convey any degree of mandate, recommendation, authorization, prohibition, or enforceable
condition. The verbs “shall” and “should” are not used in Support statements. The verb “will” can sometimes be used in support statements when
referencing things that are the government’s responsibility.
PGDS APPLICABILITY
CURRENT VERSION
Designs for new CBISs shall comply with the requirements set forth in this version of the PGDS. See Chapter 4 for other project types and their
PGDS compliance.
All CBIS will be tested to requirements as established in Appendix D of the latest version of the PGDS in effect at the time of testing. This will allow
TSA to obtain the best set of test data to evaluate CBIS performance and to recommend fixes or improvements to the system. For Operational

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems ii August 21, 2020
GENERAL INFORMATION
Analysis Reports and CBIS that are being upgraded or changed, TSA reserves the right to evaluate the CBIS against the most current published
PGDS version.
PRIOR VERSIONS
Any project sponsor that has received formal confirmation from TSA of the receipt of the complete 30% Detailed Design Package for a CBIS
project prior to the publication date of this version of the PGDS shall continue to be governed by the PGDS version in effect at the time of such
confirmation. Furthermore, projects that have passed the 30% Detailed Design phase—including those systems currently under construction or in
operation—with TSA approval shall be held to the design standards specified by that approval (either under the previous PGDS versions or prior
standards in place before the publication of Version 1.0 of the PGDS).
DELAYED OPENING OF CBIS

TSA reserves the right to require a project sponsor to resubmit the 30% Detailed Design Package under the requirements of the latest PGDS if the
CBIS has not passed the Integrated Site Acceptance Test (ISAT), according to the PGDS version in effect at the time of the original 30% Detailed
Design Package submittal, within two years of TSA approval of the original 30% Detailed Design Package.
INDUSTRY COLLABORATION AND COMMENTS
TSA has been collaborating with an industry working group that represents airlines, Baggage Handling System (BHS) designers, manufacturers,
and consultants to finalize recommended changes to PGDS Version 7.0.
The PGDS is updated regularly to ensure that its guidance and standards reflect the current technology and operating environment. The working
group will continue to meet with TSA to maintain the collaboration and consider potential changes for incorporation into the next version of PGDS.
The public and industry are invited to submit comments to TSA’s PGDS mailbox at pgds@tsa.dhs.gov from the date of PGDS publication.
Comments, as well as TSA proposed changes, will be shared with the industry working group prior to each meeting and will be reviewed and
discussed during the sessions. Any additional comments provided through the industry working group will also be considered during these
sessions.
The TSA values all comments and input from industry stakeholders, but only those comments and input determined to enhance and improve
the PGDS will be incorporated in the next release of the PGDS. An example of the standard form for comments is provided in Appendix A,
Section A.9.
The comment form can be found at the Beta.SAM.gov website.

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems iii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
MAIN DOCUMENT
VERSION HISTORY ........................................................................................................................................................................... I
DISCLAIMER.................................................................................................................................................................................... II
COMPLIANCE LANGUAGE DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................................... II
PGDS APPLICABILITY...................................................................................................................................................................... II
Current Version............................................................................................................................................................................... ii
Prior Versions ................................................................................................................................................................................ iii
Delayed Opening of CBIS ................................................................................................................................................................ iii
INDUSTRY COLLABORATION AND COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... III
CONTENTS..................................................................................................................................................................................... IV
Main Document .............................................................................................................................................................................. iv
Appendices...................................................................................................................................................................................xiv
Tables...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................xvii
Figures ....................................................................................................................................................................................... xix
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS..............................................................................................................................................XXIV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................................................................................XXVII
SECTION I : CBIS CONCEPTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-2
1.2 Background........................................................................................................................................................................ 1-4
1.3 Organization....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.4 Key Changes from PGDS v6 to PGDS v7 ............................................................................................................................... 1-6

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems iv August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 2 : CHECKED BAGGAGE SCREENING PROCESS............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 Screening Process Overview................................................................................................................................................. 2-2
2.2 Level 1 – EDS..................................................................................................................................................................... 2-3
2.3 Level 2 – On-Screen Resolution ............................................................................................................................................ 2-3
2.4 Level 3 – Checked Baggage Resolution Area .......................................................................................................................... 2-3
CHAPTER 3 : CBIS TYPES AND EQUIPMENT................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 CBIS Overview ................................................................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2 CBIS Using Type I EDS Units................................................................................................................................................ 3-3
3.2.1 In-Line CBIS .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.2.2 EDS Multiplexed Network ........................................................................................................................................ 3-7
3.3 CBIS Using Type II EDS Units ............................................................................................................................................... 3-9
3.3.1 Mini In-Line CBIS.................................................................................................................................................... 3-9
3.3.2 Stand-Alone EDS ................................................................................................................................................. 3-11
3.4 CBIS Using ETD Units ....................................................................................................................................................... 3-17
3.4.1 Primary Screening ................................................................................................................................................ 3-17
3.4.2 Alarm Resolution .................................................................................................................................................. 3-21
3.5 Other Baggage Conveying Systems ..................................................................................................................................... 3-21
3.5.1 Individual Carrier Systems ..................................................................................................................................... 3-21
3.5.2 Mobile Inspection Tables ....................................................................................................................................... 3-22
SECTION II: CBIS PROJECTS.......................................................................................................................................................... 3-1
CHAPTER 4 : PROJECT PLANNING AND INITIATION........................................................................................................................ 4-1

4.1 CBIS Project Types ............................................................................................................................................................. 4-2
4.1.1 New CBIS Projects ................................................................................................................................................. 4-2
4.1.2 Recapitalization...................................................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.3 Optimization........................................................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.4 PGDS Upgrades..................................................................................................................................................... 4-3
4.1.5 Expansion ............................................................................................................................................................. 4-3
4.2 Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................................................................. 4-3

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems v August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
4.2.1 Project Stakeholders ............................................................................................................................................... 4-3
4.2.2 Integrated Local Design Team .................................................................................................................................. 4-4
4.2.3 Project Sponsor...................................................................................................................................................... 4-5
4.2.4 TSA Headquarters .................................................................................................................................................. 4-5
4.3 Project Phases.................................................................................................................................................................... 4-6
4.4 Design-Build Projects ........................................................................................................................................................... 4-9
4.5 Design Review Process........................................................................................................................................................ 4-9
4.6 Submittals Formatting ........................................................................................................................................................ 4-11
4.7 TSA Funding .................................................................................................................................................................... 4-11
4.7.1 Funding Application .............................................................................................................................................. 4-11
4.7.2 Use of TSA-Approved Equipment............................................................................................................................ 4-11
4.7.3 Invoicing and Earned Value Management................................................................................................................. 4-12
CHAPTER 5 : PRE-DESIGN PHASE.................................................................................................................................................. 5-1

5.1 Pre-Design Phase Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 5-2
5.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Pre-Design Phase Responsibilities .................................................................................................... 5-4
5.3 Pre-Design Phase Deliverables ............................................................................................................................................. 5-5
5.4 TSA Pre-Design Phase Responsibilities.................................................................................................................................. 5-6
5.5 Baggage Screening Demand Determination ............................................................................................................................ 5-6
5.5.1 Categorize the Airport into Screening Zones ............................................................................................................... 5-7
5.5.2 Determine Current Checked Baggage Demand........................................................................................................... 5-9
5.5.3 Project Future Baggage Demand ............................................................................................................................ 5-19
5.6 Baggage Screening Equipment Requirements Determination................................................................................................... 5-21
5.6.1 Screening Equipment Parameters and Assumptions .................................................................................................. 5-21
5.6.2 EDS Equipment Requirements ............................................................................................................................... 5-23
5.6.3 EDS Equipment Redundancy ................................................................................................................................. 5-25
5.6.4 OSR Station Requirements .................................................................................................................................... 5-26
5.6.5 Baggage Inspection Station Requirements ............................................................................................................... 5-27
5.6.6 ETD Machine Requirements................................................................................................................................... 5-31
5.6.7 Accommodating Traffic Growth after the Design Year................................................................................................. 5-32
5.7 Alternatives Development and Evaluation ............................................................................................................................. 5-33
5.7.1 Alternatives Development ...................................................................................................................................... 5-33
5.7.2 Alternatives Evaluation and Selection ...................................................................................................................... 5-38
5.7.3 Alternatives Analysis Report ................................................................................................................................... 5-40

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems vi August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 6 : SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE...................................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1 Schematic Design Phase Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 6-2
6.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Schematic Design Phase Responsibilities .......................................................................................... 6-4
6.3 Schematic Design Phase Deliverables.................................................................................................................................... 6-5
6.4 TSA Schematic Design Phase Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................ 6-6
CHAPTER 7 : DETAILED DESIGN PHASE......................................................................................................................................... 7-1

7.1 Detailed Design Phase Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 7-2
7.2 30% Design........................................................................................................................................................................ 7-2
7.2.1 Project Sponsor and ILDT 30% Design Responsibilities................................................................................................ 7-4
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables ......................................................................................................................................... 7-5
7.2.3 TSA 30% Design Responsibilities ............................................................................................................................. 7-8
7.2.4 Dynamic Modeling .................................................................................................................................................. 7-8
7.3 70% Design...................................................................................................................................................................... 7-10
7.3.1 Project Sponsor and ILDT 70% Design Responsibilities.............................................................................................. 7-12
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables ....................................................................................................................................... 7-13
7.3.3 TSA 70% Design Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................... 7-16
7.4 100% Design .................................................................................................................................................................... 7-17
7.4.1 Project Sponsor and ILDT 100% Design Responsibilities ............................................................................................ 7-18
7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables ..................................................................................................................................... 7-19
7.4.3 TSA 100% Design Responsibilities .......................................................................................................................... 7-21
7.5 Contingency Planning ........................................................................................................................................................ 7-22
7.5.1 Contingency Planning Process ............................................................................................................................... 7-22
7.5.2 General Considerations ......................................................................................................................................... 7-22
7.5.3 Design Recommendations to Facilitate Contingency Planning ..................................................................................... 7-23
7.5.4 Alternative TSA Screening Measures....................................................................................................................... 7-24
7.5.5 Failure Types and Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................................... 7-24
7.5.6 Evaluation of Contingency Alternatives .................................................................................................................... 7-26
CHAPTER 8 : CONSTRUCTION PHASE............................................................................................................................................ 8-1

8.1 Construction Phase Overview ............................................................................................................................................... 8-2
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities .................................................................................................. 8-2

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems vii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
8.2.1 Construction Phase Deliverables............................................................................................................................... 8-5
8.2.2 TSA Construction Phase Responsibilities ................................................................................................................... 8-6
8.2.3 Meetings ............................................................................................................................................................... 8-6
8.3 System Change Implementation and Test Data........................................................................................................................ 8-6
8.3.1 CBIS Change Requests........................................................................................................................................... 8-6
8.3.2 Change Request Log .............................................................................................................................................. 8-7
8.3.3 TSA Approval......................................................................................................................................................... 8-7
8.3.4 Testing Procedures ................................................................................................................................................. 8-7
8.3.5 Test Results........................................................................................................................................................... 8-8
8.4 Training ............................................................................................................................................................................. 8-8
8.4.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training............................................................................................................................... 8-8
8.4.2 TSA Training.......................................................................................................................................................... 8-9
CHAPTER 9 : TESTING AND COMMISSIONING PHASE..................................................................................................................... 9-1

9.1 Testing and Commissioning Phase Overview .......................................................................................................................... 9-2
9.2 Pre-Commissioning Requirements ......................................................................................................................................... 9-2
9.3 Testing and Commissioning Phase Deliverables ...................................................................................................................... 9-6
9.4 TSA Testing and Commissioning Phase Responsibilities ........................................................................................................... 9-6
9.4.1 Integrated Site Acceptance Testing ........................................................................................................................... 9-6
9.4.2 Operational Run-in & Closeout ................................................................................................................................. 9-9
CHAPTER 10 : PROJECT CLOSEOUT PHASE ................................................................................................................................ 10-1

10.1 Project Closeout Phase Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 10-2
10.2 Project Closeout Phase Deliverables .................................................................................................................................... 10-2
10.3 Control Configuration Architecture Documentation.................................................................................................................. 10-4
10.3.1 Electronic File Naming Convention .......................................................................................................................... 10-4
10.3.2 Submittal Format .................................................................................................................................................. 10-5
10.3.3 Control System Architecture Drawing. ...................................................................................................................... 10-6
10.3.4 PLC Code and Associated Configuration Information ................................................................................................. 10-6
10.3.5 HMI Configuration. ................................................................................................................................................ 10-7
10.3.6 High-level Computer Configuration.......................................................................................................................... 10-7
10.3.7 Programming and Configuration Software ................................................................................................................ 10-7
10.3.8 CBIS/ISAT Benchmark Data. .................................................................................................................................. 10-8
10.3.9 Change Summary Log........................................................................................................................................... 10-8

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems viii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 11 : LIFE CYCLE COST ESTIMATING............................................................................................................................. 11-1
11.1 Life Cycle Cost Estimating Overview .................................................................................................................................... 11-2
11.2 Analysis Assumptions ........................................................................................................................................................ 11-2
11.2.1 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Period .............................................................................................................................. 11-2
11.2.2 Equipment Life Cycle ............................................................................................................................................ 11-2
11.2.3 Construction Period .............................................................................................................................................. 11-3
11.2.4 Real Dollar Cost ................................................................................................................................................... 11-3
11.3 Capital Costs .................................................................................................................................................................... 11-3
11.3.1 Screening Equipment Acquisition Costs ................................................................................................................... 11-3
11.3.2 Screening Equipment Direct Installation Costs .......................................................................................................... 11-4
11.3.3 Screening Equipment Upgrade Costs ...................................................................................................................... 11-4
11.3.4 Similar Screening Equipment Replacement Costs ..................................................................................................... 11-4
11.3.5 Required Building and BHS Infrastructure Modification Costs ...................................................................................... 11-5
11.4 Soft Costs ........................................................................................................................................................................ 11-5
11.5 O&M Costs....................................................................................................................................................................... 11-6
11.5.1 Screening Equipment Maintenance Costs ................................................................................................................ 11-6
11.5.2 Screening Equipment Operating Costs..................................................................................................................... 11-7
11.5.3 Incremental BHS Maintenance Costs....................................................................................................................... 11-7
11.5.4 Incremental BHS Operating Costs ........................................................................................................................... 11-8
11.6 Staffing Costs ................................................................................................................................................................... 11-8
11.6.1 TSA Personnel Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 11-8
11.6.2 Incremental Costs for Baggage Porters and Other Airport/Airline Staff .......................................................................... 11-9
11.7 Current Working Estimate Submissions ................................................................................................................................ 11-9
11.7.1 Cost Estimate Breakouts ..................................................................................................................................... 11-11
11.7.2 Cost Estimate Pricing Substantiation ..................................................................................................................... 11-12
11.7.3 Allocable Costs .................................................................................................................................................. 11-12
11.8 Basis of Estimate Document ............................................................................................................................................. 11-13
11.8.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................ 11-14
11.8.2 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 11-14
11.8.3 Project Scope Description.................................................................................................................................... 11-15
11.8.4 Methodology Used to Prepare the Estimate ............................................................................................................ 11-15

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems ix August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
11.9 Estimate Reconciliation .................................................................................................................................................... 11-18
11.10 Estimate Trending ........................................................................................................................................................... 11-19
SECTION III : CBIS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES ............................................................................ 11-1
CHAPTER 12 : CBIS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS............................................................................................................................... 12-1

12.1 CBIS Design Principles ...................................................................................................................................................... 12-2
12.2 CBIS Planning Standards ................................................................................................................................................... 12-3
12.3 BHS Capacity ................................................................................................................................................................... 12-4
12.3.1 Mainline Requirements .......................................................................................................................................... 12-4
12.3.2 Tail-to-Head Bag Spacing Requirement ................................................................................................................... 12-5
12.4 Screening Throughput Capacity Requirement ........................................................................................................................ 12-5
12.5 Bag Time-in-System .......................................................................................................................................................... 12-6
12.5.1 Time-in-System Static Calculations ......................................................................................................................... 12-6
12.5.2 Time-in-System Modeling Calculations..................................................................................................................... 12-8
12.6 Bag Travel Time Requirements ........................................................................................................................................... 12-9
12.6.1 In-Line Systems ................................................................................................................................................... 12-9
12.6.2 Mini In-Line Systems ............................................................................................................................................. 12-9
12.7 BHS Tracking ................................................................................................................................................................... 12-9
12.7.1 CBIS Positive Bag Tracking Requirements ............................................................................................................. 12-10
12.7.2 Bag Tag Identification Best Practices ..................................................................................................................... 12-13
12.8 Conveyor System Design ................................................................................................................................................. 12-14
12.8.1 CBIS Conveyor Subsystem Nomenclature.............................................................................................................. 12-14
12.8.2 Conveyor Inputs ................................................................................................................................................. 12-15
12.8.3 Divert and Merge Requirements. ........................................................................................................................... 12-15
12.8.4 Baggage Allocation Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 12-16
12.8.5 Conveyor System Design Best Practices ................................................................................................................ 12-16
12.8.6 Recirculation Loop Requirement ........................................................................................................................... 12-18
12.8.7 Reinsertion Line Requirement............................................................................................................................... 12-18
12.8.8 Draft Curtains Requirement . ................................................................................................................................. 12-18
12.8.9 Stack Light Requirements .................................................................................................................................... 12-18
12.8.10 System Conveyable Items.................................................................................................................................... 12-18
12.8.11 Oversize Bag Conveyance................................................................................................................................... 12-19

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems x August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
12.8.12 Out-Of-Gauge Bag Conveyance ........................................................................................................................... 12-19
12.9 Fail-Safe Operation. ......................................................................................................................................................... 12-19
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements ............................................................................................................ 12-19
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS ................................................................................................. 12-20
12.9.3 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for a Manually Operated Mini In-Line Decision Point CBIS ........................................ 12-23
12.10 Operational Test Kit ......................................................................................................................................................... 12-23
12.11 Bag Jam Rate................................................................................................................................................................. 12-24
12.12 EDS Maintainability Requirements ..................................................................................................................................... 12-25
12.12.1 Service Access................................................................................................................................................... 12-25
12.12.2 Environment ...................................................................................................................................................... 12-25
12.12.3 Storage and Spare Parts Access........................................................................................................................... 12-27
12.12.4 EDS Replacement .............................................................................................................................................. 12-27
12.12.5 Quick Disconnect Standard .................................................................................................................................. 12-27
12.12.6 EDS UPS and Power Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 12-27
12.13 CBIS Reporting............................................................................................................................................................... 12-27
12.13.1 Reporting Frequency Requirement ........................................................................................................................ 12-27
12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements ............................................................................................................................. 12-27
12.13.3 Daily Reporting Requirements .............................................................................................................................. 12-31
12.13.4 BHS ID Log Report Requirements ......................................................................................................................... 12-32
12.13.5 BHS Reporting During Maintenance ...................................................................................................................... 12-32
CHAPTER 13 : ON-SCREEN RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS ..................................................................................... 13-1

13.1 OSR Overview .................................................................................................................................................................. 13-2
13.2 General Ergonomic Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 13-2
13.3 Architectural Considerations................................................................................................................................................ 13-3
13.3.1 Traffic and Routing ............................................................................................................................................... 13-3
13.3.2 Entrances and Exits .............................................................................................................................................. 13-3
13.3.3 Equipment Requirements for Design Year ................................................................................................................ 13-4
13.3.4 Equipment Requirements for Future Growth ............................................................................................................. 13-4
13.3.5 Plan Space Provision ............................................................................................................................................ 13-4
13.3.6 Vertical Space Provision ........................................................................................................................................ 13-5
13.3.7 Windows ............................................................................................................................................................. 13-6
13.3.8 OSR Noise Abatement .......................................................................................................................................... 13-7
13.3.9 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning................................................................................................................. 13-7

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xi August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
13.4 OSRA Operational Requirements ........................................................................................................................................ 13-7
13.4.1 General OSRA Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 13-7
13.4.2 OSRA Layout ....................................................................................................................................................... 13-7
13.4.3 OSR Room Layout................................................................................................................................................ 13-8
13.4.4 Workstation Arrangements and Ergonomic Considerations ....................................................................................... 13-10
13.4.5 Off-Workstation Shared Visual Displays ................................................................................................................. 13-17
13.4.6 Personnel Circulation and Custodial Services Access .............................................................................................. 13-19
13.4.7 Personnel Circulation .......................................................................................................................................... 13-19
13.4.8 Custodial Services Access ................................................................................................................................... 13-20
13.5 Verification and Validation of OSRA Layout ......................................................................................................................... 13-20
CHAPTER 14 : CHECKED BAGGAGE RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS........................................................................ 14-1

14.1 CBRA Overview ................................................................................................................................................................ 14-2
14.2 CBRA Layout.................................................................................................................................................................... 14-2
14.3 Baggage Inspection Stations ............................................................................................................................................... 14-5
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 14-8
14.3.2 Baggage Removal Point ........................................................................................................................................ 14-9
14.3.3 CBRA BHS Displays ........................................................................................................................................... 14-10
14.4 Horizontal Clearances ...................................................................................................................................................... 14-11
14.5 CBRA Functionality.......................................................................................................................................................... 14-11
14.5.1 Normal Alarm Line Queuing Method ...................................................................................................................... 14-11
14.5.2 Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method.................................................................................................................... 14-13
14.5.3 Baggage Removal Point ...................................................................................................................................... 14-14
14.5.4 Scan Guns ........................................................................................................................................................ 14-14
14.5.5 Baggage Process and Screening Timers ................................................................................................................ 14-15
14.5.6 Reinsertion Line ................................................................................................................................................. 14-15
14.5.7 Serial Communication Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 14-15
14.6 BSD Operations .............................................................................................................................................................. 14-19
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design........................................................................................................................................... 14-19
14.6.2 BSD Statuses and High-level Processing Procedures .............................................................................................. 14-22
14.6.3 Station Disabled and Waiting for Bag Screens ........................................................................................................ 14-25
14.6.4 Bag Processing by Status .................................................................................................................................... 14-26
14.6.5 Unique Identifiers Cell ......................................................................................................................................... 14-32
14.6.6 Alternate Queueing Method.................................................................................................................................. 14-34

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
14.6.7 Bag Waiting Alerts .............................................................................................................................................. 14-36
14.7 General CBRA Design Considerations................................................................................................................................ 14-37
14.7.1 Bag Storage Capacity ......................................................................................................................................... 14-37
14.7.2 Architectural Features ......................................................................................................................................... 14-38
14.7.3 CBRA Physical Space Requirements..................................................................................................................... 14-38
14.7.4 Lighting............................................................................................................................................................. 14-39
14.7.5 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning............................................................................................................... 14-39
14.7.6 Power and Communications ................................................................................................................................. 14-39
14.7.7 Connectivity to TSA Network ................................................................................................................................ 14-40
14.7.8 CBRA Noise Abatement ...................................................................................................................................... 14-40
14.7.9 Ergonomic Design Dimensions ............................................................................................................................. 14-40
14.7.10 Conveyor System Crossovers and Catwalks ........................................................................................................... 14-40
14.7.11 Conveyor Belt End Points on Alarm Line ................................................................................................................ 14-41
14.7.12 Design for Safety ................................................................................................................................................ 14-41
CHAPTER 15 : CBIS OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE BEST PRACTICES ...................................................................................... 15-1

15.1 CBIS Operating Best Practices ............................................................................................................................................ 15-2
15.1.1 CBIS Remote Reporting Workstation....................................................................................................................... 15-2
15.1.2 CBIS Reporting Trends.......................................................................................................................................... 15-2
15.1.3 CBIS Testing ....................................................................................................................................................... 15-3
15.1.4 BHS O&M Contracts ............................................................................................................................................. 15-3
15.1.5 Communications................................................................................................................................................... 15-3
15.2 Maintenance Best Practices ................................................................................................................................................ 15-4
15.2.1 Maintenance Responsibility Matrix .......................................................................................................................... 15-4
15.2.2 Operator Training ................................................................................................................................................. 15-4
15.2.3 Frequency of Preventive Maintenance ..................................................................................................................... 15-4
15.2.4 CBIS Environment ................................................................................................................................................ 15-5
15.2.5 Aligning BHS and EDS Preventive Maintenance........................................................................................................ 15-5
15.2.6 BHS Maintenance Best Practice ............................................................................................................................. 15-5
CHAPTER 16 : INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ............................................................................................................... 16-1

16.1 Cybersecurity Demonstration .............................................................................................................................................. 16-2
16.2 Cybersecurity Requirement Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 16-2
16.2.1 User Accounts...................................................................................................................................................... 16-3

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xiii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
16.2.2 Incident Handling.................................................................................................................................................. 16-3
16.3 Firewalls .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16-5
16.4 Remote Access................................................................................................................................................................. 16-7
16.4.1 Remote Access Logs ............................................................................................................................................ 16-8
16.4.2 External Connections ............................................................................................................................................ 16-8
16.5 Software Maintenance and Updates ..................................................................................................................................... 16-8
16.6 Network Segregation ......................................................................................................................................................... 16-8
16.7 Cybersecurity Best Practices............................................................................................................................................. 16-10
16.8 STIP Data Requirements for Checked Baggage Systems ...................................................................................................... 16-11
16.8.1 Roles and Responsibilities for Implementing STIP ................................................................................................... 16-11
16.8.2 The IMAC Process.............................................................................................................................................. 16-11
16.8.3 Specific STIP Design Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 16-12
16.8.4 Advanced Surveillance Program Video Surveillance ................................................................................................ 16-17
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A : SUBMITTAL OUTLINES, FORM TEMPLATES AND EXAMPLES .................................................................................. A-1
A.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training Example.............................................................................................................................. A-3
A.2 CBIS Operations Guide – Sample Outline .............................................................................................................................. A-4
A.3 Baggage and Data Flow Chart Examples ............................................................................................................................... A-8
A.4 Daily CBIS Report Examples............................................................................................................................................... A-13
A.5 CBIS Change Request ...................................................................................................................................................... .A-26
A.5.1 Change Request Parameters ................................................................................................................................ .A-26
A.5.2 CBIS Change Request Example ............................................................................................................................. A-28
A.5.3 CBIS Change Request Form..................................................................................................................................A-30
A.6 MIA CBIS PLC Code Change Proposal Example....................................................................................................................A-32
A.7 PGDS Request for Variance Form .......................................................................................................................................A-45
A.8 Government Furnished Information Requests ........................................................................................................................A-46
A.9 Industry Comment Template ...............................................................................................................................................A-51
APPENDIX B : GENERIC EXAMPLES OF CHECKED BAGGAGE INSPECTION SYSTEMS ................................................................... B-1

B.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................B-1
B.2 Methodology for Developing Generic Examples ...................................................................................................................... B-2
B.3 Generic Examples of Linear CBIS Design Concepts ................................................................................................................ B-3

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xiv August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
B.3.1 Linear CBIS Design Concept A................................................................................................................................ B-4
B.3.2 Linear CBIS Design Concept B................................................................................................................................ B-6
B.4 Generic Examples of Individual Carrier System-Based CBIS Design Concepts ............................................................................ B-8
B.4.1 Description of Individual Carrier System-based CBIS Design Concept C .......................................................................B-10
B.4.2 Evaluation of Individual Carrier System-based CBIS Design Concept C ........................................................................B-10
APPENDIX C : BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT CASE STUDY............................................................................................................... C-1

C.1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ C-2
C.2 Case Study Background. ..................................................................................................................................................... C-2
C.3 CBIS Alternatives ............................................................................................................................................................... C-4
C.3.1 Zoning Schemes ................................................................................................................................................... C-4
C.3.2 Screening System Types ........................................................................................................................................ C-5
C.3.3 Qualitative Assessment of Preliminary Alternatives ..................................................................................................... C-6
C.3.4 Feasible Alternatives .............................................................................................................................................. C-7
C.4 Determination of Design Day Baggage Demand...................................................................................................................... C-8
C.4.1 Peak Month .......................................................................................................................................................... C-9
C.4.2 Terminal 1 ADPM and PDPM .................................................................................................................................C-10
C.5 Terminal 1 Demand Estimation............................................................................................................................................C-18
C.5.1 Design Load Adjustment Factors............................................................................................................................. C-18
C.5.2 Base Demand Estimation....................................................................................................................................... C-20
C.5.3 Design Year Demand Estimation............................................................................................................................. C-20
C.5.4 Terminal 1 Design Day Baggage Demand ................................................................................................................ C-22
C.6 Quantitative Assessment ....................................................................................................................................................C-23
C.6.1 Baseline Demand Estimation.................................................................................................................................. C-23
C.6.2 Design Day Demand Estimation.............................................................................................................................. C-24
C.6.3 Feasible Alternative 1 – CT-80 EDS Machines .......................................................................................................... C-27
C.6.4 Feasible Alternative 2 – L-3 eXaminer SX EDS Machines ........................................................................................... C-31
C.6.5 Feasible Alternative 3 – L-3 eXaminer SX EDS Machines ........................................................................................... C-35
C.6.6 OSR and ETD Screening Equipment .......................................................................................................................C-39
C.7 Analysis and Evaluation .....................................................................................................................................................C-40
C.7.1 Qualitative Assessment ......................................................................................................................................... C-40
C.7.2 Quantitative Life-Cycle Cost Analysis....................................................................................................................... C-42

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xv August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
C.8 Final Considerations ..........................................................................................................................................................C-52
APPENDIX D : COMMISSIONING AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ D-1

D.1 Commissioning and Evaluation Overview ............................................................................................................................... D-2
D.2 Introductory Testing ............................................................................................................................................................ D-5
D.2.1 CBRA Equipment and Functionality Test ................................................................................................................... D-5
D.2.2 Travel Time/On-Screen Resolution Test .................................................................................................................... D-7
D.2.3 Over-Height Bag Test............................................................................................................................................D-10
D.2.4 Over-Width Bag Test.............................................................................................................................................D-11
D.2.5 Over-Length Bag Test ...........................................................................................................................................D-12
D.2.6 Out-of-Gauge/Lost Bag Routing Test . ......................................................................................................................D-13
D.2.7 Duplicated IATA/RFID Tag Test . .............................................................................................................................D-13
D.2.8 Mixed Bag Line Test .............................................................................................................................................D-15
D.2.9 PLC versus Upper Level Sort Test ..........................................................................................................................D-16
D.2.10 Clear Bag Bypass Test ..........................................................................................................................................D-17
D.3 Detailed Testing ................................................................................................................................................................D-18
D.3.1 Removed Bag Test ............................................................................................................................................... D-20
D.3.2 Delayed Bag Test ................................................................................................................................................. D-21
D.3.3 Accelerated Bag Test ............................................................................................................................................ D-22
D.3.4 Added Bag Test ...................................................................................................................................................D-23
D.3.5 Bag Spacing Test .................................................................................................................................................D-24
D.3.6 E-Stop Test .........................................................................................................................................................D-25
D.3.7 Halt/Fail-Safe Test ................................................................................................................................................D-26
D.3.8 Fail-Safe Operation for In-Line CBIS........................................................................................................................D-26
D.3.9 Fail-Safe Operation for Mini In-Line CBIS with a Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point. .............................................D-27
D.3.10 EDS Entrance Jam Recovery Test (Continuous Feed EDS only). .................................................................................D-27
D.3.11 EDS Exit Jam Recovery Test (Continuous Feed EDS only).........................................................................................D-29
D.3.12 Decision Expiration Functionality Test ......................................................................................................................D-30
D.3.13 Operational Test Kit Functionality Test .....................................................................................................................D-31
D.3.14 Crossover Test. ....................................................................................................................................................D-33
D.4 System-Wide Testing.........................................................................................................................................................D-34
D.4.1 Full Load Test ...................................................................................................................................................... D-35
D.4.2 System Throughput Test........................................................................................................................................ D-36
D.5 Operational Run-In ............................................................................................................................................................D-37

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xvi August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
D.6 Post-Commissioning Requirements......................................................................................................................................D-39
APPENDIX E : CONTINGENCY PLAN EXAMPLES ............................................................................................................................E-1
APPENDIX F : RISK BASED SECURITY IMPACTS FOR THE ELECTRONIC BAGGAGE SCREENING PROGRAM...................................F-1
APPENDIX G : REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................................ G-1

G.1 Transportation Security Administration................................................................................................................................... G-2
G.2 Other Federal Agencies....................................................................................................................................................... G-3
G.3 Industry Guidance Documents.............................................................................................................................................. G-4
G.4 Additional Cybersecurity Resources ...................................................................................................................................... G-5
APPENDIX H : REQUIREMENTS TABLES....................................................................................................................................... H-1
TABLES
Table 3.1: Type I EDS Units .............................................................................................................................................................. 3-3
Table 3.2: Type II EDS for Stand-Alone CBIS Configuration ................................................................................................................. 3-11
Table 3.3: ETD for Primary Screening and Alarm Resolution ................................................................................................................ 3-17
Table 5.1: Pre-Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS............................................................................................. 5-5
Table 5.2: Passenger Arrival Distributions.......................................................................................................................................... 5-15
Table 5.3: Summary of Input Data Needs and Potential Data Sources ................................................................................................... 5-17
Table 5.4: Example Baggage Demand Projection ............................................................................................................................... 5-20
Table 5.5: Assumed Design Values .................................................................................................................................................. 5-22
Table 6.1: Schematic Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS ................................................................................... 6-5
Table 7.1: 30% Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS............................................................................................ 7-5
Table 7.2: 70% Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line CBIS Only (Mini In-Line Exempt)........................................................................... 7-13
Table 7.3: 100% Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS........................................................................................ 7-19
Table 8.1: Construction and Training Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS .................................................................................. 8-5
Table 9.1: Testing Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS .................................................................................................. 9-6
Table 10.1: Closeout Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS ............................................................................................ 10-2
Table 11.1: Components of Direct Installation Costs............................................................................................................................ 11-4
Table 11.2: Screening Equipment Electrical Consumption.................................................................................................................... 11-7
Table 11.3: Estimated Annual Incremental BHS Maintenance Costs for Systems Without Existing CBIS ..................................................... 11-8
Table 13.1: Workstation Layouts .................................................................................................................................................... 13-11

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xvii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
Table 13.2: Monitor/Desk/Task Chair Ergonomic Design Reference..................................................................................................... 13-14
Table 13.3: Control Room Storage – Classification of Types ............................................................................................................... 13-16
Table 14.1: List of Tools Needed for the Bag Inspection Process........................................................................................................... 14-7
Table 14.2: BSD Color Requirements.............................................................................................................................................. 14-20
Table 14.3: Example of CBRA Accumulation.................................................................................................................................... 14-37
Table 15.1: TSA Procurement and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix ................................................................................................... 15-4
Table 16.1: ASP Recommended Fields of View................................................................................................................................ 16-18
Table C.3.1: Initial Evaluation of Alternatives, Terminal 1 ...................................................................................................................... C-7

Table C.4.1: Terminal 1 Peak Month Available Seats 2007...................................................................................................................C-10
Table C.4.2: Average Day and Peak Day of the Peak Month: August 2006 .............................................................................................C-11
Table C.4.3: Oakland Terminal 1 ADPM Schedule ..............................................................................................................................C-12
Table C.4.4: Oakland Terminal 1 PDPM Schedule ..............................................................................................................................C-14
Table C.5.1: Design Load Adjustment Factor Per Airline ......................................................................................................................C-19
Table C.5.2: Comparison of Design Day Baggage Flows at Terminal 1 ..................................................................................................C-22
Table C.6.1: Comparison of Design Day Baggage Flows at Terminal 1 ..................................................................................................C-23
Table C.6.2: F3 Screening Zone Peak Month and Peak Day.................................................................................................................C-24
Table C.6.3: F3 Screening Zone Peak Hour Baggage Volumes.............................................................................................................C-27
Table C.6.4: Alternative 1 EDS Machine Capacity Calculations .............................................................................................................C-29
Table C.6.5: Alternative 1 OSR/ETD Equipment Calculations ...............................................................................................................C-30
Table C.6.6: Alternatives 2 and 3 EDS Machine Calculations................................................................................................................C-32
Table C.6.7: Alternative 2 OSR/ETD Equipment Calculations ...............................................................................................................C-34
Table C.6.8: Combined CBRAs Peak Month and Peak Day ..................................................................................................................C-36
Table C.6.9: Combined CBRA Zone Peak Hour Baggage Volumes .......................................................................................................C-38
Table C.6.10: Combined CBRA OSR/ETD Calculations .......................................................................................................................C-40
Table C.7.1: Qualitative Assessment Matrix .......................................................................................................................................C-41
Table C.7.2: Unit Costs Used in the Life Cycle Cost Analysis ................................................................................................................C-43
Table C.7.3: Alternative Life Cycle Costs ...........................................................................................................................................C-44
Table C.7.4 Terminal 1, Alternative 1, Life Cycle Cost Analysis .............................................................................................................C-45
Table C.7.5: Terminal 1, Alternative 2a, Life Cycle Cost Analysis ..........................................................................................................C-47
Table C.7.6: Terminal 1, Alternative 2b, Life Cycle Cost Analysis ..........................................................................................................C-49
Table C.7.7: Terminal 1, Alternative 3, Life Cycle Cost Analysis ............................................................................................................C-51
Table D.1.1: TSA ISAT Bag Dimensions............................................................................................................................................. D-3

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xviii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Generic In-Line Checked Baggage Inspection System........................................................................................................... 2-2
Figure 3.1: Schematic Visualization of an In-Line CBIS Using Type I EDS Units ........................................................................................ 3-4
Figure 3.2: L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6700 and eXaminer 3DX 6700 ES............................................................................................................ 3-5
Figure 3.3: MD CTX 9800 DSi (SEIO) ................................................................................................................................................. 3-6
Figure 3.4: EDS Networking Type Comparison..................................................................................................................................... 3-8
Figure 3.5: Example Mini In-Line Configuration................................................................................................................................... 3-10
Figure 3.6: Example Stand-Alone EDS Configuration .......................................................................................................................... 3-12
Figure 3.7: Schematic Visualization of Stand-Alone EDS Configurations ................................................................................................ 3-13
Figure 3.8: Reveal CT-80DR+ .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-15
Figure 3.9: Smiths Detection CTX 5800 ............................................................................................................................................. 3-16
Figure 3.10: Schematic Visualization of an ETD Primary Screening System............................................................................................ 3-18
Figure 3.11: Smiths IonScan 500DT ................................................................................................................................................. 3-19
Figure 3.12: L3 Implant Sciences QS-B220........................................................................................................................................ 3-20
Figure 4.1: CBIS Project Design Phases.............................................................................................................................................. 4-8
Figure 4.2: Summary of Responsibilities During the Design Process ...................................................................................................... 4-10
Figure 4.3: Earned Value Management Graph.................................................................................................................................... 4-13
Figure 5.1: Pre-Design Phase Process Flow ........................................................................................................................................ 5-3
Figure 5.2: Summary of Pre-Design Phase .......................................................................................................................................... 5-4
Figure 5.3: Zone Hierarchy Representation.......................................................................................................................................... 5-7
Figure 5.4: Assumed Screening Zones at Albuquerque International Sunport ............................................................................................ 5-8
Figure 5.5: Example 12-Month FDRS Peak 10-Minute Daily Volume, Ascending ..................................................................................... 5-10
Figure 5.6: Earliness Distributions – Domestic Departures Before8/9:00 A.M. and Off-Peak-After 8/9:00 AM ............................................... 5-13
Figure 5.7: Earliness Distribution – International Departures ................................................................................................................. 5-13
Figure 5.8: Lateness Distribution – International Recheck .................................................................................................................... 5-14
Figure 5.9: ADPM Checked Baggage Flow ........................................................................................................................................ 5-18
Figure 5.10: Example Growth Rate Calculation................................................................................................................................... 5-20
Figure 5.11: Example EDS Requirements Calculation ......................................................................................................................... 5-25
Figure 5.12: Example OSR Station Requirements Calculation............................................................................................................... 5-27
Figure 5.13: Example BIS Requirements Calculation........................................................................................................................... 5-31

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xix August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
Figure 5.14: Pre-Design Phase Alternatives Development And Evaluation.............................................................................................. 5-34
Figure 5.15: System Type Comparison.............................................................................................................................................. 5-36
Figure 6.1: Schematic Design Phase Design Process Flow .................................................................................................................... 6-3
Figure 6.2: Summary of Schematic Design Phase................................................................................................................................. 6-4
Figure 7.1: Detailed Design Phase, 30% Design Process Flow ............................................................................................................... 7-3
Figure 7.2: Summary of 30% Detailed Design Phase. ............................................................................................................................ 7-4
Figure 7.3: Detailed Design Phase, 70% Design Process Flow ............................................................................................................. 7-11
Figure 7.4: Summary of 70% Detailed Design Phase........................................................................................................................... 7-12
Figure 7.5: Detailed Design Phase, 100% Design Process Flow............................................................................................................ 7-17
Figure 7.6: Summary Of 100% Detailed Design Phase ........................................................................................................................ 7-18
Figure 8.1: Summary of Construction Phase ........................................................................................................................................ 8-2
Figure 9.1: Summary of Commissioning And Testing Phase................................................................................................................... 9-2
Figure 9.2: ISAT Pre-Requisite Milestones ........................................................................................................................................... 9-4
Figure 9.3: ISAT Process Flow........................................................................................................................................................... 9-7
Figure 10.1: Summary of Project Closeout Phase ............................................................................................................................... 10-2
Figure 11.1: Detailed Cost Estimate Summary.................................................................................................................................. 11-10
Figure 11.2: TSA Reimbursable Funding Breakout Sample ................................................................................................................ 11-13
Figure 11.3: Sample Work Breakdown Structure............................................................................................................................... 11-16
Figure 12.1: Bag Time In System and Bag Time In CBRA .................................................................................................................... 12-7
Figure 12.2: Time In System and Time In CBRA Standards .................................................................................................................. 12-8
Figure 12.3: In-Line Fail-Safe Designs ............................................................................................................................................ 12-21
Figure 12.4: Mini In-Line Fail-Safe Designs ...................................................................................................................................... 12-22
Figure 12.5: EDS PGDS Maintainability Standards Exhibit (Environment Checklist) ............................................................................... 12-26
Figure 13.1: Neutral Body Position.................................................................................................................................................. 13-14
Figure 13.2: Viewing Distance........................................................................................................................................................ 13-15
Figure 13.3: Preferred Location of Off-Workstation Shared Visual Displays ........................................................................................... 13-17
Figure 14.1: Optimal CBRA Layout for Smaller Systems ...................................................................................................................... 14-3
Figure 14.2: Optimal CBRA Layout for Larger Systems........................................................................................................................ 14-4
Figure 14.3: Example Baggage Inspection Station .............................................................................................................................. 14-5
Figure 14.4: CBRA Workstation Cross Section ................................................................................................................................... 14-6
Figure 14.5: CBRA Workstation Elevation.......................................................................................................................................... 14-8
Figure 14.6: Photo Eye Reflector Cover........................................................................................................................................... 14-10
Figure 14.7: Normal Alarm Line Queuing Method.............................................................................................................................. 14-12

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xx August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
Figure 14.8: Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method ........................................................................................................................... 14-14
Figure 14.9: Serial Communications Configuration Option.................................................................................................................. 14-16
Figure 14.10: Elements of Bag Status Display Screen ....................................................................................................................... 14-21
Figure 14.11: High-level Procedure Per Bag Status ........................................................................................................................... 14-24
Figure 14.12: Station Disabled (left side) and Station Enabled (right side) Screens ................................................................................ 14-25
Figure 14.13: Station Disabled (left side) and Manual Mode Activated (right side) Screens ...................................................................... 14-26
Figure 14.14: Cleared Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations ....................................................................................... 14-27
Figure 14.15: Alarmed Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations ...................................................................................... 14-28
Figure 14.16: Out of Gauge Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations ............................................................................... 14-29
Figure 14.17: EDS ERRORED Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations ........................................................................... 14-30
Figure 14.18: UNKNOWN Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations.................................................................................. 14-31
Figure 14.19: Unique Identifier Cell Messages.................................................................................................................................. 14-32
Figure 14.20 : Unknown Bag Duplicate IATA.................................................................................................................................... 14-33
Figure 14.21: AQM Out of Gauge Bag Screen.................................................................................................................................. 14-34
Figure 14.22: AQM EDS ERROR Bag Screen .................................................................................................................................. 14-35
Figure 14.23: AQM Unknown Bag Screen........................................................................................................................................ 14-35
Figure 14.24: Example of Bag Waiting Alert for Alarm Bag Screen ...................................................................................................... 14-36
Figure 16.1: Industrial Control System High-level View ........................................................................................................................ 16-2
Figure 16.2: Cybersecurity Incident Response Framework ................................................................................................................... 16-4
Figure 16.3: Firewall Example.......................................................................................................................................................... 16-6
Figure 16.4:Secure Remote Access Example..................................................................................................................................... 16-7
Figure 16.5:Network Segregation ..................................................................................................................................................... 16-9
Figure 16.6: Strategic Framework for Cyber Defense-In-Depth............................................................................................................ 16-10
Figure 16.7: Stand-Alone CBIS Configuration................................................................................................................................... 16-13
Figure 16.8: Networked CBIS Configuration ..................................................................................................................................... 16-14
Figure 16.9: IT Cabinet ................................................................................................................................................................. 16-16
Figure A.3.1: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – No ATR ................................................................................................................ A-8

Figure A.3.2: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – Upstream ATR....................................................................................................... A-9
Figure A.3.3: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – Downstream ATR..................................................................................................A-10
Figure A.3.4: Outbound BHS, International Terminal, San Francisco International Airport..........................................................................A-11
Figure A.3.5: Outbound BHS, Terminal 8, John F. Kennedy International Airport .....................................................................................A-12
Figure A.4.1: Daily CBIS Summary Report .........................................................................................................................................A-14

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxi August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
Figure A.4.2: Daily CBIS Bag Volume Report .....................................................................................................................................A-16
Figure A.4.3: CBIS Executive Summary Report ..................................................................................................................................A-17
Figure A.4.4: CBRA Executive Summary Report .................................................................................................................................A-18
Figure A.4.5: PEC Tracking Report ...................................................................................................................................................A-19
Figure A.4.6: CBRA Bag Process Timer Report ..................................................................................................................................A-20
Figure A.4.7: CBRA Bag Report .......................................................................................................................................................A-21
Figure A.4.8: CBIS Hourly Throughput Report ....................................................................................................................................A-22
Figure A.4.9: CBIS Bag Spacing Report ............................................................................................................................................A-23
Figure A.4.10: CBIS Performance Report ..........................................................................................................................................A-24
Figure A.5.1: Change/Variance Request Process................................................................................................................................A-27
Figure A.5.2: CBIS Change Request Form.........................................................................................................................................A-31
Figure A.7.1: Request for PGDS Variance Template ...........................................................................................................................A-45
Figure A.8.1: GFI Request Process - TSA Funded Designs ..................................................................................................................A-48
Figure A.8.2: GFI Request Process - Airport Funded Designs ...............................................................................................................A-49
Figure A.8.3: GFI Request Form ......................................................................................................................................................A-50
Figure A.9.1: Standard Form for Industry Comments ...........................................................................................................................A-51
Figure B.3.1: Linear CBIS Design Concept A ...................................................................................................................................... B-4
Figure B.3.2: Linear CBIS Design Concept B ...................................................................................................................................... B-6
Figure B.4.1: Individual Carrier System-Based CBIS Design Concept C .................................................................................................. B-9
Figure C.2.1: Existing Conditions, Terminal 1 ...................................................................................................................................... C-3
Figure C.3.1: Zoning Schemes, Option A, Terminal 1 ........................................................................................................................... C-4
Figure C.3.2: Zoning Schemes, Option B, Terminal 1 ........................................................................................................................... C-5
Figure C.5.1 : Passenger Arrival Profiles ...........................................................................................................................................C-20
Figure C.5.2: Standard Methodology Design Load Profile.....................................................................................................................C-21
Figure C.5.3: Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile.........................................................................................................C-21
Figure C.6.1: Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F31 Zone .........................................................................................C-25
Figure C.6.2: Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F32 Zone . ........................................................................................C-25
Figure C.6.6: Strategy-Orientated Methodology Design Load Profile, F36 Zone....................................................................................... C-26
Figure C.6.7: Strategy-Orientated Methodology Design Load Profile, F37 Zone....................................................................................... C-26
Figure C.6.8: Alternative 1 Conceptual Diagram, Terminal.................................................................................................................... C-28

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxii August 21, 2020
CONTENTS
Figure C.6.9: Alternatives 2A and 2B Conceptual Diagram, Terminal 1...................................................................................................C-31
Figure C.6.10: Alternative 3 Conceptual Diagram, Terminal 1 ...............................................................................................................C-35
Figure C.6.11: Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F31-3 Zone......................................................................................C-37
Figure D.3.1: Problematic Bag Alignments .........................................................................................................................................D-19
Figure D.6.1: CBIS Configuration Management Process ......................................................................................................................D-40

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxiii August 21, 2020
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACWP Actual Cost of Work Performed BIS Baggage Inspection Station DBU Date of Beneficial Use
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act BMA Baggage Measurement Array DHS Department of Homeland
ADPM Average Day of the Peak Month BOE Basis of Estimate Security
AL Alarm Line bph Bags per Hour DSL Deputy Site Lead
ANSI American National Standards BPT Baggage Process Timer EAC Estimate at Completion
Institute BRL Baggage Reinsertion Line EBSP Electronic Baggage Screening
APM Acquisition Program BRP Baggage Removal Position Program
Management BSD Bag Status Display EDS Explosives Detection System
AQM Alternate Queuing Method BSIS Baggage Screening Investment EDS-CP EDS Competitive Procurement
ASCII American Standard Code Study ESM Enhanced Staffing Model
Information Interchange BST Baggage Screening Timer ETD Explosives Trace Detection
ASHRE American Society of Heating, BTT Bag Travel Time EVM Earned Value Management
Refrigerating, and Air- FA False Alarm
CAD Computer-Assisted Design
conditioning Engineers
CAGR Compound Annual Growth Rate FAA Federal Aviation Administration
ASP Advanced Surveillance Program
CBIS Checked Baggage Inspection FAQs Frequently Asked Questions
ATO Airline Ticket Office
System FDRS Field Data Reporting System
ATR Automatic Tag Reader
CBRA Checked Baggage Resolution FIFO First In First Out
ATSA Acceptance Testing and System Area FOV Field of View
Acceptance
CCR CBIS Change Request FRM Field Regional Manager
BAC Budget at Completion
CCTV Closed Circuit Television FSA Flight Schedule Analysis
BAM Bag Allocation Methodology
CI Control Interface FSD Federal Security Director
BASE Baggage Assessment and
CL Clear Line GFI Government Furnished
System Evaluation
CM Corrective Maintenance Information
BCWP Budgeted Cost of Work
Performed CONOPSConcept of Operations HMI Human Machine Interface
BCWS Budgeted Cost of Work CPI Cost Performance Index HQ (TSA) Headquarters
Scheduled CPU Central Processing Unit HSD High Speed Diverter
BDR Basis of Design Report CRPG Checkpoint Requirements and HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air
BHS Baggage Handling System Planning Guide Conditioning
BHSC Baggage Handling System CSV Comma-Separated Values IAT Independent Acceptance Testing
Contractor CWE Current Working Estimate

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxiv August 21, 2020
IATA International Air Transport NFPA National Fire Protection RBS Risk Based Security
Association Association RDC Regional Deployment
ICS Individual Carrier System O&M Operating and Maintenance Coordinator
ICS-CERT Industrial Control Systems OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer RFI Request for Information
Cyber Emergency Response OH Over Height RFID Radio Frequency Identification
Team OIT Office of Information Technology RFV Request for Variance
ID Identification (or Identifier) OL Over Length RL Re-Insert Line
ILDT Integrated Local Design Team OOG Out-of-Gauge ROM Rough Order-of-Magnitude
IMAC Installation, Move, Add and OS Oversize SAT Site Acceptance Test
Change
OSARP On-Screen Alarm Resolution ScTP Screened Twisted Pair
IQT Image Quality Test Protocol SER System Evaluation Report
IRD Interface Requirements OSHA Occupational Safety and Health SI Site Integration
Document Administration SIDA Security Identification Display
ISAT Integrated Site Acceptance Test OSR On-Screen Resolution Area
ISO International Organization for OSRA On-Screen Resolution Area SL Site Lead
Standardization
OTA Other Transactional Agreement SOP Standard Operating Procedures
IT Information Technology
OTK Operational Test Kit SOW Scope of Work
IWG Industry Working Group
OVT OSR Viewing Time SSCP System Services Control Point
LCC Life-Cycle Cost
OW Over Width SSI Sensitive Security Information
LCCA Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
PDF Portable Document Format STIP Security Technology Integrated
LEO Law Enforcement Officer
PDPM Peak Day Peak Month Program
LIT Lost in Track
PE Photo Eye STZ Security Tracking Zone
MB Megabytes
PEC Photoelectric Cell SV Schedule Variance
MCP Motor Control Panel
PGDS Planning Guidelines and Design SVS Secondary Viewing Station
MCS Master Control Station Standards TAF Terminal Area Forecast
MIT Mobile Inspection Table PLC Programmable Logic Controller TRC Technical Review Committee
MSEDS Medium-Speed Explosive PM Preventive Maintenance TRN Test Readiness Notification
Detection System
PMIS Performance Management TRR Test Readiness Review
MTCBF Mean Time Between Critical Information System
Failures TSA Transportation Security
PNR Passenger Name Record Administration
NC Non-Condensing
POC Point of Contact TSIF TSA Security Integration Facility
NEDS Networked Explosive Detection
PVS Primary Viewing Station TSL Transportation Security
Systems
QLR Quick Look Report Laboratory

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxv August 21, 2020
TSM Transportation Security Manager UPS Uninterruptible Power Supply VSU Vertical Sortation Unit
TSO Transportation Security Officer UTP Unshielded Twisted Pair WBS Work Breakdown Structure
TSR Test Summary Report VAC Variance at Completion WLAN Wireless Local Area Network
UIC Unique Identifier Cell VFD Variable Frequency Drive

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxvi August 21, 2020
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The following is a list of organizations whose staff contributed their valuable time and insights to developing previous versions of the PGDS:
Airport Sponsors Baggage Handling System Security Equipment Manufacturers

City of Atlanta, Department of Aviation Designers/Consultants Analogic Corporation
City of Manchester, Aviation Department AECOM General Electric Company
Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Alliant Technologies L-3 Communications Corporation
Board Beumer Corporation Leidos
Metropolitan Washington Airports BNP Associates Inc. Morpho Detection, Inc.
Authority Brock Solutions Rapiscan Systems
Port of Seattle, Aviation Division CAGE Inc. Smiths Detection
ECRS SureScan
Airlines Five Star Airport Alliance
American Airlines Faith Group Other Industry Contributors
Delta Air Lines G&T Conveyor Company Inc. Airport Consultants Council
JetBlue Airways Glidepath Group AvAirPros
Northwest Airlines Gresham, Smith, & Partners International Association of Baggage
Southwest Airlines Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. System Companies
United Airlines Jervis B. Webb Company Lockheed Martin
JSM and Associates Sabel Systems
Federal Government Agencies and
K2 Consulting SP Consulting LLC
Contractors
Logplan LLC PGDS Project Team
Battelle
Parsons Corporation
Consolidated Safety Services, Inc. Raytheon Company Global Systems Technologies
National Institute of Occupational Health Siemens Corporation TSA Acquisition Program Management
TSA Occupational Safety, Health and Studdiford Technical Solutions LLC TSA Requirements and Capabilities
Environment Division Swanson Rink Analysis
TSA Acquisition Program Management TSA Security Operations
TransSolutions, Inc.
TSA Requirements and Capabilities URS Corporation
Analysis Vanderlande Industries Cover page designed by CAGE Inc.
TSA Security Operations
Vertech Industrial Systems
Vic Thompson Company

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems xxvii August 21, 2020
CBIS CONCEPTS
SECTION I : CBIS CONCEPTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2: CHECKED BAGGAGE SCREENING PROCESS
CHAPTER 3: CBIS TYPES AND EQUIPMENT

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems August 21, 2020
CBIS CONCEPTS 1: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems 1-1 August 21, 2020
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of the PGDS is to provide specific guidance on ways to implement a CBIS that (1) are less costly from both capital and life-cycle
perspectives and (2) have higher performance than the previous generation of installed baggage screening systems. A BHS provides sortation
and conveyance of checked baggage from airport inputs to baggage makeup areas. The CBIS, as part of the BHS, is the portion of the system
located in the Security Tracking Zone (STZ). The STZ starts at the point at which the BHS acquires positive tracking of a bag prior to the EDS
(normally at a Baggage Measurement Array (BMA), an Automatic Tag Reader (ATR), or a photocell where the BHS Tracking ID is assigned). The
STZ extends to the Clear Line diversion points and to the Baggage Removal Points (BRPs) in the Checked Baggage Resolution Area (CBRA).
The PGDS also establishes design requirements clarifying the operational parameters that must be met. Additional best practice information is
provided based on the lessons learned over years of designing and installing these systems.
To expedite the nationwide installation of CBISs in an equitable, sustainable, and cost-effective manner as required by legislation, the PGDS:
• Establishes common design requirements and metrics to which all screening system designs must adhere.
• Consolidates collective industry experience and insights relating to best practices for planning, designing, and implementing baggage
screening systems.
• Disseminates the latest information on screening technologies, in-line screening concepts, and screening protocols.
• Standardizes the methodologies for planning, designing, and evaluating various system design alternatives.
The PGDS not only emphasizes best practices associated with screening system layouts, it also addresses other factors necessary to actively
manage system costs and performance. Key objectives emphasized include the following:
• Achieve the most cost-efficient solution – Achieving long-term cost efficiency requires two key changes from typical past practices: (1)
considering a wide range of alternatives rather than relying on a preconceived notion regarding which system would be best suited for a
particular airport, and (2) assessing the 20-year life-cycle costs of different alternatives, so that the ongoing costs of operating and
maintaining these systems are appropriately balanced with the upfront capital costs.
• Define design requirements and best practices – Clearly delineating TSA’s requirements for CBISs and presenting industry best
practices have proven effective at making sure those requirements are met once the system is operational.
• Understand the complexity of in-line screening systems and avoid the common pitfalls of first-generation designs – Baggage
screening systems are complex, especially those with high-level of automation. Many different technologies for conveyance, tracking, and
screening must all work together seamlessly to achieve an efficient and reliable CBIS. Lessons learned have been incorporated into this
document as best practices and are intended to inform designers of effective elements of design which have proven successful during
implementation.

• Develop principles for appropriate sizing of CBISs, including methods for estimating demand and equipment requirements –
The approach used to estimate demand and equipment needs for the initial system has a major effect on project costs. Many different
approaches have been used over the last several years, with widely varying results. An overly conservative approach to estimating
demand and equipment needs can result in prematurely eliminating potentially less costly screening alternatives. Under-estimating
demand and equipment needs can result in excessive occurrences of demand exceeding capacity and associated operational difficulties
and security degradation. The PGDS provides TSA’s approach for validating baggage screening demand and determining the equipment
requirements for a given project.
• Develop principles for providing equipment redundancy and establishing contingency operations – Other important considerations
for system sizing are Explosive Detection System (EDS) equipment redundancy and contingency operations. EDS equipment redundancy
is designed into a system in an effort to attain the best operational availability from an EDS matrix. In addition, projects are required to
create a project-specific contingency plan agreed upon by all key stakeholders, including local TSA, airport and airline personnel, that
defines how the CBIS will operate when screening equipment is unavailable, demand exceeds capacity during extraordinary
circumstances, or a catastrophic system failure occurs.
• Develop principles for accommodating growth beyond initial system sizing – Systems are designed to accommodate demand up to
five years beyond the Date of Beneficial Use (DBU). Planning marginal additional upfront investments in conveyors or facilities can
significantly reduce costs in the long term. For example, significant savings and less operational disruption could be achieved by providing
needed expansion space up front rather than incrementally expanding a facility over time. The choice of how additional capacity is to be
provided will depend on the constraints of the facility, forecast growth, degree of confidence about the forecast growth, overall capacity of
the terminal, expected life of the terminal, and the initial system type. DBU+5 years will continue to be used as the design year for initial
system sizing; however, the level of upfront investment to accommodate demand beyond DBU+5 years should be assessed using a 20-
year life-cycle cost analysis.
• Use an integrated and participatory approach to the planning, design and implementation processes by involving all relevant
stakeholders – Stakeholder involvement is key to successful and cost-effective CBIS implementation. This involvement needs to occur at
both the industry/federal government level and the local/airport level.
• Upgrade the design review and approval process – Utilizing lessons learned to improve the design review and approval process is
important to support the objectives of cost management and increased quality for the screening systems.
The PGDS also addresses some aspects of the installation, testing, and commissioning of the CBIS. Requirements related to the operation and
maintenance of CBISs are not within the scope of the PGDS but some best practice information is included. Reimbursable and nonreimbursable
expense information related to the Electronic Baggage Screening Program (EBSP) are also not in the PGDS but are available in a separate policy
memo called “Electronic Baggage Screening Program Policy – TSA Funding of Checked Baggage Inspection System Project Costs,” which can be
obtained at the Beta.SAM.gov website.

1.2 Background
The PGDS was developed as an industry reference to develop cost-effective solutions and to define TSA requirements for CBISs. The PGDS was
developed for use by airport operators, airlines, CBIS planners and designers, EDS and BHS vendors, CBIS-related service providers and
additional stakeholders involved in the planning, design, commissioning, operation, and maintenance of CBISs.
PGDS Version 1.0, published on October 10, 2007, was prepared as part of the Baggage Screening Investment Study (BSIS) undertaken by TSA
in 2006 in consultation with the aviation industry.
The BSIS was a direct response to the requirements included in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Section 4019d),
and was intended to respond to directives in the 2005 DHS Appropriations Act Conference Report and recommendations contained in the March
15, 2005, Government Accountability Office report. The EBSP framework was developed as the basis for the BSIS. The EBSP is a DHS
acquisition program, under which the Checked Baggage Technologies Division, within TSA’s Acquisition Program Management (APM) receives
funding for the execution of checked baggage screening projects.
As described in the EBSP Strategic Planning Framework submitted to Congress in February 2006, the primary goals of the EBSP Strategic Plan
are to:
• Increase security through deploying EDS equipment to as many airports as practicable and implementing more labor-intensive explosives
trace detection (ETD) screening protocols at those locations where ETD will continue to be used for primary screening.
• Minimize EBSP life-cycle costs by deploying the best possible screening solutions at each airport, appropriately balancing capital
investment and operating cost tradeoffs.
• Minimize impacts to TSA and airport and airline operations through well-designed and well-placed EDS solutions.
• Provide a flexible security infrastructure platform for accommodating growing airline traffic and other industry changes over the next 20
years and for addressing potential new threats.
During 2007 and 2008, many valuable industry comments on Version 1.0 of the PGDS were received from airport operators, airlines, designers,
and planners, as well as from TSA. In addition, several follow-on studies were conducted to implement some of the next steps articulated in
PGDS, Version 1.0. Since then, TSA has completed several rounds of review processes in which industry comments and follow-on PGDS studies
were incorporated into successive published PGDS versions.
Since publication of the PGDS V5.0 in 2015, the industry and TSA have made a consolidated effort to emphasize performance-based
requirements in the PGDS and clearly identify and differentiate between requirements and best practices within the document. The TSA formed an
internal stakeholder group from various offices, divisions and branches called the PGDS Technical Review Committee (TRC) to review and
address internal and external stakeholder recommendations and govern the PGDS. Industry created the PGDS Industry Working Group (IWG) in

an effort to create a forum for industry stakeholders to discuss relevant PGDS issues and collaborate with TSA. The result of the collaboration
between these two groups and the updating, revision and review process is reflected in this version (V7.0) of the PGDS.
1.3 Organization
The PGDS is organized into three sections as follows:
• Section I: CBIS Concepts

Chapter 1, Document Purpose, Background, Organization and Key Changes from the previous version
Chapter 2, Checked Baggage Screening Process
Chapter 3, CBIS Types and Equipment
• Section II: CBIS Projects

Chapter 4, Project Planning and Initiation: project phases, stakeholder roles and responsibilities, the design review process, and TSA
funding
Chapter 5, Pre-Design Phase, including methodologies for developing an evaluation of alternatives
Chapter 6, Schematic Design Phase
Chapter 7, Detailed Design Phase, including 30%, 70%, and 100% design reviews
Chapter 8, Construction Phase, including system change implementation
Chapter 9, Testing and Commissioning Phase
Chapter 10, Project Closeout Phase, including control configuration architecture documentation
Chapter 11, Life Cycle Cost Estimating
• Section III: CBIS Design Requirements and Industry Best Practices

Chapter 12, CBIS Design Requirements
Chapter 13, On-Screen Resolution Area Planning Standards
Chapter 14, Checked Baggage Resolution Area Planning Standards
Chapter 15, CBIS Operating and Maintenance Best Practices
Chapter 16, Information Technology Security

This document also contains the following appendices:
• Appendix A, Submittal Outlines, Form Templates, and Examples – Report submittal outlines for CBIS for the Pre-Design and Schematic
Design phases and form templates, CBIS reporting examples, the Controls Configuration Architectural Overview, and an outline for TSA
training documentation required for operation of the CBIS.
• Appendix B, Generic Examples of CBISs – Generic examples of linear CBIS design concepts and Individual Carrier System-based CBISs.
• Appendix C, Basis of Design Report Case Study – Example of a Basis of Design Report showing how the PGDS should be followed to
develop and select viable CBIS alternatives.
• Appendix D, Commissioning and Evaluation Testing – Suite of tests that TSA has developed for the execution of the Testing and
Commissioning Phase of a project and guidelines for developing an ILDT Test Plan used to test and commission the CBIS after
installation.
• Appendix E, Contingency Plan Examples – Two examples of CBIS contingency plans to serve as reference for the development of this
document.
• Appendix F, Risk Based Security Impacts for the Electronic Baggage Screening Program – Placeholder.
• Appendix G, References.
• Appendix H, Requirements Lists.
1.4 Key Changes from PGDS v6 to PGDS v7
Section Section Title Changes

General Entire document Content restructured to improve information flow and document integrity
3.2.1, 3.3.2 In-Line CBIS/Standalone CBIS Removed all legacy EDS equipment from PGDS
3.5.1 Individual Carrier Systems Add requirement for the maximum average ICS carrier length
4.1 CBIS Project Types Added descriptions of CBIS project types
4.7.2 Use of TSA-Approved equipment Clarified the stipulations around designs using unqualified EDS machines
5.5.2 Determine Current Checked Baggage Demand Restructured section to emphasis field data reporting system design basis
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology Updated passenger arrival curves
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology Updated bags per passenger values
5.6.1.3 Design Values Added a table w ith assumed design values to use in the absence of site-specific values
5.6.5 Baggage Inspection Station Requirements Revised the equation and rounding method to calculate the quantity of baggage inspection
stations

Section Section Title Changes
12.12.6 EDS UPS and Pow er Requirements Added requirements for uninterruptible pow er supply unit allocation for EDS machines
12.13, A.4 CBIS Reporting Revised existing BHS reports and added three new reports
12.13.3 Daily Reporting Requirements Created a requirement for daily automated BHS report creation and transmittal
12.3.1 Mainline Requirements Added requirement restricting the mainline throughput to not exceed the non-redundant EDS
capacity
12.3.2 Tail-to-head Bag Spacing Requirement Added requirement for the establishing, adjusting and reporting of bag spacing prior to the EDS
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements Clarified w hich statuses are invalid arrivals during live operations and testing
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements Added anti-dieback language
14.2 CBRA Layout Removed the requirement for a single clear line in CBRA
14.5 CBRA Functionality Added a requirement for baggage inspection station log-in sequence
14.5.5 Baggage Process Timer Clarified the start and stop events for the baggage process timer and new baggage screening
timer
15.2.1 Maintenance Responsibility Matrix Added maintenance responsibility matrix for TSA equipment
Ch.9, Testing and Commissioning Revised testing process, conducted tests and operational run-in details
Appendix D

CBIS CONCEPTS 2: CHECKED BAGGAGE SCREENING PROCESS
CHAPTER 2: CHECKED BAGGAGE SCREENING PROCESS

2.1 Screening Process Overview
The TSA utilizes a multi-level screening process to inspect checked baggage. This screening process is applicable to all CBIS types discussed
later in this chapter except ETD-only screening.
In an in-line CBIS, screening operations are integrated with the outbound baggage handling system, as shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Generic In-Line Checked Baggage Inspection System
2.2 Level 1 – EDS
Passenger baggage checked in at the airlines ticket counters, kiosks or curbside is transported to a CBIS via conveyor systems for inspection.
Once at the EDS, photo eyes collect bag data and the EDS generates and screens a scanner image. The EDS unit assigns each bag exiting the

scanner a Level 1 security status of Clear or Non-Clear. Clear bags are diverted to the make-up area, while Non-Clear bags continue to Level 2
screening.
2.3 Level 2 – On-Screen Resolution
In On-Screen Resolution (OSR), images of Non-Clear bags are inspected by a Transportation Security Officer (TSO) and assigned a Level 2
security screening status of Clear or Non-Clear. Clear bags are diverted to the make-up area, while Non-Clear bags continue to Level 3 screening.
The Level 2 screening typically takes place concurrently with baggage conveyance. BHS configurations are designed to allow 45 seconds of travel
time for each bag between the exit of the EDS unit and the second decision point. If a Level 2 disposition isn’t available before a bag reaches the
second decision point, the bag is automatically deemed Non-Clear and continues onto the CBRA line.
2.4 Level 3 – Checked Baggage Resolution Area
Bags traveling on the CBRA line are sent to a Baggage Inspection Station (BIS). TSOs conduct a directed manual search on Non-Clear bags
using the image generated at Level 1 and the OSR dispositions from Level 2 to target the objects of concern. When all objects have been
inspected and cleared, the bag is assigned a Level 3 security status of Clear. The bag is transferred to the Clear Line and sent to the make-up
area.
Bags that do not receive a Level 3 security status of Clear are considered Alarmed and must be processed by Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs).

CBIS CONCEPTS 3: CBIS TYPES AND EQUIPMENT
CHAPTER 3: CBIS TYPES AND EQUIPMENT

3.1 CBIS Overview
This chapter provides information about CBIS types and their associated concept of operation (CONOPS), as well as screening equipment that
can be used in the various system types.
CBIS designs use two types of EDS units for primary screening:
• EDS Type I:
Intended use case: integration of two or more EDS units with the same baggage conveyance system and providing resource
balancing across the EDS units and shared network assets
Type I EDS units are capable of screening bags at a rate no less than 400 bags per hour (bph)
• EDS Type II:

Intended use case: screening with one EDS unit and dedicated assets
Type II EDS units are capable of screening bags at a rate no less than 150 bph when operated in accordance with approved staffing
levels
A CBIS with very low throughput may be designed to accomplish primary screening using only ETDs (ETD CBIS).
Within each CBIS type, several acceptable screening equipment models may be available with similar throughput rates, false alarm (FA) rates,
and OSR rates. TSA-qualified models are identified in this chapter. New CBIS designs shall not include legacy units.
The Project Sponsor shall coordinate with the TSA Project Coordinator for any needed Sensitive Security Information (SSI) and to make a final
determination on the conveyable bag dimensions.
The tables at the beginning of each CBIS type subsection summarize the candidate screening equipment and throughput ranges for this screening
equipment. Alarm rates and resolution rates for the listed scanner units are SSI and denoted as such. Environmental restrictions for all units
include non-condensing (NC) levels of humidity.
More detailed examples of generic concepts of baggage screening systems, operational assumptions for the generic baggage screening
concepts, and best practices captured in these generic concepts are found in Appendix B.

3.2 CBIS Using Type I EDS Units
3.2.1 In-Line CBIS
In-line systems have very high levels of integration and sophisticated in-line conveyor infrastructure, providing sufficient queuing capacity and
OSR travel time while maintaining high throughput and accurate bag tracking. These systems have networked EDS technology (i.e., the capability
to link multiple EDS units with multiple viewing stations), centralized control rooms, multiple baggage inputs, and one or more CBRAs. Type I EDS
units used in this CBIS type are intended to provide solutions for airports that require fully integrated in-line systems designed to handle very high
peak baggage screening demand.
The In-Line CBIS design is required (see Section 12.4) to allow EDS listed in Table 3.1 to achieve the 95% Throughput indicated under test
conditions. Throughput values used during design for system sizing shall be based on a site-specific bag sizes, which may differ from the
assumed 28” average bag size used in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Type I EDS Units

Idealized
False OSR Average Throughput 95%
Alarm Clear OSR Tim e Belt Speed (28" bag w ith Throughput
Classification Product Rate Rate (sec) (ft/m in) 12" spacing) (bags/hour) Current Status
EDS-CP L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6700 SSI SSI 20 29.5 532 505 Qualified (EDS-CP)
EDS-CP L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6700 ES SSI SSI 20 39.5 709 674 Qualified (EDS-CP)
EDS-CP MD CTX-9800 DSi SSI SSI 20 39.5 709 674 Qualified (EDS-CP)
Notes:
1. False Alarm Rate can vary from airport to airport, so the project sponsor should contact their TSA Project Coordinator for airport-specific alarm rate data.
2. OSR Clear Rate can vary from airport to airport, so the project sponsor should contact their TSA Project Coordinator for airport-specific data.
3. Idealized throughput is based on uniform bag spacing and 100% domestic bags. A blended domestic/international bag length should be used (see Section 5.6.2) during
CBIS design.
4. 95% throughput value predicated on assumption that not all bags will be perfectly aligned when presented to the EDS units. Value is rounded to the nearest whole
number.
5. "Qualified (EDS-CP)" is defined as those systems that have successfully completed detection Certification, TSA Security Integration Facility (TSIF) Evaluation, and
Operational Test and Evaluation against EDS Competitive Procurement (EDS-CP) requirements and may be available for procurement by TSA. Project sponsors
should ask their TSA Project Coordinator to confirm availability of specific models with TSA’s Checked Baggage Technology Division.
6. The information included in this table is current as of the publication date of this document. To obtain the most up to date information on qualified EDS units, e-mail
PGDS@tsa.dhs.gov.

Figure 3.1 shows a schematic visualization of an In-line CBIS with Type I EDS units.
Figure 3.1: Schem atic Visualization of an In-Line CBIS Using Type I EDS Units
Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3 provide graphical representations and summarize equipment assumptions for current qualified Type I EDS units.

Figure 3.2: L-3 eXam iner 3DX 6700 and eXam iner 3DX 6700 ES
Applicable System Type: In-line
Notes:
1. Due to the shape of the unit’s opening, the maximum height will drop with increasing bag width.
2. "Qualified (EDS-CP)" is defined as those systems that have successfully completed Detection Certification, TSIF Evaluation, and Operational Test and Evaluation
against EDS-CP requirements and are available for procurement by TSA.
3. L 1 = Maximum bag length unit can scan
4. L 2 = Standard bag length unit can scan

Figure 3.3: MD CTX 9800 DSi (SEIO)
Applicable System Type: In-line
Notes:
2. Qualified (EDS-CP)" is defined as those systems that have successfully completed Detection Certification, TSIF Evaluation, and Operational Test and Evaluation

3.2.2 EDS Multiplexed Network
TSA deploys fully-integrated EDSs in a Multiplex Network configuration for a CBIS size of three EDSs or more. This configuration allows two or
more EDSs to communicate with two or more network elements such a viewing stations, a network master control station (MCS), or a printer. A
typical Multiplex Network consists of servers, racks, switches, cables, Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPSs), EDS components, and various other
hardware and software components that are required to establish the Multiplex Network configuration.
The EDS Multiplexed Network capabilities are critical to successful fully-integrated EDS operations and are verified prior to ISAT of a given CBIS.
A Multiplex Network transmits bag images and threat data from EDS units to one of several viewing stations for Level 2 resolution and to one of
several viewing stations for Level 3 resolution. Other EDS Multiplexed Network capabilities include server redundancy, network size scalability,
utilization of TCP/IP, network fault monitoring, management of network configurations and settings, user database management, image archive
and recall features, and access to Field Data Reporting System (FDRS) data.
The following list represents the potential EDS Multiplex Network configuration options for a fully-integrated and networked CBIS.
• Dedicated OSR Area – Can be used in new in-line, recapitalization, and existing multiple-CBIS zone projects where each screening zone
is supported with a dedicated multiplexed network server physically located in separated OSR rooms.
• Split OSR Area – Can be used in CBIS expansions, recapitalization, and EDS upgrade projects where two separate networks are co-
located together in the same physical OSR area (or room). This configuration will require dedicated network servers and MCS for each
screening zone co-located within the OSR area (or room).
• Consolidated OSR Area – Can be used in CBIS expansions, recapitalization, and EDS upgrade projects where two or more dedicated
OSR areas are networked together. This configuration may require EDS component upgrades and requires a split OSR area (or room)
initially while the existing OSR network elements are transitioned to the new network.
• Remote Network – Can be used in CBIS expansions and multiple CBIS zone projects where a subset of EDS units is physically located
remotely from the primary CBIS screening zone but share OSR or CBRA functions with the primary CBIS. This configuration will utilize a
remote server and switch to plug into the existing network in order to minimize network cabling requirements and may optionally utilize a
dedicated MCS.
Figure 3.4 compares characteristics of the four networking types.

Figure 3.4: EDS Netw orking Type Com parison

3.3 CBIS Using Type II EDS Units
Type II EDS units are designed for situations with lower throughput than those using Type I EDS systems. Two CBIS configurations use Type II
EDSs: mini in-line and stand-alone.
3.3.1 Mini In-Line CBIS
A mini in-line design is a cost-effective solution for an airport or bag zone with low bag screening throughput needs. This CBIS type provides fully
automated operations at a fraction of the cost of an in-line system. Other advantages include reduced space requirements, capital and operational
costs, and construction time.
Mini in-line designs are tailored to site-specific needs, demographics, and operations, resulting a unique configuration for nearly every design.
The system’s ability to queue bags is minimized because of its smaller footprint. As a result, system diebacks are expected to occur for short
periods of time, but can be minimized with proper analysis and bag flow control.
A mini in-line design is defined by the following criteria:
• Single Type II EDS configuration

• No redundant EDS
Contingency alternatives will be considered on a case by case basis and must be discussed with the TSA. Most airports have multiple mini in-line
systems located near each other that may serve as redundant systems for each other in the event of an EDS or BHS failure. If other nearby
systems aren’t available, the TSA will analyze the baggage profile to determine other viable and cost-effective alternatives to ensure that
operations continue during any system failures, such as additional ETDs, inspection stations, etc. Please contact your TSA Project Coordinator for
available qualified EDS machines for use in a mini in-line solution.
Figure 3.5 shows an example of a mini in-line solution.

Figure 3.5: Exam ple Mini In-Line Configuration

3.3.2 Stand-Alone EDS
In small airports or in specific zones with low baggage volumes at larger airports, stand-alone EDSs may be the most cost-effective option.
Qualified Type II EDS units for stand-alone configurations are listed in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Type II EDS for Stand-Alone CBIS Configuration

False Alarm OSR Clear Average OSR Throughput
Classification Models Rate Rate Tim e (sec) (bags/hour) Current Status
EDS-CP Reveal CT-80DR+(S) SSI SSI 30 200-225 Qualified (EDS-CP)
EDS-CP Reveal CT-80DR+(L) SSI SSI 30 180-200 Qualified (EDS-CP)
EDS-CP Reveal CT-80DR+(XL) SSI SSI 30 160-180 Qualified (EDS-CP)
EDS-CP Smiths CTX 5800 SSI SSI 20 277 Qualified (EDS-CP)
Notes
1. False Alarm Rate based on System Evaluation Report (SER) or FDRS data from fielded systems and intended to be used as a national average. Airport-specific data
may be available from the TSA Project Coordinator.
2. OSR Clear Rate based on values used for TSA staffing and intended to be used as a national average. Airport-specific data may be available from the TSA Project
Coordinator.
3. Throughput value based on operational data analyzed from FDRS reports of fielded equipment.
against EDS-CP requirements and may be available for procurement by TSA. Project sponsors should ask their TSA Project Coordinator to confirm availability of specific
models with TSA’s Checked Baggage Technology Division.
5. Given the limited available field data at the time of this publication, the CTX 5800 “as fielded” throughput value provided here is based on acquisition method (3D
volumetric), belt speed and TSO staffing constraints in Standalone configuration.
The information included in this table is current as of the publication date of this document. To obtain the most up to date information on qualified EDS units, e-mail
PGDS@tsa.dhs.gov.

As shown in Figure 3.6 and Figure 3.7, a stand-alone EDS operates in a manner similar to lobby screening nodes installed today at many
Category X and Category I airports; however, stand-alone equipment should be installed in baggage makeup areas or other appropriate locations
to reduce lobby congestion where possible. This CBIS type is relatively labor intensive, but minimal capital investment is required to install the
system and support the operation. Note that no redundant stand-alone units will be provided by TSA.
Figure 3.6: Exam ple Stand-Alone EDS Configuration

Figure 3.7: Schem atic Visualization of Stand-Alone EDS Configurations
Stand-alone EDS layout designs shall ensure TSA personnel do not handle baggage more than 8 feet from the entrance or exit of the baggage
screening location footprint (as validated by the local Federal Security Director [FSD]) for the purposes of picking up a bag for screening or
returning a screened bag to the aircraft operator.
A stand-alone system option would significantly reduce up-front capital costs by using currently available EDS units with throughputs of at least
100 bph in locations where no economic justification exists to design and implement an in-line system.

Most stand-alone EDSs may be installed with either flat or incline/decline conveyor belts at the entrance and exit of the unit. The preferred
configuration of these belts may vary from site to site and the availability may vary from model to model. Refer to the EDS Original Equipment
Manufacturer (OEM) Installation Guide for the available options associated with each model.
Level 3 screening operations for stand-alone EDS units will vary based on the type of EDS used. EDS-CP units all have the ability to recall bag
images on Secondary Viewing Stations (SVSs) for Level 3 screening, and the CONOPS for these units may include the use of visual light
indicators, conveyor functionality, search list criteria, and manual bag ID entry. Most legacy EDS units do not have dedicated SVS capability and
TSOs will follow local procedures for alarm resolution with ETD. Accordingly, each deployment layout for legacy EDSs must accommodate the
footprint required for alarm resolution dictated by local policy. A key consideration is the space necessary to support multiple TSOs assigned to the
EDS traveling between the Primary Viewing Station (PVS) and alarm resolution work areas. Silent duress alarms shall be installed at all stand-
alone EDS Checked Baggage screening areas located in the public space. Reference latest Checkpoint Requirements and Planning Guide
(CRPG), Duress Alarm Requirements, Section 7.6 for more details.
Figure 3.8 and Figure 3.9 provide graphical representations and summarize equipment assumptions for current and future stand-alone EDS units
that are not already presented as part of the mini in-line CBIS type.

Figure 3.8: Reveal CT-80DR+
Applicable System Type: Stand-Alone
Notes:
2. "Qualified (EDS-CP)" is defined as those systems that have successfully completed detection Certification, TSIF Evaluation, and Operational Test and Evaluation
3. L1 = Standard
4. L2 = Long
5. L3 = XL

Figure 3.9: Sm iths Detection CTX 5800
Applicable System Type: Stand-alone
Notes:
1. Due to the concave opening of the machine, the maximum height will drop with increasing bag width. System does not have a limitation on the allowable length of bags.

3.4 CBIS Using ETD Units
ETD equipment is currently used for primary screening and for resolution of EDS alarms. ETD systems qualified for both applications are listed in
Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: ETD for Prim ary Screening and Alarm Resolution
False Max Avg Full Open Search Directed Search Oversize
Classification Model Alarm Analysis Screening Method Screening Method Screening Method Current Status
Rate Time (sec) Throughput (bph) Throughput (bph) Throughput (bph)
Domestic:22.5 Domestic: 20.9 Domestic: 19.5
Current Smiths IONSCAN 500DT SSI 8 Qualified
International: 19.8 International: 18.7 International: 13.8
Domestic:22.5 Domestic: 20.9 Domestic: 19.5
Current L3 Implant Sciences QS-B220 SSI 8 Qualified
International: 19.8 International: 18.7 International: 13.8
Notes:
1. Qualified = Certified to the 2012 Trace Detection Standard by the Transportation Security Laboratory (TSL) for use in Checkpoint and Checked Baggage screening.
2. The information included in this table is current as of the publication date of this document. To obtain the most up to date information on qualified ETDs, e-mail
PGDS@tsa.dhs.gov.
3.4.1 Primary Screening
ETD equipment can currently be used for 100% checked baggage screening in lobbies, baggage makeup areas, or other appropriate locations
when no EDS is present.
ETDs can also be used for primary screening of baggage that cannot be screened using an EDS, including out-of-gauge (OOG), oversize (OS),
and fragile items. OOG is defined as exceeding the maximum baggage dimensions that can physically be screened by the EDS machine. OS is
defined as exceeding the maximum conveyable baggage dimensions of the standard-width BHS conveyors.
As ETD screening is the most labor-intensive screening method and has the lowest throughput compared with all other screening methods, ETD
primary screening is typically only appropriate in lieu of EDS screening at airport zones with low baggage volumes. Typical screening capacity for
stand-alone ETD CBIS types is less than 100 bph. Silent duress alarms shall be installed at all ETD primary screening systems located in the
public space. Reference latest CRPG, Duress Alarm Requirements, Section 7.6 for more details.

A schematic view of an ETD-only system for primary screening is shown in Figure 3.10.
Figure 3.10: Schem atic Visualization of an ETD Prim ary Screening System
Figure 3.11 and Figure 3.12 provide graphical representations and summarize equipment assumptions for ETD machines.

Figure 3.11: Sm iths IonScan 500DT
Applicable System Type: Stand-Alone ETD

Figure 3.12: L3 Im plant Sciences QS-B220
Applicable System Type: Stand-Alone ETD

3.4.2 Alarm Resolution
ETD equipment is used in the Directed Search Screening Method to screen EDS-alarmed bags that have not been cleared by operators using an
OSR protocol based on viewing bag images. This method is focused on identifying and locating objects within baggage that have triggered EDS
alarms. In the event that a bag image is not available for an EDS-alarmed bag, a full open search may be employed by the TSA screener.
3.5 Other Baggage Conveying Systems
The previous discussions have assumed the traditional “friction belt on slider bed” baggage conveyance technology, but there are alternate types of
baggage systems that utilize other means to accomplish the same goals.
3.5.1 Individual Carrier Systems
An Individual Carrier System (ICS)-based CBIS design concept typically uses individual carriers to move baggage through a transport and
sortation system, which allows for the distribution of bags to the EDS units as well as to the CBRA, and if so designed, for the automated sortation
of bags to multiple makeup devices. ICSs typically consist of a closed-loop conveying system on which special-purpose carriers, each
accommodating a single bag and possessing a unique radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, are transported to the EDS. In this type of system,
the bag remains on the carrier throughout the screening and sortation processes. Alarmed baggage is transported to the CBRA on the carrier
while cleared baggage is conveyed to the sortation system. The ICS concept is presented to provide planners with a broad range of potential CBIS
concepts for consideration during the Pre-Design Phase. More details on application of the ICS concept are found in Appendix B.
A key consideration in this type of design is that once loaded onto the ICS carrier, the bag must remain associated with that carrier throughout the
screening process. Upon arrival into the CBRA, the bag cannot be removed from the carrier until an operator is available to screen the bag. Once
the bag is removed from the carrier by sliding the bag (lifting should not be required), the carrier must remain at that location until the bag has
been screened and loaded back onto the same carrier to maintain positive tracking. Depending on the CBRA design, bags may remain in the
carrier during the physical inspection process.
ICS is most beneficial in a centralized screening operational design, where EDS and CBRA staff can be minimized without compromising time-in-
system constraints. The Project Sponsor shall coordinate with TSA and OEMs to ensure the EDS-Carrier configuration is approved and an
approval letter is obtained from the TSA program office prior to the 100% design phase. TSA will ensure prioritization is provided for detection
impact validation testing of the EDS-Carrier configuration at TSA testing facilities. It is the responsibility of the ICS OEM to coordinate detection
impact testing with the EDS OEM as part of their research and development process. The ICS OEM must provide the carriers associated with the
EDS-Carrier configuration to the EDS OEM and TSL for detection impact validation testing.

The average ICS carrier size shall be no larger than two standard deviations above the airport-specific average bag length 1, using airport-specific
data where possible, plus additional carrier length beyond maximum bag loading size required for operation specified by the ICS manufacturers
(typically 6”). ICS throughput shall be calculated based upon the carrier size and the minimum spacing requirements.
3.5.2 Mobile Inspection Tables
A Mobile Inspection Table (MIT) may be used to transport bags to the TSOs for inspection in the CBRA. The MIT consists of a table top integrated
into an automated cart that transports bags along a path of magnetic tape affixed to the floor. Bags are loaded onto the MIT automatically and are
delivered directly to the TSOs for inspection. The bag remains on the MIT during inspection and is positively tracked with the MIT. The MIT utilizes
RFID transponders to positively update its position. After inspection the bag is automatically delivered to the clear line conveyor system for
sortation or driven directly to the make-up area. Error bags can be sent to a reinsertion line.
1 Based on national average bag lengths, the standard deviations are 5.3” for domestic and 4.7” for international.

CBIS PROJECTS
SECTION II: CBIS PROJECTS

CHAPTER 4: PROJECT PLANNING AND INITIATION
CHAPTER 5: PRE-DESIGN PHASE
CHAPTER 6: SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
CHAPTER 7: DETAILED DESIGN PHASE
CHAPTER 8: CONSTRUCTION PHASE
CHAPTER 9: TESTING AND COMMISSIONING PHASE
CHAPTER 10: PROJECT CLOSEOUT PHASE
CHAPTER 11: LIFE CYCLE COST ESTIMATION

CBIS PROJECTS 4: PROJECT PLANNING

4.1 CBIS Project Types
The majority of baggage screening projects fall into one of five categories – new system, recapitalization, optimization, PGDS upgrade, and
expansion. The design requirements for the project are in part dependent on which type of project is being undertaken. Similarly, the ability for
TSA to provide funding is also dependent on the type of project. The life cycle cost estimating process for CBIS has been included later in this
section to guide the Integrated Local Design Team (ILDT) through understanding the total cost for CBIS construction and operation for the life of
the system.
4.1.1 New CBIS Projects
New CBIS projects are any in-line screening systems that are built without needing to modify an existing CBIS. New CBIS projects are generally at
greenfield sites (a new terminal, a newly created CBIS within an existing terminal, etc.) or can occur when an existing system is completely
removed and replaced.
New CBIS projects are expected to fully comply with the design standards and requirements in the PGDS.
4.1.2 Recapitalization
Recapitalization projects are TSA-initiated and based on the expectation of existing screening equipment becoming technically obsolete. The
scope of a recapitalization project is limited specifically to only those actions necessary to remove the existing screening equipment and integrate
new screening equipment into an existing system.
Recapitalization projects are limited to the replacement of the screening equipment, while maintaining existing system capacity. The scope of
recapitalization projects is defined by TSA in advance. Any additional work that an airport would like to conduct beyond the recapitalization scope
is considered optimization activity (see Section 4.1.3).
A recapitalization project does not need to fully comply to PGDS requirements since it is not intended to fix known issues in the existing system. A
recapitalization project must only comply with PGDS as it relates to installation and configuration of new screening equipment. Similarly, due to the
reduced scope of a recapitalization project, the design process may not require all five phases of design.
4.1.3 Optimization
Optimization projects are airport-initiated modifications to an existing CBIS for any reason other than screening equipment recapitalization. Any
changes made to the system as part of the optimization must comply with PGDS requirements. However, it is not required to bring the rest of the
existing system (i.e. portions that are not receiving optimization) up to PGDS-compliance. PGDS applicability will be determined based on project’s
scope.

4.1.4 PGDS Upgrades
PGDS Upgrade projects are TSA-initiated efforts to close gaps between existing system capabilities and current PGDS requirements. Any
changes made to the system as part of the PGDS upgrade must comply with PGDS requirements. However, it is not required to bring the rest of
the existing system (i.e., portions that are not receiving upgrades) up to PGDS-compliance. PGDS applicability will be determined based on
project’s scope.
Required design submittals for a PGDS upgrade will depend on the scope and complexity of the upgrades to be done, but typically will not require
all five phases of design
4.1.5 Expansion
Expansion projects are limited to efforts that add screening equipment to an existing system that is designed to be expanded. This primarily refers
to in-line systems originally built with additional shunts for future EDS installation. Expansion projects are generally not required to be compliant
with current PGDS version, as the system may have been built to a previous version of the document.
The number of design phases required for an expansion project will be dependent on the scope and complexity of the expansion.
4.2 Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities
4.2.1 Project Stakeholders
The project stakeholders list should be customized to reflect the relevant stakeholders at the specific airport, including external stakeholders
associated with the project, and should include the following individuals representing primary functional areas:
• Airport – Engineering, Operations, Information Technology (IT), Maintenance, Planning and Design, Project Management, and others, as
appropriate
• Air Carriers – Headquarters, Operations, Corporate Real Estate, IT, Maintenance, Engineering, Planning, Security Technology Officers,
Station Managers, and others, as appropriate
• TSA – Local and National (Headquarters [HQ]) TSA

The following additional project stakeholders or designees will be included in some phases of the process:
• Law Enforcement – Local law enforcement (the entity responsible for procedures to handle alarmed bags not cleared at level 3 screening
in the CBRA by ETD)
• Technology Vendors – EDS equipment providers and manufacturers
Project stakeholders should be periodically briefed on the progress of the planning and design effort.
4.2.2 Integrated Local Design Team
As part of the design process, an ILDT that includes representatives of the above-mentioned stakeholders should be formed. In addition, the ILDT
should include a professional planning and design team comprised of architects, engineers, planners, CBIS designers, cost estimators, safety
professionals and project managers. The design team is also likely to include specialty consultants, such as simulation analysts, on an as-needed
basis.
Key benefits of the ILDT include:
• Facilitation of overall project coordination and information sharing between all project stakeholders throughout the life of the project
• Improved coordination of contingency plans and continuity of operations
• Representation of all project stakeholders in the decision making process
• A spirit of collaboration among stakeholders, which facilitates stakeholder buy-in from the early phases of the project
Responsibilities of the ILDT include:
• Development of alternative screening concepts, evaluation of those concepts, and generation of design drawings and submittals
• Submission of Requests for Variation (RFVs). Assessment of specific local conditions affecting the CBIS design, as well as the
requirements to be met by the design. After proper evaluation of local conditions and the CBIS design, if the ILDT concludes that any
process, performance, or design requirements set forth in this PGDS cannot be met by the CBIS designs due to local constraints, the ILDT
can petition TSA via the Project Sponsor for an exemption. The ILDT shall assess all implications of an exemption from any requirements
set forth in the PGDS due to local constraints and include full documentation supporting the request. The PGDS RFV Form can be found
in Appendix A, Section A.7.
• Submission of CBIS Change Requests (CCRs). A change request is submitted by the ILDT when a change to the system is required at
the construction contractor level but does not change the Other Transactional Agreement (OTA) scope. Further details relating to change
requests can be found in Section 8.3. The PGDS CCR Form can be found in Appendix A, Section A.5.

If Passenger Facility Charge funding is contemplated, regular communication with the local Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airports Office
servicing the airport should be included in the ILDT planning process since TSA does not provide such communication or coordination.
The responsibilities of individual ILDT members must be fully understood and properly integrated to ensure the effective design and
implementation of the optimal screening system.
4.2.3 Project Sponsor
The Project Sponsor is assumed to be an airport owner or operator. Key responsibilities of the Project Sponsor include:
• Initiation and execution of CBIS planning and design

• Formation of the ILDT and selection of a professional planning and design team. If an ILDT is not formed, the Project Sponsor shall
assume the responsibilities of the ILDT as defined in Section 4.2.2.
• Application for TSA funding
• Identification of a point of contact who is responsible for stakeholder outreach during each phase of the project
• Submission of design packages to TSA and participation in design review meetings
• Initiation and execution of construction, as well as testing and commissioning of the CBIS
• Operation and maintenance of the BHS portion of the CBIS
4.2.4 TSA Headquarters
Representatives from TSA Headquarters will be responsible for reviewing and approving or rejecting design submittals. TSA will determine funding
eligibility and prioritization as well as assess issues related to occupational safety, health, and the environment.
Typical TSA Headquarters representatives include individuals from Acquisition Program Management, Requirements and Capabilities Analysis,
and the Capabilities Management Division.
Key responsibilities of TSA Headquarters include:
• Creation of a regular forum for exchanging lessons learned as implementation moves forward and regularly updating the PGDS
• Reviews of technical and operational designs
• Assessment of the impact of potential screening protocol changes

• Communication of design best practices to the aviation industry
• EBSP management, including providing periodic updates to the Strategic Plan as warranted by technology or other critical changes and
making best efforts to provide the TSA resources needed for the project
• Providing a stakeholder forum to brainstorm operation and policy issues as needed
• Providing Government Furnished Information (GFI) upon request
4.3 Project Phases
All projects shall follow the phasing listed in below in sequence:
• Pre-Design Phase – The design-year baggage screening demand is estimated and a recommended conceptual alternative is developed.
This involves identifying existing baseline conditions and selecting a preferred alternative through an iterative process of developing and
analyzing a range of candidate alternatives. Using the GFI request form found in Appendix A, the ILDT shall request airport-specific GFI
from TSA, if available. TSA may provide a list of optimal preliminary alternatives for the Project Sponsor to consider.
• Schematic Design Phase – The work product of the Pre-Design Phase is used to further develop and refine the preferred alternatives,
including initial development of design drawings, more detailed Rough-Order-of-Magnitude (ROM) construction cost estimates, and
program schedules, resulting in an approved Basis of Design Report.
• Detailed Design Phase – The Basis of Design Report (BDR) is used to refine and finalize detailed design drawings, ROM construction
cost estimates, and program schedules. Three sub-phases are used as milestones: 30%, 70%, and 100% design.
• Construction Phase – The CBIS is constructed following the 100% detailed design documents. Any changes to the approved documents
are submitted to TSA for review and approval. Schedules for construction, equipment delivery, and testing are finalized. Training is also
included in the construction phase prior to the testing and commissioning of the system.
• Testing and Commissioning Phase – All required tests are conducted before the system is commissioned.
• Project Closeout Phase – All final as-built documentation is submitted.
The Project Sponsor will establish a program for design and implementation of the optimal screening system and that this program will be
submitted to TSA in compliance with the Pre-Design Phase submittal milestones. TSA approval of these milestones will trigger initiation of the
Schematic Design Phase.
TSA may choose to allow the Project Sponsor to forgo certain project phase submissions at its discretion. The Project Sponsor may also request
to forgo project phases through the Request for Variance (RFV) process detailed in Appendix A, Section A.7. Project Sponsor may request a
combined Pre-Design and Schematic Design submittal at certain locations deemed applicable to the TSA Project Coordinator.

During the entirety of the design phase:
• All formulas and calculations for figures shall be submitted.

• All PGDS or other TSA-provided rates and numbers shall be used in all submittals unless a RFV is submitted to and approved by TSA.
• All rates and numbers supplied in submittals shall be accompanied by all the supporting numbers and calculations.
Figure 4.1 summarizes the design phases (pre-design, schematic design, and detailed design) described in the PGDS.

Figure 4.1: CBIS Project Design Phases

4.4 Design-Build Projects
Sponsors of projects anticipated for completion through a design-build contract, regardless of the design percentage at which the design-build
contract is expected to be awarded, shall provide all documentation outlined in the PGDS.
Documentation shall be provided in accordance with a schedule coordinated by the Project Sponsor and TSA to ensure applicability of the
intended system to the guidelines and standards presented in the PGDS.
Additionally, shop drawings and 70% progress drawings shall be provided for CBISs being constructed through design-build contracts to
demonstrate that the system being constructed conforms to the design reviewed and approved by TSA.
4.5 Design Review Process
The following TSA stakeholders are involved in the design review process: design reviewers, site leads, engineering staff, life-cycle support staff,
and Project Coordinator. The design review process consists of the following steps for each design phase:
• The Project Sponsor submits the design submittals to the TSA.

• After reviewing the Project Sponsor’s submittals, if TSA determines additional data is needed, the TSA instructs the Project Sponsor to
provide any missing information to the TSA design review team.
• Following receipt of the requested data, TSA will complete the review process and provide the Project Sponsor with written review
comments including either acceptance or rejection of the submittals. This may be followed by a meeting or teleconference between the
TSA, the Project Sponsor, and the CBIS Designer to discuss TSA’s comments, particularly if submittals are rejected.
• The Project Sponsor shall provide a written response to each TSA comment on the form and in the space provided.
• Based on the Project Sponsor’s response to the comments and any subsequent discussions and clarifications, the TSA will accept or
reject the submittals.
Figure 4.2 summarizes the interactions between the Project Sponsor, ILDT, and TSA Headquarters in the design review process.

Figure 4.2: Sum m ary of Responsibilities During the Design Process

4.6 Submittals Formatting
All submittals shall be made electronically in print-ready Portable Document Format (PDF) and shall include the following:
• The title of the design shall be located on the front page and in the footer section, and shall state the applicable PGDS version at the time.
• Each design package shall begin with a table of contents.
• All chapters/submittals shall be indexed electronically within the file.
• A table of contents listing headings and page numbers shall be included in the front of each submittal.
• Each chapter shall be identified with an electronic PDF bookmark.
• PDF file size shall not exceed 20 megabytes (MB) for any submittal items.
4.7 TSA Funding
4.7.1 Funding Application
Airports with an eligible in-line CBIS project may request TSA funding in support of the CBIS design and construction. The two-step application
process consists of the submission of (1) a ReMAG request and (2) an application. Guidance and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on the
funding and application processes can be found on TSA’s Electronic Baggage Screening Program website. For more information on TSA’s funding
policy, see the Electronic Baggage Screening Program Policy Memo – TSA Funding of Checked Baggage Inspection System Project Costs at the
Beta.SAM.gov website.
4.7.2 Use of TSA-Approved Equipment
When TSA funds the design and construction of a CBIS project, the project sponsor shall design their CBIS for incorporation of TSA-qualified EDS
and ETD units.
In the event that the airport is not using TSA funding for either the design or construction of a project, the airport may choose to design for a TSA-
certified EDS, rather than a TSA-qualified, unit throughout the design process. However, TSA will only approve a 100% design to move forward to
construction if it is designed using TSA-qualified equipment identified in Chapter 3. The airport assumes the cost and schedule risk that if no
qualified equipment exists or has been procured at that time, the airport may need to either redesign the system to use available qualified
equipment or delay construction of the system until new qualified equipment becomes available.

4.7.3 Invoicing and Earned Value Management
Invoices or requests for payment should include a summary page presented in the same format as the current working cost estimate (see Section
11.7) to allow for ease of tracking and comparing actual expenses to agreed-upon costs. For invoicing instructions, refer to the Project OTA.
Because the practice of Earned Value Management (EVM) and the equation's ability to measure cost performance are widely accepted, airport
sponsors, airlines, or other organizations requesting funding support from TSA should provide a current EVM analysis. This analysis should
identify work completed to date and include a forecast of the work anticipated to be completed during the next month or invoicing period,
whichever is longer. The EVM data should be representative of the entire project scope in the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) format, using the
most current cost-loaded project schedule. Estimates with EVM calculations submitted for funding reimbursement request purposes should
include, at a minimum, the following EVM elements:
• Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) - Representative of all costs, including indirect costs that are planned or scheduled. A well-
designed schedule usually reflects these planned cost as a traditional S-curve shape.
• Actual Cost of Work Performed (ACWP) – Representative of all costs, including indirect costs charged against activities that are
completed.
• Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP) – More traditionally described as “earned value”, these costs are representative of the direct
and indirect costs for activities that are completed. These costs are distinct from the BCWS, which is for activities that are planned to be
completed.
• Budget at completion (BAC)
• Estimate at completion (EAC)
• Schedule variance (SV)
• Variance at completion (VAC)
• Cost performance index (CPI) (which equals BCWP ÷ ACWP)
The BCWS, ACWP, and ACWS provide the mechanics for a full analysis of project progress and performance in the EVM environment. As
depicted in Figure 4.3, the projections of EAC, SV, and VAC will be derived from these initial investments where the EAC for the data on the date
compiled is calculated as EAC = ((BAC - BCWP) ÷ CPI) + ACWP. Note that CPI = BCWP ÷ ACWP; poor performance produces a CPI greater
than 1.

Figure 4.3: Earned Value Managem ent Graph

CBIS PROJECTS 5: PRE-DESIGN PHASE
CHAPTER 5: PRE-DESIGN PHASE

5.1 Pre-Design Phase Overview
Every terminal at every airport is unique, with a particular set of zones and specific demand levels. All approved CBIS types should be considered
to find the optimal CBIS solution for each terminal. Many factors should be considered when selecting a specific system configuration—such as
the airport or terminal zone scheme, demand levels for the various zones, and the capital, operating, and maintenance costs associated with each
alternative for each zone—to determine the most cost-effective solution that is optimally-scaled for that airport or terminal.
Planners and designers should consider various alternative solutions during the early design process. The primary purpose of this phase is to
identify a preferred conceptual alternative for submittal to TSA before the initiation of schematic design. This phase requires the identification of
existing baseline conditions; estimation of design-year baggage screening demand; and development, analysis, and evaluation of alternative
screening concepts. This phase represents an iterative process for selecting a preferred alternative from a range of candidates. In each iterative
cycle, alternatives are further refined and evaluated. A process flow chart of the Pre-Design Phase is displayed in Figure 5.1.

Figure 5.1: Pre-Design Phase Process Flow
The end product of the Pre-Design Phase will be an Alternatives Analysis Report to be submitted to TSA describing the preferred alternative and
the process and rationale used in its selection. To satisfy TSA requirements, the report should provide sufficient documentation to indicate that a
reasonably diverse range of PGDS-compliant alternatives was explored and that the preferred alternative is operationally viable, meets level-of-
service requirements, and is the most cost-effective solution. Figure 5.2 summarizes ILDT tasks and deliverables and TSA responsibilities for the
Pre-Design Phase.

Figure 5.2: Sum m ary of Pre-Design Phase
5.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Pre-Design Phase Responsibilities
The tasks involved in the Pre-Design Phase that are the responsibility of the Project Sponsor and ILDT are outlined below:
• Collect necessary data, conduct a facilities inventory and participate in a project expectation meeting with TSA.
• Request, receive and review available GFI. Using the GFI as a starting point helps to shorten the design process and possibly nullify the
need for a Flight Schedule Analysis (FSA) (see Section 5.5.2.2).
• Define the zoning scheme and estimate design-year baggage screening demand as described in Section 5.5.1. The TSA possesses
information that is pertinent to the design review process, especially at the Pre-Design level. The Project Sponsor should interact with the
TSA to obtain realistic historical values for bags per passenger, peak values for passenger arrivals, passenger arrival curves, etc.

• Develop preliminary screening alternatives as described in Section 5.7. These screening alternatives should be similar to the system types
described in Chapter 3.
• Analyze the preliminary alternatives by conducting qualitative and high-level quantitative assessments (e.g., spatial analyses, assessment of
compatibility with airline business models), including security screening equipment requirements (see Section 5.6). Appendix C contains an
example of how a qualitative and high-level quantitative assessment of screening alternatives could be performed.
• Select the most promising alternatives for further development and evaluation.
• Refine the level of definition needed for the selected alternatives to support more detailed evaluations (e.g., specific screening equipment
types as well as screening equipment requirements).
• Obtain TSA staff, equipment, and maintenance cost estimates to perform the life cycle cost analysis.
• Perform ROM evaluations, including 20-year life cycle cost analyses (see Chapter 11).
• Select the Preferred Alternative, which is the alternative that is operationally viable, meets the level-of-service requirements, and has the
lowest present value life cycle costs. Other promising alternatives could be carried forward to the Schematic Design Phase at the discretion
of the Project Sponsor.
• Submit Alternatives Analysis Report to TSA.
• Receive TSA comments on the Alternatives Analysis Report and formal approval or rejection.
• Participate in a meeting with the TSA Design Review Team in the event the Project Sponsor or ILDT requires clarification on the comments
and disposition of the submittal.
5.3 Pre-Design Phase Deliverables

Table 5.1: Pre-Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Pre-Design Phase Deliverables – In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
• Alternatives Analysis Report
• Preliminary contingency plan (only applicable to mini in-lines at this phase)
The Pre-Design package shall include the deliverables described below:
• Alternatives Analysis Report. This report documents the assumptions and methodology used to derive the design-year baggage
screening demand, the process used to develop alternatives, a description of all alternatives considered, and a list of the preliminary set of
alternatives to be carried forward for analysis on a life cycle cost basis. The format for this deliverable is given in Section 5.7.3.
This report will be used as the basis for requesting staffing estimates from TSA for use in the life cycle cost analysis.

This report also documents the life cycle cost analysis and basis for selection of the preferred alternatives to be further developed in
the Schematic Design Phase.
• Preliminary contingency plan (see Section 5.7.3; only applicable to mini in-lines at this phase)
5.4 TSA Pre-Design Phase Responsibilities
At the beginning of the Pre-Design Phase, TSA will initiate a project expectation meeting with the Project Sponsor and ILDT. If available, TSA will
provide the following GFI:
• Historical data and the analysis required to render the baggage design 10-minute rate
• OOG percentage for current EDS units at site
• TSA Enhanced Staffing Model arrival curves and demand assumptions
• Performance Management Information System (PMIS) reports
• Estimates of staffing levels necessary to complete the life cycle cost analysis in preparing the Preferred Alternatives Analysis Report
As part of the review process during the Pre-Design Phase, TSA Headquarters is expected to provide the Project Sponsor with the following:
• A Design Review Meeting with the Project Sponsor, ILDT, and TSA project coordinators
• Formal approval or rejection and comments on the report submittals
5.5 Baggage Screening Demand Determination
The intent of baggage screening demand analysis is to ensure that systems are designed to meet the baggage demands of at least 85% of the
days as expressed by the peak 10 minutes of each day in the calendar year. Where designing for the 85th percentile does not provide sufficient
capacity as determined by the TSA and Project Sponsor, alternative design days can be used with TSA approval.
This section documents the methodology used to determine the design demand required to size optimal screening systems within an airport. As
explained in detail in the following paragraphs, the steps below summarize the methodology:
1. Categorize the airport into screening zones

2. Determine current checked baggage demand for each zone
3. Project future baggage demand for each zone

To aid the project sponsor in determining the baggage demand through this methodology, the TSA will provide GFI, when requested and
available, for the given airport. This information may include data that will assist the project sponsor in determining the design day baggage rate
(see Section 5.5.2) and equipment requirements (see Section 5.6). The Project Sponsor may choose to use this information as a guide
throughout the analysis or as a justification to shorten the required analysis.
Appendix C provides a case study on how these initial steps should be conducted.
5.5.1 Categorize the Airport into Screening Zones
Checked baggage screening systems can be designed to combine checked baggage from several airlines into a single system. As numerous
options are available for combining baggage flows, planners should use their best judgment to capture (1) high-level architectural constraints and
(2) airline operational constraints. It is recommended that more than one screening configuration and airline grouping be considered at the outset
of a project to provide realistic alternatives for comparison.
One approach that could be used to determine feasible combinations of baggage flow is a zone hierarchy scheme that represents the spatial
characteristics of airport. Figure 5.3 presents a sample scheme for a tri-level hierarchy (F1, F2, and F3).
Figure 5.3: Zone Hierarchy Representation
Each element in the hierarchy represents a spatially feasible zone for EDS screening, be it at a small, decentralized level or at a large,
consolidated level:

• F1 Zone – An F1 zone is the largest feasible zone in an airport for installation of a centralized in-line system. This zone may
accommodate multiple airlines that share EDS and are usually served by multiple baggage belts with sortation functionality downstream
from the screening area.
• F2 Zone – An F2 zone represents a screening solution that fits somewhere between the F1 and F3 zones, and is usually determined by
the feasibility of 2 or more adjacent airlines sharing their screening and baggage handling facilities (e.g., a common baggage make-up
area).
• F3 Zone – An F3 zone is the smallest feasible zone in a terminal wherein a highly decentralized EDS is likely to be preferred, and is
usually served by a single take-away baggage belt. A dominant airline in a terminal with multiple baggage belts would have a number of
F3 zones.
For example, Figure 5.4 shows the western half of the ticketing lobby and associated baggage make-up area at Albuquerque International Sunport
(ABQ). The ticket lobby, airline ticket offices (ATOs), and baggage make-up areas are all located on one contiguous level.

Figure 5.4: Assum ed Screening Zones at Albuquerque International Sunport
One potential method of developing a zone hierarchy for ABQ would be the following:
• F3 Zones – Each baggage take-away belt is assigned to an F3 zone.

• F2 Zones – An existing, contiguous baggage make-up area with several take-away belts is defined in this example as a single F2 zone.
• F1 Zones – As the ticketing lobby, the ATO, and the baggage make-up areas are physically divided by the entrance hall into the west and
east sides, each side is designated as a single F1 zone. It would be impractical and expensive to screen all bags in a single centralized
system for the entire airport; thus, at ABQ, two separate F1 zones were identified.

Because the subdivision of an airport into zones is subjective, a detailed explanation of the reasons that a particular screening zone hierarchy was
selected over another hierarchy should be provided as part of the Alternatives Analysis Report.
Screening zone selection is fundamental in generating baggage screening demand profiles and, ultimately, in determining the required baggage
screening equipment.
All airlines (including charter airlines) operating in each screening zone shall be identified.
5.5.2 Determine Current Checked Baggage Demand
There are two methods for estimating current demand, one using FDRS data and the other using FSA data. If available, the TSA will supply GFI to
assist the ILDT in their determination of current baggage rate demands. This GFI data may consist of historical empirical FDRS data that has been
cultivated to yield the peak 10 minutes of every day of the preceding year, individual EDS unit processing rates (by minute or 10-minute rolling
bins), and Staff Allocation Model data (yielding some values for parameters such as bags/passenger/airline, hourly rates, etc.).
If available, FDRS data provided by TSA shall be used to determine the current 85th percentile peak 10-minute demand for each screening zone. If
GFI is not available, the FSA methodology shall be used to derive the Average Day Peak Month (ADPM) peak 10-minute demand for each
screening zone.
5.5.2.1 Field Data Reporting System Analysis Methodology
FDRS data provides an actual measure of current baggage demand. The peak 10-minute volume from each day is graphed from smallest to
largest to identify the 85th percentile value for the screening zone, as illustrated in Figure 5.5.

Figure 5.5: Exam ple 12-Month FDRS Peak 10-Minute Daily Volum e, Ascending
To find the Design Day demand, the 85th percentile 10-minute demand value is grown as described in Section 5.5.3; no FSA is required.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology
The FSA method of estimating checked baggage demand analyzes the flight schedules on the ADPM to identify the peak hour demand associated
with each screening zone. The FSA method should only be used if FDRS is unavailable or is found to not be representative of actual baggage
demand for some reason.
(1) Identify ADPM

The ADPM is determined from originating bags and international recheck bags for each zone.
• For each screening zone, the total number of monthly originating bags and international recheck bags for all airlines in that zone in a
12-month period shall be obtained and the peak month identified. The month with the maximum combined number of originating and
international recheck bags is referred to as the peak month.

• For each screening zone, the total number of daily originating and international recheck bags for all airlines in that zone during the
peak month shall be calculated, and a mathematical average shall be derived. The day on which the number of originating and
international recheck bags is closest to the calculated mathematical average is the ADPM.
Depending on the airlines operating in each zone, the ADPM might differ from zone to zone.
Planners should include charter airline originating bags or international recheck bags if that information is relevant and available when determining
the ADPM for each zone.
(2) Flight Schedule

Once the ADPM for each zone has been determined, that day’s flight schedule for each screening zone shall be provided in MS Excel format. To
identify outbound baggage demand, flight schedules shall only contain information on departing flights from the subject airport. Flight schedules
shall specify for each flight: destination, flight departure time, flight number, published carrier, operator, aircraft type, and number of seats.
To derive international recheck baggage demand, the arrival schedule of international flights whose passengers will be connecting to domestic
flights shall be provided. Baggage arriving from international destinations where security screening protocols differ from those used by TSA are
re-screened at the first United States port of entry before being loaded onto any domestic flight.
(3) Load Factors

A load factor is the percentage of seats on a flight occupied by ticketed passengers. Load factors vary by flight (e.g., by airline, time of day, and
destination), by day of the week, and by season. Because of the variance in load factors, it is important to obtain the most accurate data that
reflect the specific conditions of the selected ADPM directly from the airlines if possible.
In addition, load factors on international arrival flights must be obtained to derive international recheck baggage demand.
(4) Originating and Connecting Passenger Percentages

Originating passengers are passengers whose itinerary begins at the subject airport; an originating passenger checks in with the appropriate
airline and proceeds through the security screening checkpoint to the departure gate. Similar to load factors, the percentage of originating
passengers may vary by flight (e.g., by time of day, destination, and airline), by day of the week, and by season.
Domestic flights departing from the airport prior to 9 a.m. typically have significantly higher percentages of originating passengers than those
departing after 9 a.m. because of the nature of connecting passenger traffic. In general, the first arrival bank of domestic flights permits very few
passengers to connect with flights departing from the airport prior to 9 a.m.; therefore, most of the passengers on those flights are originating
passengers. Thus, the percentage of originating passengers before 9 a.m. is close to 100%; after 9 a.m. the percentage ranges from 5% to 100%.

Because of the wide variance in originating passenger percentages, it is important to obtain the most accurate data that reflect the specific
conditions of the ADPM at the subject airport directly from the airlines if possible.
The percentage of passengers arriving on international flights and connecting to domestic flights shall be used to derive international recheck
baggage demand.
The estimated number of originating passengers shall be calculated by multiplying the number of seats by the load factor and by the percentage
of originating passengers assumptions for the ADPM.
The estimated number of connecting passengers from international to domestic flights shall be calculated by multiplying the number of arriving
seats by the load facto, and by the percentage of connecting passengers assumptions for the ADPM.
(5) Passenger Arrival Distributions

Passenger arrival distributions specify the percentages of originating and international recheck passengers arriving at the airport a specific number
of minutes prior to their flight departure. These distributions are used to determine the flow of passengers checking bags for each flight. The flows
for each flight are added together to generate an overall passenger flow over the course of the Design Day.
Where possible, and with TSA’s concurrence, arrival distributions should be airport-specific, and obtained directly from the airlines. If airport-
specific data is not available, the earliness distributions in this section should be used.
Domestic Earliness Distributions: Significant differences exist in the earliness distributions between passengers on Domestic flights departing
before 8/9:00 a.m. and after 8/9:00 a.m. Earliness distributions for flights departing in the morning are generally of shorter duration and thus more
peaked; therefore, it is important to use the appropriate earliness distributions to accurately derive actual baggage flows.
The distribution for flights departing before 8/9:00 a.m.(peak) hours exhibits higher peaking characteristics and has a much shorter duration than
the distribution for flights departing after 8/9:00 a.m. (off-peak) hours.
The Domestic earliness distributions have been revised based on a 2018 PGDS Study and are shown in Figure 5.6.

Figure 5.6: Earliness Distributions – Dom estic Departures Before8/9:00 A.M. and Off-Peak-After 8/9:00 AM
International Earliness Distributions: The distribution variance for international departures is higher than for domestic departures and a larger
percentage of international passengers arrive at the airport earlier than for domestic flights. The International earliness distributions have been
revised based on a 2018 PGDS study and are shown in Figure 5.7.
Figure 5.7: Earliness Distribution – International Departures

Lateness Distributions: A lateness distribution for international recheck passengers specifies the percentage of passengers that exit the Federal
Inspection Services facility a specific number of minutes after their flights have landed. Specifically, the lateness distribution is applied to
international recheck passengers that need their bags screened. Passengers arriving from international destinations where security screening is
not conducted according to TSA protocols and who are connecting to domestic flights need to have their bags screened at the first port of entry
into the United States before they are loaded onto any domestic flight.
Lateness distributions have a much shorter duration than earliness distributions because all passengers deplane upon arrival within a relatively
short period of time for any given flight. For this reason, the international recheck baggage flows show marked peaks and have very short
durations, as shown in Figure 5.8.
Figure 5.8: Lateness Distribution – International Recheck
The data underlying the passenger arrival distribution graphs in this section are compiled in Table 5.2. These values should only be used if airport-
specific data is not available.

Table 5.2: Passenger Arrival Distributions
Minutes Before Earliness Earliness Lateness
Earliness
Departure/ Peak Dom estic Off-peak Dom estic Federal Inspection
International
After Arrival Before 8/9:00 a.m . After 8/9:00 a.m . Services Flight
0 to 10 0.80% 0.06% 0.22% 0.00%
10 to 20 0.26% 0.30% 0.11% 0.00%
20 to 30 0.42% 0.48% 0.15% 0.00%
30 to 40 1.10% 0.98% 0.28% 2.00%
40 to 50 3.08% 2.10% 0.61% 3.00%
50 to 60 6.71% 4.03% 1.32% 19.00%
60 to 70 10.34% 6.19% 3.08% 27.00%
70 to 80 12.87% 8.16% 5.13% 25.00%
80 to 90 13.54% 9.59% 7.37% 20.00%
90 to 100 12.79% 10.25% 8.93% 4.00%
100 to 110 11.21% 10.08% 10.28% 0.00%
110 to 120 8.70% 9.25% 10.69% 0.00%
120 to 130 6.13% 7.95% 9.75% 0.00%
130 to 140 4.11% 6.44% 8.40% 0.00%
140 to 150 2.66% 5.09% 7.12% 0.00%
150 to 160 1.69% 3.94% 5.74% 0.00%
160 to 170 1.10% 3.06% 4.75% 0.00%
170 to 180 0.72% 2.36% 3.81% 0.00%
180 to 190 0.46% 1.83% 2.92% 0.00%
190 to 200 0.32% 1.43% 2.17% 0.00%
200 to 210 0.22% 1.14% 1.62% 0.00%
210 to 220 0.15% 0.92% 1.19% 0.00%
220 to 230 0.11% 0.74% 0.90% 0.00%
230 to 240 0.08% 0.62% 0.71% 0.00%
>240 0.41% 3.01% 2.77% 0.00%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

(6) Checked Bags per Passenger
The average number of checked bags per originating passenger varies by airline, by destination, and by time of year. Extensive in-field data
collection efforts and specific data provided by the airlines for a 2019 study demonstrate that the number of checked bags per passenger is:
• Average of 0.7 checked bags per originating passenger for domestic flights
• Average of 1.0 checked bags per originating passenger serving international markets
• Average of 1.0 recheck bags per international-to-domestic connecting passenger
These are very generic ranges, and planners should obtain and substantiate locally-collected specific values for the types of carriers and markets
served. Planners should consider protocol modifications, such as the one prohibiting and subsequently limiting liquids in carry-on baggage that
may also affect these ratios.
The estimated number of originating checked bags shall be calculated by multiplying the estimated number of originating passengers by the
number of checked bags per passenger assumptions for the ADPM.
The estimated number of international recheck bags shall be calculated by multiplying the estimated number of connecting passengers from
international to domestic flights by the number of international recheck bags per passenger assumptions for the ADPM.
The earliness and lateness distributions are used to derive the flows of originating and international recheck bags throughout the day.
Table 5.3 summarizes several potential sources of the key input data used to derive ADPM baggage flows.

Table 5.3: Sum m ary of Input Data Needs and Potential Data Sources
Data Sources
Scheduled airline activity Official Airline Guides, Inc.
Seabury Airline Planning Group Database
Airport sponsor
Airlines
Charter airline activity Airport sponsor
Charter airlines
Airline boarding load factors U.S. Department of Transportation
Airlines
Percentage of originating passengers U.S. Department of Transportation
Airlines
Earliness and lateness distributions Airlines
In-field surveys
Checked bags per passenger Airlines
In-field surveys
Historical baggage data TSA
Enhanced Staffing Model (ESM) Data TSA
(7) Identify Peak Demand

The final product of the Flight Schedule Analysis will show the combined baggage flow by 10-minute bin over the ADPM for all airlines in the
screening zone. The highest 10-minute bin is used for the peak demand value.
Figure 5.9 shows the 10-minute ADPM checked baggage flow by airline for an example airport. Each airline is represented by a different color in
this figure.This figure is meant for reference only and is not meant to depict the actual curve smoothness developed using the ADPM process.

Figure 5.9: ADPM Checked Baggage Flow
5.5.2.3 Calibration of Flight Schedule-Driven Demand
The FSA methodology should be calibrated with actual baggage counts for the relevant airlines. If a significant discrepancy in peak hour baggage
demand (for the ADPM) is found between the two sources, then planners should consult with the Project Sponsor (see Chapter 1) to resolve the
discrepancy.

5.5.3 Project Future Baggage Demand
Baggage demand projections can be based on the FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) or on the specific airport’s Master Plan forecast (if the
Master Plan is current). However, the use of a Master Plan for forecast growth can only be used to limit future growth and cannot exceed the TAF
growth rate. In general, the FAA must approve the forecast used to determine design year baggage demands. If, for any reason, local airport and
airline staff and their consultants believe that the TAF or the Master Plan forecasts do not properly represent expected growth at the airport, the
revised forecast and a detailed explanation of the reasons that the FAA-approved forecast is not acceptable shall be provided to TSA for approval.
The demand cannot be higher than the activity level that can be supported by the terminal gates for which the CBIS is designed.
Baggage demands shall be projected to the specific Design Year before they can be used to determine screening equipment requirements. The
design year for equipment requirements shall be five years after the initial DBU for a given baggage screening system (i.e., DBU+5 years). This
assumption is based on current TSA policy for system approval. Thus, if a system is scheduled to become operational in 2020, the design year for
that system will be 2025.
The growth rate from the TAF or Master Plan forecast should be uniformly applied to the existing baggage demand. It may be applied differently if
a detailed explanation of the reasons that the current activity pattern is expected to change is provided.
The Compound Average Growth Rate (CAGR) is calculated using the following formula:
An example calculation is shown in Figure 5.10:

Figure 5.10: Exam ple Grow th Rate Calculation
Applying the example growth rate starting with the current demand through DBU+5 from the example FDRS chart in Section 5.2.2.1 yields the
Design Year demand shown in Table 5.4:
Table 5.4: Exam ple Baggage Dem and Projection

5.6 Baggage Screening Equipment Requirements Determination
During the Pre-Design Phase, the focus is on determining how many EDS units, OSR stations, and BISs are required, given a certain airline
grouping, CBIS type, and EDS equipment type. Once all feasible screening zones have been determined and the baggage flow for each screening
zone has been projected for the design year, it is possible to determine the high-level equipment requirements for each screening zone.
In determining EDS equipment requirements, the surged adjusted 10-minute demand of the design day in the design year (DBU+5) shall be used.
OSR station and BIS requirements shall be based on the capacity of the EDS equipment.
The EDS equipment requirements shall be listed in 1-year increments in the Basis of Design Report, from DBU through DBU+5 years. This is a
chart listing EDS units, PVS and SVS workstations by yearly requirements. The EDS equipment requirements for 10 additional years past DBU+5
years shall be listed in 1-year increments in a separate chart in the Basis of Design Report, from DBU+6 through DBU+15 years to support long-
term planning.
Equipment requirements shall be revalidated 12 months prior to equipment delivery. If EDS equipment type changes, the construction start date is
delayed, or if the construction schedule causes delays more than 12 months beyond the expected DBU, then a revalidation of EDS and CBRA
requirements shall be submitted.
5.6.1 Screening Equipment Parameters and Assumptions
5.6.1.1 False Alarm Rate and OSR Clear Rate
The range of expected annual average false alarm rates for EDS can vary based on domestic flights (at the low-end) and international flights (at
the high-end) with varying bag content.
False alarm rates for international flights are typically higher as checked bags for these flights tend to be bigger and have a higher ratio of alarms
per bag due to relatively dense or highly cluttered bag content.
The OSR clear rate and clear time estimates are based on approved TSA alarm resolution protocol as well as expected EDS image quality and
alarm resolution tools provided to screeners on EDS bag viewing stations (or threat resolution interfaces).
The estimated OSR clear rate and OSR clear time are annual averages for domestic and international flights (with varying bag content and varying
bag images).

5.6.1.2 Out-of-Gauge and Oversize Screened Baggage
Maximum baggage dimensions represent the maximum in every dimension and not maximum dimensions of an actual bag that can fit into the
EDS. For example, with the L-3 eXaminer 3DX, at maximum width of 32 inches the maximum height of a bag is 14 inches and at a width of 21.5
inches the maximum height of the bag is 21.5 inches. Anything beyond the maximum dimensions of the EDS is considered to by out-of-gauge.
The OOG percentage is based on annual and national averages for domestic and international flights with varying bag sizes and on maximum bag
dimensions specified by baggage handling system designers and EDS manufacturers. The OOG percentage is based on the EDS model selected
for the CBIS. The airport-specific OOG percentage may differ from the national average based on the unique mix of bag sizes and types specific
to the airport.
OS bags are items that are too large to be conveyed by the standard width conveyors. These are generally delivered to the CBRA through a
separate larger wider conveyor line or hand-delivered to a screening location.
5.6.1.3 EDS Error and Lost-In-Track Baggage
EDS error bags are items that errored in the EDS and tracked to the CBRA with an EDS Error status. These bags can either be reinserted or
manually screened as determined by the TSO.
Lost-In-Track (LIT) bags are bags that are not tracked properly post-EDS. These bags may have received a decision by the EDS, but are sent to
CBRA because the original tracking ID association is lost. Depending on the screening system, these bags may be reconciled in the CBRA using
the International Air Transport Association (IATA) bag tag and a hand scanner.
5.6.1.4 Design Values
Site-specific design values are always preferred over assumed values. The use of the assumed values in Table 5.5 is allowed only in the absence
of site-specific data and when accompanied by supporting data deemed acceptable to the Project Coordinator.
Table 5.5: Assum ed Design Values

Design Param eter Assum ed Values
EDS Errored Rate 1%
Lost-In-Track Rate 2% w ith connected Reinsertion Line or 1% w ithout
Oversize Rate 2%
Out-of-Gauge Rate 2%
Average Bag Length Domestic 29.3”, International 30.2”

5.6.2 EDS Equipment Requirements
The following key inupts are needed to determine EDS equipment requirements:
• Design year peak 10-minute demand, calculated as described in Section 5.5

• CBIS type and EDS equipment type (a list of system types, EDS equipment types, and EDS throughputs is provided in Chapter 3)
To calculate EDS equipment requirements:
1. If the peak 10-minute design year baggage demand was developed using the FSA method, the peak flow value is adjusted by subtracting
bags that will not pass through the EDS machines (OS and OOG). If the peak flow value was identified using the FDRS method, no
adjustment is necessary.
2. A surge factor is applied to account for random variability in the expected average demand and ensure that equipment requirements are
not undersized. For mini in-line systems, the application of a surge factor may not be required; this will be at TSA’s discretion.
3. The surged adjusted peak 10-minute demand is converted to a peak-hour design year baggage demand,
4. The EDS unit throughput is calculated using the expected EDS model data and applicable domestic/international blended average bag
length.
5. The hourly demand is divided by the EDS unit throughput.
6. The resulting number is rounded up to the next whole number of EDS.
The number of EDS units required shall be calculated as follows:
where:
NEDS = Number of EDS units

Adjusted Peak 10-Minute Demand = Peak 10-minute demand that will be screened by EDS units
ThroughputEDS = Number of EDS screened bags per hour (95% throughput presented in Table 3.1 for in-line systems). The EDS throughput
rates shall be calculated using the following formula:

Surge Factor is derived from an assumed Poisson arrival process distribution. The following formula shall be used to calculate each zone-
specific surge factor:
Continuing the example from Section 5.5.3, the number of EDS machines required would be calculated as shown in Figure 5.11. Note that the
peak demand in the example originated from the FDRS graph in Section 5.5.2.1.

Figure 5.11: Exam ple EDS Requirem ents Calculation
As screening systems are sized to meet demand 85% of the time, screening demand will, at times, exceed capacity over the course of the year.
Depending on the duration of the over-capacity conditions, specific contingency measures should be implemented.
5.6.3 EDS Equipment Redundancy
Estimating EDS equipment requirements based on surged peak-hour baggage demand will result in adequate capacity during typical operating
conditions. However, EDS equipment cannot be assumed to be 100% reliable. Given the central role of EDS as the primary screening technology
for checked baggage inspection, redundancy must be provided to account for the potential that EDS equipment will be inoperable during certain
peak periods. For mini in-line systems redundant EDS equipment is not allowed.

To attain the best possible values for operational availability, an additional EDS unit will be supplied per EDS unit grouping. A grouping is defined
as a quantity of EDS units situated together and fed from a single mainline. The redundant EDS should be included in the total EDS machines for
determining space allocation.
The quantity of mainlines, as well as the quantity of EDS units in a CBIS should be minimized. This increases efficiency, operational availability,
and reduces cost.
The redundant EDS units are intended to provide replacement capacity in the event that some of the nonredundant EDS units are out-of-service
for a period of time.
Redundant equipment shall only be provided when no lower-cost redundancies are possible. For instance, for decentralized systems (such as mini
in-line or stand-alone systems), redundancy can be provided through the use of other nearby systems. It is expected that redundant equipment will
only be cost-effective for In-line CBIS types, where unit downtime can have a significant effect on system performance.
TSA will endorse the CBIS right of way for future growth but reserves the right to delay providing all screening equipment beyond those necessary
to accommodate DBU+5 years until growth projections are met.
5.6.4 OSR Station Requirements
For certain system types, the OSR can be centralized and remotely located.
The degree of centralization can also vary from totally centralized OSR systems that serve the entire airport to OSR systems dedicated to each
CBIS. If the system type supports a remotely located OSR system, several considerations should guide the selection of the appropriate degree of
system centralization, including TSA staffing, space requirements, and IT infrastructure requirements.
Thus, to select the best OSR system type and location, it is recommended that OSR options be evaluated by assessing OSR staffing needs,
capital costs of IT infrastructure and building modifications, and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) costs associated with each option.
The number of OSR stations to be actually installed shall be derived based on the total non-redundant EDS capacity. The size of the OSR Area
(OSRA) in terms of space allocation shall be based on the number of OSR stations derived based on the total EDS capacity including redundant
units.
The number of OSR stations (NOSR) required shall be calculated as follows:

where:
NEDS x ThroughputEDS = Total EDS capacity (throughput) for all non-redundant EDS units connected to the remote OSR system;
FAEDS = EDS false alarm rate for the EDS equipment selected; and
ThroughputOSR = 3600 / Screening Processing TimeOSR
Where Screening Processing Time = Average screening time in seconds that the OSR operator needs for each bag.
Continuing with the example from the preceding section, the number of OSR stations required would be calculated as shown in Figure 5.12.
Figure 5.12: Exam ple OSR Station Requirem ents Calculation
The false alarm rate shown in the above example is used for illustrative purposes only. Official planning values for EDS false alarm rates are
considered SSI. Please contact TSA to obtain this information.
5.6.5 Baggage Inspection Station Requirements
BISs are located in CBRAs. In general, an ETD machine is shared between two TSOs because the amount of time the ETD machine is used
during the total screening process for a bag is relatively short. Thus, the ratio of BISs to ETD equipment is typically two to one.
The following key inputs are necessary to calculate BIS requirements:
• Total sum of EDS capacity (throughput) for all non-redundant EDS units connected to the CBRA (sum of Throughput EDS)
• Average Domestic/International bags ratio
• EDS false alarm rate for the EDS equipment selected (FAEDS)
• Average rate of OS and OOG bags

• OSR clear rate (CROSR)
• Average rate of EDS Error and Lost-in-Tracking bags, which may have different processing times than alarmed bags
• Average ETD screening time per TSO, converted to average ETD throughput per TSO per hour (ThroughputETD)
The number of BISs to be installed shall be derived based on the total non-redundant EDS capacity. The size of the CBRA in terms of space
allocation shall be based on the number of BISs derived based on the total EDS capacity.
The NBIS equation is developed by calculating separate pro-rated domestic and international BIS requirements for the expected volume of
Alarmed, OOG, Reinsert, and OS bags. The first three results are added together and, unlike other equipment calculations that round up, the sum
is rounded using the Half Round Up methodology, where greater than or equal to 0.5 rounds up, and less than 0.5 rounds down. The OS
requirement value is rounded up and then added to the rounded Alarmed+OOG+Reinsert value.
The number of BISs (NBIS) required shall be calculated as follows:

Where:
NEDS = number of non-redundant EDS

ThroughputEDS = throughput of the EDS
FAEDS = False Alarm Rate of the EDS
CROSR = OSR clear rate
% Domestic = percentage of baggage associated with domestic flights
% International = percentage of baggage associated with international flights
Rate Directed Search Domestic = rate at which TSOs resolve domestic alarmed baggage via directed search
Rate Directed Search International = rate at which TSOs resolve international alarmed baggage via directed search
% OOG = percentage of OOG bags
Rate OOG Domestic = rate at which TSOs resolve domestic OOG baggage via OOG search
Rate OOG International = rate at which TSOs resolve international OOG baggage via OOG search
% LIT = percentage of bags Lost in Tracking
ErrorEDS = percentage of bags associated with EDS errors
Rate Reinsert = rate at which TSOs reinsert bags (domestic and international are the same)
% OS = percentage of OS bags
Rate OS Domestic = rate at which TSOs resolve domestic OS baggage via OS search
Rate OS International = rate at which TSOs resolve international OS baggage via OS search
Continuing the example from the preceding section, the number of EDS machines required would be calculated as shown in Figure 5.13. Note that
the assumed values are used for illustrative purposes only; airport-specific values should be used if available. Official planning values for EDS
false alarm rates are considered SSI. Please contact TSA to obtain this information.

Figure 5.13: Exam ple BIS Requirem ents Calculation
5.6.6 ETD Machine Requirements
The number of ETD machines required shall be calculated as follows, rounded up to the next ETD:
Continuing the example from the preceding section, the number of ETDs required for this CBIS would be 15÷2 = 7.5, which rounds up to 8 ETDs.

NOTES:
• In determining ETD TSO throughput rates for remote OSR, it is assumed that each TSO has a dedicated viewing station.
• The false alarm rate and OSR clear rate shown in the above example are used for illustrative purposes only. Official planning values for
EDS false alarm rates are considered SSI. Please contact TSA to obtain this information.
5.6.7 Accommodating Traffic Growth after the Design Year
The equipment requirements documented above are based on a design demand for five years beyond the screening system DBU (i.e., DBU+5
years). It is likely that the initial system will have some excess capacity because EDS equipment requirements are rounded up and equipment will
not necessarily reach 100% utilization after five years. This excess capacity should be used to accommodate as much traffic growth as possible
before additional costs are incurred to expand the CBIS.
For future planning, the ILDT needs to consider the space required for future growth.
While increased system utilization may accommodate some additional demand, designers should also seek to provide low-cost flexibility options in
the system to incorporate one or more of the following capacity enhancements:
• Upgraded software, hardware, or both to improve throughputs of installed equipment.

• Replacement of installed equipment with higher-throughput units and necessary modifications to the BHS to support these units (including
providing access to and from the equipment).
• Addition of new equipment and associated BHS infrastructure.
In practice, a combination of one or more of the above approaches could be used. The choice of how additional capacity is to be provided will
depend on the constraints of the terminal, the degree of certainty about future traffic growth, the overall capacity of the terminal, and the optimal
system type to be installed.
Several examples of how additional capacity could be provided for specific system types are provided below:
• In-Line CBIS – These systems could be designed with sufficient queuing capacity, variable frequency drives, and other components to
support replacement of EDS units to accommodate traffic growth. Alternatively, designs could preserve space for additional equipment or
provide areas where low-cost modifications to facilities might be possible to install additional units. The choice will depend on local traffic,
spatial and operational considerations, and life cycle cost projections.
• Mini In-Line CBIS – As this system type is based on minimal BHS modifications, it is likely that the BHS of a mini in-line system will not
support significantly higher-throughput EDS equipment without significant modifications. Therefore, growth beyond DBU+5 years can be

accommodated by (1) new units and associated BHS infrastructure, (2) upgrading the BHS (and possibly the EDS) to support higher
throughputs, or (3) replacing the mini in-line system with an in-line system.
• Stand-Alone CBIS – Software and hardware improvements may increase system throughput (assuming that bags can be loaded into the
EDS units at a fast enough rate to fully utilize the unit). However, it is expected that additional units will be the most likely means of
enhancing capacity.
To determine when and if additional capacity will be required, baggage demand and system performance should be monitored and projected on
an annual basis. Planners would then be able to anticipate the need for additional capacity and perform any necessary analyses to determine the
most cost-effective approach to enhancing system capacity.
As discussed in more detail in Chapter 11, planners should conduct a 20-year life cycle cost analysis for each screening alternative identified and
the preferred alternative should be spatially feasible as well as have relatively low life cycle cost. The life cycle cost analysis should include an
assessment of the overall costs of different approaches for accommodating growth.
While CBIS screening equipment may be replaced during the 20 year life cycle to meet operational needs, 20 years is the proper analsysis period
for the purposes of life cycle cost analysis. This is needed in order to properly assess economic trade-offs between the more capital intensive in-
line CBIS with the more labor-intensive stand-alone CBIS. The 20-year analysis period is also the assumed useful life of the BHS equipment.
5.7 Alternatives Development and Evaluation
5.7.1 Alternatives Development
Several elements of the planning process are presented together in this section enabling planners to develop and evaluate various screening
solution alternatives for a particular airport or terminal.

Figure 5.14 summarizes the alternatives development and evaluation process to be carried out during the Pre-Design and Schematic Phases.
Figure 5.14: Pre-Design Phase Alternatives Developm ent And Evaluation
When developing the Alternatives Analysis report as stated in the requirements for Pre-Design Phase in Chapter 4, planners shall follow the
requirements listed in Sections 5.2, 5.6, and Chapter 11 (Life Cycle Cost Estimating), and should develop optimally-scaled screening alternatives
taking into account the following:
• Airport Spatial Data – Terminal configurations, airline assignments, and architectural constraints that will affect the categorization into
screening zones (see Section 5.5.1).
• CBIS Capacity Data – Data related to the number and type of screening systems and screening equipment (see Section 5.6).
• Baggage Screening Demand Data – Factors affecting current and future baggage flow into the CBIS, such as existing infrastructure
including ticket counter and curbside check-in positions, numbers of gates, and runway capacities (see Section 5.2).
• Cost Data – Equipment, infrastructure, O&M, and staffing costs (see Chapter 11).

Planners are encouraged to develop various alternatives based on conditions at the specific airport. An initial high-level assessment identifies
spatially and operationally feasible alternatives. Spatially and operationally feasible alternatives shall be evaluated on the basis of a 20-year life
cycle cost analysis detailed in Chapter 11 for implementing, maintaining, and replacing the screening system.
The methodology for developing alternatives, assumptions for assessing the cost effectiveness of the alternatives, and the evaluation process for
selecting the preferred alternatives are discussed in this section. Appendix C provides a case study of an airport installation where this
methodology was applied.
Section 5.7 defines the screening alternatives development based on airline groupings (screening zones). Chapter 2 describes the system types.
Tradeoff assessment between upfront capacity and incremental capacity at an airport is discussed in Section 5.5.3. Section 5.6 defines the
methodology for determining the screening equipment requirements.
5.7.1.1 Screening Zone Categorization
When defining the set of screening alternatives, planners should compare screening solutions for different combinations of baggage flows.
Whenever possible, at least two different combinations of baggage flows should be analyzed to provide a meaningful comparison (e.g., centralized
zones vs. airline-specific zones).
5.7.1.2 CBIS Type Selection
Several screening system types could serve demand in each screening zone. The CBIS types defined in Chapter 2 provide different tradeoffs
between upfront capital costs and recurring staffing and O&M costs, as illustrated in Figure 5.15 and summarized below:

Figure 5.15: System Type Com parison
• In-Line CBIS. In-line systems are likely to be used in centralizing screening zones that serve one or more airlines. They are generally the
most efficient from the perspectives of EDS unit and staff utilization. However, the centralized nature of these systems may require more
complex conveyor arrangements and extensive building modifications, therefore, associated upfront capital investment and O&M costs
may be high. These systems may contain extensive buffering space and sections of conveyor allowing for sufficient OSR time.
This system type corresponds to the Qualified Type I EDS as specified in the TSA Procurement Specification (see Section 3.2.1).
• Mini In-line CBIS. Mini in-line systems are decentralized systems that incorporate a simpler conveyor design and require a smaller
footprint. These systems are likely to be located closer to airline ticket counters or baggage make-up devices. Travel times are thus
reduced, as is the likelihood of improper baggage sortation. However, staff and equipment utilization for a mini in-line system is typically

lower than for an In-Line system given the lower demand placed on the system and more peaked load requirements. As a result of lower
facility and conveyor modification impacts, capital and O&M costs are expected to be lower for mini in-line systems than for In-Line CBIS
types (see Section 3.2.2).
• Stand-Alone EDS. For facilities with very low throughput requirements or where architectural conditions may render other systems cost
prohibitive, a solution based on a stand-alone EDS unit (see Chapter 3 for a list stand-alone EDS units) may be the most economical. A
conveyor infrastructure is not required with a stand-alone EDS and, therefore, no significant incremental increase in airport/airline O&M
costs is expected. These systems offer an even lower capital cost on a per unit basis, but are also less efficient in terms of staff and unit
utilization than System Type 2 (see Section 3.3.2).
• Stand-Alone ETD Systems. Primary screening with ETD should only be used to screen OOG, OS, fragile, and other baggage that cannot
be screened using EDS or at airports with very low bag volume that cannot justify an EDS unit. ETD solutions are typically deployed in
lobbies or baggage make-up rooms and are the most labor-intensive solutions. A conveyor infrastructure is not required and, therefore,
these systems offer the lowest capital and O&M cost (see Section 3.4).
Centralized screening zones require a fully automated in-line system (System Type 1). Smaller in-line systems or mini in-line systems are typically
better suited for more decentralized zones (such as bag rooms accommodating one or more airlines). Mini in-line systems and stand-alone
systems are typically better suited for highly decentralized zones. However, planners should not explicitly assume this relationship and need to
select the optimal screening system for a zone based on the particular characteristics of the zone regardless of the level of centralization.
5.7.1.3 Alternatives Baggage Screening Demand Estimation
Once the screening zones are defined, planners estimate baggage screening demand for each screening zone as explained in detail in
Section 5.5.
5.7.1.4 Alternatives Equipment Requirements Estimation
The design year baggage flow and the selected system types are used to calculate equipment requirements as explained in detail in Section 5.6.
For each alternative proposed, planners shall determine the CBIS type (e.g., in-line, mini In-line, stand-alone) and number of units required for
each screening zone.
5.7.1.5 Alternatives Concept Definition
Screening alternatives should be developed based on the type of screening equipment and number of units required which, in turn, are based on
the screening demand and system types initially selected.
Planners are encouraged to develop as many screening alternatives as possible within the existing physical constraints.

These initial concepts do not require a high level of detail, however, planners should be able to qualitatively assess potential impacts on existing
facilities and operations.
• Tradeoff between Upfront Capacity and Incremental Capacity

Specifically, planners should assess the tradeoffs between (1) incurring additional upfront costs to increase design flexibility for
accommodating future demand growth, and (2) accommodating growth based on modifying the initial system incrementally over the
20-year analysis period for the purposes of conducting alternative analysis through the use of 20-year life cycle cost assessment. This
tradeoff assessment may indicate, for instance, that systems at critical airports (such as airline hubs) should be designed with
additional space to accommodate future EDS units.
Airport planners typically assess the capacity of functional components at an airport (e.g., ticket counters, gates, runways) to
determine the ultimate capacity of the terminal. The ultimate terminal or airport capacity shall be the upper limit for demand estimates
for the purposes of CBIS design. For example, if a 20-year demand analysis indicates that additional ticket counters, gates, or runway
capacity is required beyond that available in the current terminal or airport, then planners would assume that such requirements are
beyond the scope of the CBIS design. Capital-intensive expansions to accommodate additional demand at other airport functional
components should also include consideration of additional baggage screening capacity to accommodate future growth of baggage
demand beyond the ultimate capacity considered in the CBIS design.
• Contingency Planning
Even though a contingency plan is required only for mini-inlines at the Pre-Design Phase, planners should consider the implications of
potential mitigation measures regarding the development of alternatives early on, as some measures could affect the alternative
system layout and level of complexity. A more detailed explanation of the contingency planning process, contingency plan
development, and evaluation of contingency alternatives is included in Section 5.7.2.
5.7.2 Alternatives Evaluation and Selection
Once alternative concepts have been developed, a high-level assessment should be conducted to determine which alternatives are viable and
should be considered in the life cycle cost analysis. The life cycle cost analysis will provide present value costs for each viable alternative so that
the alternatives can be evaluated quantitatively based on these costs and the preferred alternatives selected.
5.7.2.1 High-Level Assessment
A high-level assessment is a qualitative evaluation based on general criteria with the objective of helping planners and stakeholders understand
which alternatives are viable and should be considered further in the evaluation process.

The criteria to be used in the high-level assessment depend on the airport and should be developed in close coordination with project
stakeholders. The following are examples of criteria used in the case study provided in Appendix C:
• Customer Level of Service – The effect of each alternative on the passenger’s experience at the airport
• Effect on Airport Operations – The reliability and maintainability of the EDS equipment and the contingency procedures that could be
implemented if a unit were inoperative during a peak period, as well as the effect that the alternative would have on the airlines
• Economic Considerations – These costs will include those to be borne by TSA as well as airport operators and airlines. The costs
associated with TSA staff salaries as well as implementing and maintaining the alternative
• Design Criteria – The effect that the alternative would have on existing facilities, as well as the ease with which the alternative could be
constructed, expanded, and commissioned
• Ergonomic Considerations – The accessibility of the system to personnel; inclusive of stairs, ladders, spatial considerations, egresses,
and when the manual transport of baggage is required
Based on criteria similar to those listed above, planners and stakeholders should evaluate the alternatives and eliminate those that are not viable.
It might be helpful to develop a high-level assessment matrix similar to the one shown in Appendix C, Section C.7.1. The remaining alternatives
should be further refined before analyzing life cycle costs.
Once the number of feasible alternatives has been reduced and those remaining feasible alternatives compared based on life cycle cost, detailed
flow modeling can be used to further evaluate the alternatives, refine equipment requirements, and evaluate CBIS performance. Flow modeling
helps planners, architects, and CBIS designers transition from high-level concepts to more detailed design. It can also serve as a feedback loop
between designers and the Baggage Handling System Contractor (BHSC) regarding the system parameters needed for effective operation of the
CBIS. Dynamic modeling is discussed in detail in Section 7.2.4.
5.7.2.2 Quantitative Evaluation Based on Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Life cycle costs are analyzed for the viable alternatives identified in the high-level assessment to select the preferred alternative (or alternatives).
The requirements and details regarding how to conduct a life cycle cost analysis are presented in Chapter 11.
The lowest cost alternative might not be the best option as ranked in the high-level assessment. The final selection is based on quantifiable
analysis, qualitative considerations, and good judgment.

5.7.2.3 Selecting the Preferred Alternative
Alternatives shall be evaluated on the basis of the present value of total life cycle costs, defined as the present value of the annual sum of capital,
O&M, and staffing costs. Costs should be separated by stakeholder (e.g., TSA, airport operator, and airline) for transparency in the evaluation
process.
For the purposes of estimating the present value of these costs, planners shall use the 20-year Real Interest Rate on Treasury Notes and Bonds
of Specified Maturities found in the latest version of the Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-94, Appendix C, as the real discount
rate. This discount rate corresponds to guidance from the Office of Management and Budget for projects that accrue costs or benefits to
governmental and nongovernmental parties. Discounting of life cycle costs is necessary to ensure that all alternatives are compared on a
standardized basis. The discount rate is meant to reflect the time value of money (cash received today is worth more than the same amount of
cash received tomorrow because of the opportunity to invest that cash in other projects) and the risk associated with uncertain future cash flows.
The formula below can be used to calculate the present value cost of the screening system alternative.
where C1 is the total cost in year 1 and r is the real discount rate.
Once the costs of all concept-level alternatives have been developed to include the full present value life cycle costs, alternatives shall be ranked
based on present value life cycle costs and the lowest-cost alternative that meets all other requirements shall be selected as the preferred
alternative. Other higher-cost alternatives may be carried forward for further development and evaluation in the Schematic Design Phase with
approval from TSA and the ILDT.
The least expensive design may not be the most efficient for all concerned. The ILDT should present their position as to why a particular
alternative is more efficient compared with another.
5.7.3 Alternatives Analysis Report
The following is a sample outline for the Alternatives Analysis Report, as introduced in Chapter 2, to be prepared in the Pre-Design Phase. This
report will be incorporated in the Basis of Design Report, in the Schematic Design Phase. An example can be found in Appendix C. A detailed
explanation of the life cycle cost analysis can be found in Chapter 11.
1 Alternatives Definition
2 Design Year Baggage Screening Demand Determination

2.1 Base Year Assumptions
2.2 Base Year Surged ADPM Baggage Screening Demand Determination
2.2.1 Base Year Peak Month Determination
2.2.2 Base Year ADPM Determination
2.2.3 Base Year ADPM Flight Schedule
2.2.4 Base Year Surged Peak Hour ADPM Baggage Screening Demand Calculation
2.2.5 Design Year Surged Peak Hour ADPM Baggage Screening Demand Calculation
3 Proposed System Types Selection
4 Life-cycle Costs Estimation
4.1 Analysis Assumptions
4.2 Life Cycle Costs Calculation
5 Qualitative Evaluation and Selection of Feasible Alternatives

CBIS PROJECTS 6: SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
CHAPTER 6: SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE

6.1 Schematic Design Phase Overview
During the Schematic Design Phase, the work product of the Pre-Design Phase is used to further develop and refine the Preferred Alternative,
including initial development of concept-level design drawings and a program schedule, as well as more detailed ROM construction cost
estimates. The Basis of Design Report is the end product of the Schematic Phase.In the design packages that must be submitted during this
phase, increased emphasis is placed on economic analysis, contingency operations plan, and conformance with operational performance
standards. A process flow chart of this phase is displayed in Figure 6.1.

Figure 6.1: Schem atic Design Phase Design Process Flow

ILDT tasks, deliverables, TSA responsibilities, and meetings during the Schematic Design Phase are addressed in the following paragraphs and
summarized in Figure 6.2.
Figure 6.2: Sum m ary of Schem atic Design Phase
6.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Schematic Design Phase Responsibilities
The tasks that are the responsibility of the Project Sponsor and ILDT involved in the Schematic Design Phase are outlined below:
• Further develop and refine the preferred alternatives, including the initial development of design drawings.
• Develop a more detailed ROM construction cost estimate to be incorporated into the life cycle cost analysis performed in the Pre-Design
Phase.
• Develop a program schedule.
• Obtain a preliminary indication of expected equipment types from TSA: EDS unit availability and characteristics are subject to the outcome
of TSA’s competitive procurement.
• Submit the BDR (see below).
• Participate in a meeting with the TSA Design Review Team in the event the Project Sponsor/ILDT requires clarification on the comments
and disposition of the submittal. Receive comments on the Basis of Design Report and formal approval or rejection.

6.3 Schematic Design Phase Deliverables
Table 6.1: Schem atic Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Schem atic Design Phase Deliverables – In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Schem atic Design Phase (Section Chapter 6)
Basis of Design Report
• Detailed program requirements
• Preferred EDS equipment make and model
• High-level flow -based modeling assumptions and results
• Preliminary concept plans
• Contingency plan (only applicable to mini in-lines at this phase)
• Phasing and constructability technical memoranda
• ROM estimate of probable construction costs and O&M costs
• Stakeholder notification documentation
• Preliminary project schedule
• Environmental conditions compatibility assessment
• Written response to each TSA comment using TSA comment spreadsheet
The Schematic Design package shall include the Basis of Design Report, which shall add the following elements to the Alternatives Analysis
Report described in the Pre-Design phase:
• Detailed program requirements, including planning and modeling assumptions and results, a conceptual system overview, and a system
evaluation of the preferred alternative (see Section 5.7 for further information on the selection of the preferred alternative); Planners shall
make specific reference to TSA-specified CBIS design performance requirements and current commissioning requirements outlined in
Chapter 12 and Appendix D and also make specific reference to the equipment that TSA has identified to perform the screening function
• Indication of preferred equipment type and quantity
• High-level flow-based modeling assumptions and results
At the Schematic Design Phase, high-level flow-based modeling shall be used to determine maximum baggage time in system by
calculating the shortest and longest times a bag will travel through the system as measured from the natural points of bag induction
through an EDS, into and out of the CBRA and for the shortest and longest time for OOG bag travel from natural induction into and out
of the CBRA. The paths used for the high-level flow-based modeling calculations shall also be submitted to TSA on plan view
drawings.

For the purpose of these calculations, assume constant bag flow based on the design speeds from induction to CBRA with no
provision for jams, faults, or halting for merging or diverting. For complicated system designs, nonvisual flow modeling may prove
beneficial and can be performed at the Project Sponsor’s discretion.
• Preliminary concept plans for the existing BHS, as well as the planned configuration of the in-line CBIS
• Phasing and constructability technical memoranda documenting project-specific issues for each discipline, including CBIS design and
architectural, structural, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, and communications considerations
• ROM estimate of probable construction and O&M costs based on the BDR documentation
• Environmental compatibility assessment between environmental conditions that will exist in designed CBIS and environmental
requirements of EDS units
• Written response to each TSA comment from the design review on the form and in the space provided
It is assumed that the Project Sponsor will engage the services of a professional design team to complete the deliverables for the Schematic
Design Phase. The approved Basis of Design Report shall be the basis upon which subsequent design is developed. In addition, the following
appendices should be included in the BDR for the Preferred Alternative:
Appendix A: Documentation of Stakeholder Notification
Appendix B: Probable Construction Cost and O&M Cost
Appendix C: Preliminary Project Schedule
Appendix D: Sheet Index of Preliminary Concept Plans
6.4 TSA Schematic Design Phase Responsibilities
As part of the review process at the end of the Schematic Design Phase, TSA Headquarters is expected to provide the Project Sponsor with the
following:
• Preliminary indication of expected equipment type to be delivered
• Formal approval or rejection and comments on the Basis of Design Report

CBIS PROJECTS 7:DETAILED DESIGN PHASE
CHAPTER 7: DETAILED DESIGN PHASE

7.1 Detailed Design Phase Overview
During the Detailed Design Phase, the BDR is used to refine and finalize detailed design drawings, contingency plans, ROM construction cost
estimates, and the program schedule. Three sub-phases are to be used as milestones: 30% design, 70% design, and 100% Construction
Documents.
Tasks, deliverables, TSA responsibilities, and meetings for the Detailed Design Phase are addressed in the following sections.
7.2 30% Design
A process flow chart of the 30% Design Phase is displayed in Figure 7.1.

Figure 7.1: Detailed Design Phase, 30% Design Process Flow

Figure 7.2 summarizes ILDT tasks, deliverables, TSA responsibilities and meetings for the 30% Detailed Design Phase.
Figure 7.2: Sum m ary of 30% Detailed Design Phase
7.2.1 Project Sponsor and ILDT 30% Design Responsibilities
The tasks that are the responsibility of the Project Sponsor and ILDT involved in the 30% Detailed Design sub-phase are outlined below:
• Create the detailed design based on the TSA-approved Basis of Design Report.
• Develop 30% level current working estimate and Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA).
• Update the preliminary program schedule developed in the Schematic Design Phase.
• Obtain an updated indication of expected EDS equipment types from TSA.
• Submit the 30% design deliverables specified below.
• Participate in a meeting with the TSA Design Review Team in the event the Project Sponsor/ILDT requires clarification on the comments
and disposition of the submittal.
• Receive comments on the 30% design submittals and formal approval/rejection from TSA.

7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables
Table 7.1: 30% Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
30% Design Phase Deliverables – In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Detailed Design Phase
30% Design Subm ittals
• Updated Basis of Design Report
• Preliminary plans for all disciplines
• Cross sections
• Concept of operations
• Baggage and data flow charts
• Table of Contents for CBIS
• Screening Equipment Installation Guidelines References
• Outline of reporting capabilities
• National Environmental Policy Act form completion
• 30% Current Working Estimate and LCCA
• Preliminary phasing schedule
• Conveyor manifest
• List of EDS equipment that w ill be decommissioned
• Response to TSA comments using TSA comment spreadsheet
The 30% design package shall include the following documents, which shall be delivered both in the native format (Word, Excel, AutoCAD, etc.)
and as a PDF file (hard copies are not required):

• Preliminary Plans for all disciplines, including:
Plan views of outlined conveyors and right of ways, mechanical elements, UPS and power pole locations, EDS locations and CBRA
EDS unit removal route with locations of quick disconnect conveyors as well as all other O&M-related access

Inclines and declines
Conveyor delineations, especially near the EDS units and in the CBRA
Conveyor ID labels
Elevations of significant areas (floor and wall penetrations, steep gradients, congested areas)
Top of Bed approximate elevations
Approximate Motor Control Panel (MCP) locations
CBRA plans shall include:
o Elevations
o EDS pedestals if needed
o Operational description and design prints indicating how the “no lift” policy is to be met
o BRPs and insertion positions in relation to workstations and TSO movement space
o CONOPS and layout for OS and OOG bags
o Shrouding materials
o Flooring material
o Lighting design
o Noise reduction design
o Minimum environmental conditions
o Printers
o Bag Inspection Stations (level 3 alarm resolution stations)
o Footprints for proper installation of stairs and ladders
o ETD locations and mounting options
o Bag Viewing Stations, Remote Resolution Station, FDRS locations
o Enlarged single-sheet plan view of CBRA/Level 3
• Cross sections showing the vertical dimensions of the CBIS including equipment removal paths

• Concept of Operations including discussion of how the overall CBIS is intended to work (see discussion in Section 2.1) with emphasis on
a detailed concept of operations discussion of the CBRA and an emphasis on legacy BHS (if applicable); this shall include a description of
compatibility between legacy BHS and new CBIS, contrasting baggage rates and controls methodology as well as the results of time-in-
system analyses through flow modeling studies for time-in-system and time-in-CBRA standards as detailed in Section 12.5
• Contingency plan (see Section 7.5; only applicable to mini in-lines at this phase)
• Baggage and data flow charts (detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA data flows and examples for SFO and JFK are included in Appendix A,
Section A.2)
• Table of contents for CBIS of the TSA-furnished screening equipment to be used in the CBIS
• Screening Equipment Installation Guideline References documenting the satisfactory accommodation of the selected screening
equipment in compliance with the manufacturer’s site-installation and integration guides (including document name, date, and revisions),
including EDS ancillary equipment and their respective spaces. Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) requirements (EDS,
CBRA, OSR, IT closets, etc.) associated with those spaces shall also be confirmed at this phase.
• Outline of Reporting Capabilities to be provided by the CBIS (see Appendix A, Section A.4 for examples of detailed reports generated)
• National Environmental Policy Act form completion (Section IV of TSA form 2601-1)
• Stakeholder Notification Documentation
• 30% Current working estimate and LCCA
• Preliminary phasing plan and schedule:
Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA BRPs)
at each construction phase; each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and
components labeled, if known
Brief description of the state of the system represented in each phase drawing, including:
The major functional changes of the CBIS in each phase (e.g., what components are removed/replaced, what major additions are
made to the network or subsystems)
Whether the CBIS will be used operationally following each phase, and a brief description of how operations would be conducted
(e.g., which induct points, which screening lines, is CBRA temporary or final configuration, etc.)
Number and type of each EDS populating screening lines in each phase
Schedule showing when each phase is anticipated amongst other major activities impacting the system state by the BHSC and EDS
OEM (e.g., high level of demolition and construction, networking and integration work, etc.)

• Conveyor manifest showing:
Conveyor identifiers
Approximate conveyor lengths
Approximate conveyor speeds
• List of EDS equipment, by make, model, and serial number, that will be decommissioned after the proposed in-line system is operational
In the event that CBIS design requirements described in Chapter 12 cannot be met, the TSA Design Review Team will notify the EBSP Program
Manager and LCS Manager to determine the life cycle support impact on the EDS equipment.
7.2.3 TSA 30% Design Responsibilities
As part of the review process at the end of the 30% Design sub-phase, TSA Headquarters is expected to provide the Project Sponsor with the
following:
• Updated indication of expected equipment types and quantities to be delivered

• A Design Review Meeting with the TSA project coordinators
• Formal approval or rejection and comments on the 30% design submittals
• A memorandum from TSA stating that TSA issues must be addressed (if appropriate) and that the CBIS design cannot be bid until after
TSA approval of the 100% design submittal
NOTE: Ad hoc meetings should be convened as soon as possible with all affected parties to resolve safety-related issues that arise during the
30% design phase.
7.2.4 Dynamic Modeling
Dynamic modeling is not required in the BDR. However, it can be very helpful in the Detailed Design Phase for larger systems, providing
designers with the ability to:
• Finalize the detailed components of the baggage handling and screening system (e.g., number of queuing belts, conveyor speeds, exact
location of merge and diversion points, exact amount of buffering required)
• Assist baggage designers with Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) specifications and requirements

• Refine the evaluation of system performance
• Visualize the final design to assist with stakeholder review and approval
Commercial and proprietary modeling packages can be used for the Detailed Design Phase.
If dynamic modeling is used, the modeling provider shall submit to the Project Sponsor and the TSA Project Coordinator all programming
parameters that may be used to adjust the model including but not limited to:
• Bag distribution methodology

• Belt speeds
• Merge windows
• Spacer/bag gap timers
• Jam timer
• Space programmed between bags for diverting
• Bag spacing at vertical sortation units
• All statistical distributions used
The Project Sponsor should share all dynamic modeling parameters used with the BHSC once contracted to ensure that the BHSC is using the
same programming parameters used in the modeling and the CBIS will perform as shown in the modeling.
If any parameters are changed as a result of the construction process, an updated modeling should be performed and the results submitted to the
TSA Project Coordinator to confirm CBIS performance still meets the established requirements.
When developing CBIS modeling, it is recommended that the following approach be used to verify the performance of CBIS designs and to ensure
standardization of modeling development. Using a commonly accepted approach during modeling development will enable more efficient use of
the modeling results and improve the screening solutions.
The CBIS modeling should include CBRA operations (i.e., conveyors leading to CBRA, bags queuing within CBRA, screening process, and bag
reinsertion into the CBIS).
The following standards and methodology should be used during the development of any modeling:
1. Begin with a layout of the CBIS, including accurate conveyor lengths, equipment used, and conveyor belt speeds.
2. Program system control logic, including transfers, merges, belt speeds, and bag spacing designed for the EDS equipment being used.

3. Use the design day flight schedule and other assumptions (load factors, earliness distributions, etc.) developed during the Pre-Design
phase regarding the flight schedule to determine baggage demand input to the flow model for the specific airport.
4. In a modeling effort, if the baggage rate is sampled in 1-minute intervals, no surge factor should be applied. Since the surge factor is a
correction to offset the averaging incurred over 10-minute intervals during the ADPM process, it is not relevant if the sampling is done in
1-minute increments.
5. Assume that the redundant EDS unit (see Section 5.6.3) is operational for the entire modeling period.
6. Multiple flow models should be developed for the design day to explore the sensitivity of the modeling to variables which may change
randomly.
7. For systems using laser scanners, assume a no-read or misread rate of 2.0%. For systems using RFID scanners, assume a no-read or
misread rate of 1.0%.
8. Identify potential locations for jams throughout the system and program realistic jam rates. If historical data is available on jam rates by
system location, then that information should be used. For new systems, an overall 0.5% jam rate can be applied to occur randomly at
baggage transition points within the system
Whenever possible, planners should obtain specific and updated ETD and OSR processing distributions from TSA. However, if these distributions
are not available, the following distributions can be used:
• Time to clear bag jams – Use a triangular probability distribution to simulate the clearing of jams, with a minimum time value of 0.5
minute, most likely time value of 1.5 minutes, and maximum time value of 5.0 minutes.
• OSR protocol for EDS alarmed bags – Use a normal distribution where the mean is 20.0 seconds, the standard deviation is 7.5 seconds,
the minimum value is 5.0 seconds, and the maximum value is 45.0 seconds.
• ETD protocol for oversize bags – Use a gamma distribution. Distribution parameters are considered SSI. Please contact TSA to obtain
required information.
• ETD directed search of EDS alarmed bag – Use a gamma distribution. Distribution parameters are considered SSI. Please contact TSA to
obtain required information.
• If possible, baggage size (length, width, height, and weight) should be distributed based on data collection at the airport or data provided
by the airport operator or airlines. When actual data are unavailable, the national average design values in Section 5.6.1.3 should be
used.
• The baggage weight distribution will assist TSA in selecting the type of lift-assist devices to reduce or eliminate manual baggage lifting
and handling in the CBRA.

7.3 70% Design
A process flow chart of this 70% Detailed Design Phase is displayed in Figure 7.3.

Figure 7.4 summarizes ILDT tasks, deliverables, TSA responsibilities and meetings for the 70% Detailed Design Phase.
Figure 7.4: Sum m ary of 70% Detailed Design Phase
• Refine detailed design drawings based on TSA comments on the 30% design submittals
• Refine current working estimate and update LCCA
• Update the preliminary program schedule developed in the 30% design sub-phase
• Obtain an updated indication of expected equipment type from TSA
• Submit the 70% design deliverables specified below
• Participate in a meeting TSA Design Review Team in the event the Project Sponsor or ILDT requires clarification on the comments and
disposition of the submittal
• Receive TSA comments on the 70% design submittals and formal approval or rejection from TSA

Simple mini in-line designs are exempt from this detailed design sub-phase. However, all 70% detailed design deliverables (except dynamic
simulation) are required as part of the 100% design sub-phase.
Table 7.2: 70% Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line CBIS Only (Mini In-Line Exem pt)
70% Design Phase Deliverables – In-Line CBIS
• 70% design draw ings
• Cross sections
• Refinements to description of operations
• Refinements to Bag Time in System calculations
• Preliminary contingency plan
• 70% specifications
• Draft site-specific configuration management plan
• 70% Current Working Estimate and updated LCCA
• Refined phasing plan and schedule
• Updated EDS equipment list
• Response to TSA comments using TSA comment spreadsheet
The 70% design package shall include the following documents:

• 70% design drawings for all disciplines including:
Mechanical drawings, including:
o Motor and drive package locations
o Catwalks, platforms, ladders, and stairways

o Dimensions of points of intersection
o Realistic elevations and Top of Bed identifiers, including areas of interest
o Pertinent details (maintenance areas around EDS units, CBRA spatial dimensions, egresses for TSA personnel, stairways
intended for TSA personnel, EDS unit removal paths, etc.) that refer to the general concerns of the TSA prior to the BHS
engineering occurring post bid
o Notable interference issues
Demolition requirements
Electrical
o Control station locations
o E-stop zones in the CBRA and adjacent to the EDS units (drawings which reflect areas and activating stations)
o Device locations (photo eyes, shaft encoders, audio and visual alarms)
o Intended locations and sizes of MCPs
EDS unit removal route and all other O&M-related access
Control room location (if applicable)
Demolition and phasing plans
Any refinements to CBRA plans
• Cross sections showing the vertical dimensions of the CBIS
• Refinements to the Description of Operations including refinements to the discussion of how the system is intended to work with
emphasis on the CBRA and legacy BHS (if applicable); this shall include updates to the description of compatibility between legacy BHS
and new CBIS, contrasting baggage rates and controls methodology. Any differences between proposed CBRA operations and Chapter
14 requirements shall be documented and submitted on an RFV.
• Refinements to Bag Time in System calculations based on high-level flow-based modeling calculations using the preferred CBIS
system design
• Preliminary Contingency Plan (see Section 7.5) describing contingency operations in the event of:
Screening equipment failure
Conveyance equipment failure
Loss of utility power

Unplanned surges in system demand
• 70% specifications with specific reference to the responsibility of the BHS contractor to meet TSA-specified CBIS design performance
requirements and current CBIS commissioning requirements for final TSA approval as well as documentation on the reporting capabilities
for which the CBIS is designed and related operational procedures (e.g., jam clear procedures); refer to Chapter 12 for design standards
and for detailed information on design performance requirements, and Appendix D for commissioning requirements. BHS specification
shall also include detailed requirements for the Baggage Inspection Stations.
• Draft Site-Specific Configuration Management Plan including documentation of the screening system boundaries, delineated areas of
responsibility among TSA, the Project Sponsor, and the airlines (if they are not the Project Sponsor), and procedures for documenting and
informing relevant parties of modifications to the CBIS after submission of documentation to the TSA. The Configuration Management
Plan shall follow the outline below:
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Purpose
1.3 Configuration Management Defined
2 Organizational Construct – Configuration and Organization Integration Baseline
2.1 Airport Roles and Responsibilities
2.2 TSA Roles and Responsibilities
2.3 Airlines Roles and Responsibilities
3 Configuration Control: Management, Organization, and Responsibilities
4 Configuration Control Board
4.1 Purpose
4.2 Organization and Membership
4.3 Change Request Process and Protocol
4.4 Communications Management Plan
4.4.1 Post Commissioning Change Management
4.4.2 Documentation and Audit
• Stakeholder Notification Documentation including responses to comments concerning OSR and CBRA for TSA review
• 70% Current working estimate and updated LCCA

Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA BRPs)
at each construction phase; each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and
components labeled if known
Brief description of the state of the system represented in each phase drawing, including:
o The major functional changes of the CBIS in each phase (e.g., what components are removed/replaced, what major additions are
o Whether the CBIS will be used operationally following each phase, and a brief description of how operations would be conducted
(which induct points, which screening lines, is CBRA temporary or final configuration, etc.)
o Number and type of each EDS populating screening lines in each phase
Schedule showing when each phase is anticipated amongst other major activities impacting the system state by the BHSC and EDS
OEM (i.e., high level of demolition and construction, networking and integration work, etc.)
• Conveyor manifest, including:
Motor sizing
Total amperage requirements
Conveyor speeds (refined)
• Updated list of EDS equipment, by make, model, and serial number, that will be decommissioned after the proposed in-line system is
operational
As part of the review process at the end of the 70% Design sub-phase, TSA Headquarters is expected to provide the Project Sponsor with the
following:
• Confirmation of exact equipment to be delivered and approximiate delivery schedule

70% design phase.
7.4 100% Design
A process flow chart of the 100% Detailed Design Phase is displayed in Figure 7.5.

Figure 7.6 summarizes tasks, deliverables, TSA responsibilities and meetings for the 100% Detailed Design Phase.
Figure 7.6: Sum m ary Of 100% Detailed Design Phase
• Refine and finalize detailed design drawings based on TSA comments on the 70% design submittals.
• Refine and finalize 100% level current working estimate and LCCA.
• Update the preliminary program schedule developed in the 70% design sub-phase.
• Confirm with TSA the exact equipment to be delivered and expected delivery schedule.
• Submit the 100% design deliverables specified below.
• Participate in a meeting with the TSA Design Review Team in the event the Project Sponsor or ILDT requires clarification on the
comments and disposition of the submittal.
• Receive TSA comments on the 100% design submittals and formal approval/rejection from TSA.

• Provide a final report detailing the life cycle support impacts for airport facilities that do not meet the Chapter 12 Design Best Practices
and Standards.
Table 7.3: 100% Design Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
100% Design Phase Deliverables – In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
• Bid documents
• Final Basis of Design Report including PDF
• Final description of operations
• Final Contingency Plans
• Project specifications
• Final site-specific configuration management plan
• National Environmental Policy Act form confirmation
• Final 100% Current Working Estimate and updated LCCA
• Final phasing plan and schedule
• Updated EDS equipment list
• Updated conveyor manifest
• Written response to TSA comments using TSA comment spreadsheet
The 100% design package shall include the following documents:
• Bid Documents, including:

Cover sheet with noted stakeholders, project locale, title, dates, revision block
Drawing index
Legend sheet
Mechanical
o Conveyor manifest sheets

o Plan views, including catwalk, stairs, and egress
o Elevation views
o Project specific/standard details
o Phasing drawings
o Demolition requirements
Electrical
o Control stations/devices/MCP locations
o E-stop zones, with relevant control station
Demolition and phasing plans
EDS unit removal route as well as all other O&M-related access
CBRA plans
• Final Basis of Design Report including a plan view PDF drawing of the entire system from baggage infeed to make up device
• Final Description of Operations including the final discussion of how the system is intended to work with emphasis on the CBRA and
legacy BHS (if applicable) including final updates to the description of compatibility between legacy BHS and new CBIS, contrasting
baggage rates and controls methodology. Any differences between proposed CBRA operations and current version of Chapter 14
requirements shall be documented and submitted on an RFV.
• Contingency Plans including diagrammatic depictions of baggage screening contingencies, as well as other screening methods and
mitigation measures. A consolidated document shall be provided to TSA describing the conditions that would trigger mitigation measures
and protocols for operation plus a directory of all project stakeholders with direct responsibilities for operation of the CBIS
• Project specifications with specific reference to the responsibility of the BHS contractor to meet TSA-specified CBIS design performance
requirements and current commissioning requirements for final TSA approval, including functional specifications of the system
• Final Site-Specific Configuration Management Plan including any updates on documentation of the boundaries of the screening
system, delineated areas of responsibility among TSA, the Project Sponsor, and the airlines (if they are not the Project Sponsor), and
procedures for documenting and informing relevant parties of modifications to the CBIS after submission of documentation to the TSA
• National Environmental Policy Act form confirmation (Section IV of TSA form 2601-1)
• Stakeholder Notification Documentation
• Final 100% Current working estimate and LCCA

Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA, BRPs)
at each construction phase. Each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and
components labeled if known. A brief description of the state of the system represented in each phase drawing, including:
o The major functional changes of the CBIS in each phase (e.g., what components are removed or replaced, what major additions
are made to the network or subsystems)
o Whether the CBIS will be used operationally following each phase, and a brief description of how operations would be conducted
o Number and type of each EDS populating screening lines in each phase
A schedule showing when each phase is anticipated amongst other major activities impacting the system state by the BHSC and EDS
• Updated list of EDS equipment by make, model, and serial number that will be decommissioned after the proposed in-line system is
operational
• Updated Conveyor manifest, including:
Motor sizing
Total amperage requirements
Conveyor speeds (refined)
As part of the review process at the end of the 100% design sub-phase, TSA Headquarters is expected to provide the Project Sponsor with the
following:
• Confirmation of the exact equipment to be delivered and the expected delivery schedule
100% design phase.

7.5 Contingency Planning
Contingency alternatives for a CBIS are critical to sustaining baggage operations at the airport and include provisions incorporated into the CBIS
during the design process. Operational contingencies for sustaining baggage operations include the development of written Contingency Plans by
the local stakeholders that focus on alternate methodologies for continuing baggage operations and may include portering of bags to another input
belt in the event of a localized bag belt failure.
This section summarizes the contingency planning process, contingency plan development, and an evaluation of contingency alternatives.
Appendix E provides a sample contingency plan, which illustrates how contingency design principles are applied during the CBIS design process.
7.5.1 Contingency Planning Process
The Project Sponsor shall include contingency plans for extraordinary circumstances when baggage demand exceeds CBIS capacity, whether as
the result of the failure of CBIS (EDS or BHS) components or peak baggage flow that exceeds the maximum capacity of the CBIS, and for
instances where alarm bags at the CBRA are defined as suspect bags (i.e., they cannot be cleared using directed search with ETD) and would
need to be placed in the threat containment unit for further inspection by law enforcement (typically a bomb disposal squad).
The Project Sponsor, CBIS design teams, and other stakeholders, such as airports, airlines, TSA FSD, TSA Headquarters, and all other relevant
Federal, state, and local authorities, shall mutually develop a set of agreeable mitigation measures within a comprehensive contingency plan
during the design process. Design criteria associated with rapid recovery from a critical failure within the CBIS should be established within a
range of technological and procedural solutions applicable at the individual screening zone level.
The preliminary contingency plan needs to be reviewed by the full ILDT and included in the Pre-Design Phase submittal for mini in-line systems
and the 70% Design Phase submittal for all other systems as stated in the requirements for Chapter 4. The contingency plan will be reviewed by
TSA as part of the overall design review and approval process for that CBIS design.
7.5.2 General Considerations
When developing a contingency plan, the ILDT should consider the following elements:
• Roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders regarding system operation during potential contingency scenarios (e.g., approval of
various mitigation measures and approving entities).
• Overall processing capacity of the CBIS and expected occurrences of baggage flow demand exceeding CBIS capacity (e.g., during known
peaks of the year that may exceed the 85th percentile day, peak month flow).
• Set of eligible mitigation measures as approved by TSA and applicable for the particular CBIS design (taking into account relevant spatial
and operational constraints at the particular airport).

• Maintenance of baggage screening and conveyance operations during mission critical failures of EDS or BHS components within the
context of the screening system automation continuum and the wide variation in associated costs, both capital and operational.
Contingency planning should address critical failures along a continuum that ranges from the installation of additional automation to
baggage screening mitigation processes. The trade-off between capital investment and O&M costs should be analyzed in detail.
• Other contingency plans that may affect or supersede checked baggage operations, such as the Airport Operations Emergency Response
Plan, local Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for transportation security incidents, Airport Emergency/Incident Response Plan, and
Airport Emergency/Incident Recovery Plan.
• Temporary alternative screening location for checked baggage.
• Procedures for manual handling unscreened bags in the event conveyors pre-CBIS are down. Procedures for handling screened/unclear
bags pre-CBRA.
• Threat evacuation and associated impact on baggage screening.
• Natural disaster impact on the screening operation.
7.5.3 Design Recommendations to Facilitate Contingency Planning
Contingency plans should be customized to the specific CBIS design and terminal constraints. Several design features can be incorporated to
provide for improved operation during failure events.
7.5.3.1 Programming Logic
One example of a design phase contingency plan that can be implemented into the CBIS may be that in the event of a failure of a component on
the Clear Line between the EDS units and the CBRA, all bags can be sent down the Alarm Line and then cleared bags are diverted at the 2nd
chance divert point.
Designers should specify programming scenarios for specific conditions that will automatically activate within the control system program to divert
baggage to other locations as required to maintain throughput and avoid dieback. If programming logic is used for contingency operations, the
control system should provide a visual alert to the operator when the diversion of bags is activated so that this function can be communicated to
the TSA at both the OSR and CBRA locations.
7.5.3.2 Out-of-Gauge Diverter – Bypass to ETD
The CBIS should be configured with a BMA that will identify baggage with dimensional characteristics (height, width, or length) that the screening
equipment does not have the capability to accommodate. OOG baggage should be automatically diverted to the CBRA for manual screening.

In the event that conveying or screening equipment failures occur down-line of the OOG diverter, the OOG diverter may be manually set to
operate in a “limited operation” mode in which all baggage is conveyed directly to the CBRA for manual screening. Engaging the “limited
operation” mode shall only occur with concurrence from local TSA.
7.5.3.3 Provision for Manual Conveyance of Baggage
CBIS design should allow for a clear, securable path for manual conveyance of baggage from the ticket lobby to the CBRA. As much as possible,
designs should make use of dedicated conveyors, such as crossover conveyors and OOG conveyors. CBIS analysis and design must account for
the likelihood of increased staffing levels (and the associated labor expense) necessary to maintain a system that lacks mechanical mitigation
measures to accommodate equipment failures.
7.5.3.4 Emergency and Standby Power
If there is no access to standby power for manual screening (using ETD), baggage cannot be processed using conventional ETD screening
protocols. The design team should consider, at a minimum, the provision of standby or emergency power to support full manual screening at
CBRA using ETD with bags being portered to CBRA from the ticketing lobby and from CBRA to a nearby point for handoff to airline personnel for
bag make-up operations. This only applies if the Airport intends to operate fully and process passengers and baggage during a power failure.
7.5.4 Alternative TSA Screening Measures
While the design recommendations above can be used to reduce the operational and security impact of equipment failures, certain long-duration
failures or failures that occur during peak periods may necessitate the application of alternative TSA screening measures. The Project Sponsor
should consult with TSA regarding the use of mutually agreeable alternative screening measures and document how such measures would be
implemented, if used as part of the contingency plan.
7.5.5 Failure Types and Mitigation Measures
This section describes baggage handling and screening equipment failures along with examples of potential mitigation strategies that could be
used based on the duration of the failure.
Two principal factors cause the failure of CBIS: (1) power failures produced by external events and (2) conveyance or screening equipment
failures. For the purposes of contingency planning, the cause of a failure is of less importance than its duration. Failures can be classified based
on their duration or based on the recovery period during peak times or non-peak times.
Mitigation measures are used to overcome various CBIS failures by the application of mechanical or manual methods (for example additional
conveyers to allow appropriate transfer of baggage or backup power sources for BHS components). In addition, as a last resort, alternative
screening measures can be used with TSA approval to mitigate CBIS failures.

7.5.5.1 Short-Duration Failures
Short-duration failures are failures lasting less than 10 minutes. Typically, during this class of failure, a CBIS cannot perform its intended function,
but the failure can be cured without maintenance personnel being called in. In the event of short-duration failures, airport and TSA protocols
generally follow the logic that the CBIS will be returned to operation quickly.
Typical mitigation measures for short-duration failures include the following:
• Freeze Situation until System Restarts. In the event that the system could restart momentarily, cleared bags may remain in place,
alarmed bags may remain in place (if the alarm status is positively maintained), and bags with unknown status are manually conveyed to
the CBRA. Unscreened baggage would remain in place within the system. Checked baggage would be held for induction into the CBIS
until after the system restarts.
• Manual Conveyance. In the event of uncertainty regarding short term restart or when freezing the situation is not an option (e.g., if the
failure occurs in the middle of a peak period), cleared bags may be manually conveyed to bag make-up. Alarmed bags, as well as bags
with unknown status, are manually conveyed to the CBRA. Unscreened baggage would remain in place within the system. Checked
baggage would be held for induction into the CBIS until after the system restarts.
7.5.5.2 Medium-Duration Failures
Medium-duration failures are failures lasting longer than 10 minutes, but less than 2 hours. Typically, during this class of failure, critical
components of a CBIS stop performing their function and maintenance personnel are necessary to fix the failed components. In the event of
medium-duration failures, airport and TSA protocols will vary depending on the availability of power.
Typical mitigation measures for medium-duration failures include the following:
• Manual Conveyance. When the BHS is not operational, cleared baggage is manually conveyed to bag make-up. Unscreened baggage,
alarmed baggage, and baggage with unknown status are sent to another EDS unit in a separate CBIS (if possible) or manually conveyed
to an area designated by TSA for manual or alternative screening.
• Use of Dedicated Conveyors with Standby Power. If a limited-operation conveyance system exists, it can be used to convey baggage
to the CBRA or another area designated by TSA for manual screening (e.g., OOG conveyors and oversize conveyors). When the limited
operation conveyor system is available (temporary power-loss for entire BHS, but limited system can run using a standby power source),
cleared baggage will stay within the system (until system restart) or may be conveyed to bag make-up. Alarmed or unknown baggage may
be conveyed to another EDS unit within a separate CBIS (if possible) or the CBRA. Unscreened baggage is conveyed to another EDS unit
in a separate CBIS (if possible) or to an area designated by TSA for manual or alternative screening.

7.5.5.3 Long-Duration Failures
Long-duration failures are failures lasting longer than 2 hours. Typically, during this class of failure, the entire CBIS is inoperable due to power
outages or major failures of critical components for an extended duration. Long-Duration Failures may follow the same protocols described above
for medium-duration failures. Alternate TSA screening protocols may be applied, as specified in the approved contingency plan.
Typically, mitigation measures for long-duration failures are similar to those for medium-duration failures. If it is the policy of CBIS stakeholders
that the airport operates during extended-duration power outages, then the design team should include in its design the provision of a limited
operation conveyance systems with access to standby power. Power failures may also be mitigated by the use of standby power with the capacity
to enable operation of the entire CBIS.
7.5.6 Evaluation of Contingency Alternatives
When evaluating mitigation measures, planners and designers should consider a broad range of solutions. Common critical failures of system
components (e.g., EDS unit, vertical sorter, optical scanner) within the CBIS should be analyzed to inform the selection of appropriate contingency
measures. Catastrophic failures, which may involve total system failures of any duration or a component failure of long duration, should also be
considered.
7.5.6.1 General Principles for Evaluation
The tradeoffs between providing for mechanical versus manual mitigation measures should be based on the complexity of the screening systems
and the demand placed on that system. For smaller screening matrices, manual conveyance of bags to another nearby screening system or to a
TSA-designated screening area for manual or alternative screening processes is likely to be the most cost-effective option.
For larger screening systems, mechanical measures are likely to be necessary to handle the high baggage volumes processed by the system. The
exact measures implemented should be evaluated based on both operational and economic (life-cycle cost) considerations. In each case, the
mutually developed and approved contingency plan should list the range of mitigation measures and the conditions that trigger those measures.
7.5.6.2 Mini In-Line System Example
As an example of the tradeoffs and options that should be evaluated, consider two mini in-line systems in close proximity to each other. Critical
failure of either EDS unit or the BHS may be dealt with by relatively low-cost manual processes. The failure of a single EDS unit, however, could
be mitigated by manually carrying bags to the in-feed belt serving the remaining operational EDS unit. Additionally, unscreened bags may be sent
directly to the CBRA. In this manner, bags are screened by ETD, with the possibility that some level of mitigation may be applied.

In the event that both EDS units experience medium-duration failures simultaneously, sending bags to the CBRA would be the most effective
option. A long-duration failure of the entire CBIS would require yet another mitigation process, such as increasing the number of ETD screenings
and the number of screening personnel in the lobby or bag rooms prior to bag make-up for individual flights.

CBIS PROJECTS 8: CONSTRUCTION PHASE
CHAPTER 8: CONSTRUCTION PHASE

8.1 Construction Phase Overview
Tasks, deliverables, TSA responsibilities, and meetings for the Construction Phase are shown in Figure 8.1.
Figure 8.1: Sum m ary of Construction Phase
The duration of the Construction Phase will vary significantly based on the complexity and size of the approved CBIS.
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities
The following requirements shall be adhered to during the Construction Phase, regardless of project type (design-bid-build versus design-build):
• To ensure TSA’s complete understanding and acceptance of the projected system performance, any changes or amendments to the
approved 100% design, including contract document addenda, change requests and Requests for Information (RFIs), that affect the
functionality of the CBIS shall be presented for approval to TSA. Any variation from the 100% approved design will not be funded without
prior TSA approval of the changes.
• Construction schedules shall include at a minimum key milestones for project completion such as:
Design phases
Construction bid solicitation
Construction award

Construction notice to proceed
CBIS construction prior to EDS delivery and post-EDS delivery
EDS delivery
EDS power readiness and installation
EDS SAT complete
EDS integration and network installation
Project Portfolio Checklist received and completed
Pre-ISAT
Test Readiness Review (TRR)
ISAT (see Section Chapter 9)
Live bag screening
30-day run-in
EDS decommission
Completion of all required deficiency corrections
Substantial completion
Project closeout
• TSA Deployment, through its contractor, distributes the uncompleted Pre-ISAT Project Portfolio Checklist to the Project Sponsor at no less
than 120 days before the planned start of ISAT testing, and the project sponsor shall provide Acceptance Testing this completed checklist
and the site documentation it defines no less than 90 days before the planned start of ISAT testing.
• The Project Sponsor shall submit an updated Construction Schedule to TSA stakeholders at a minimum of every 30 days after
construction award. Most projects conduct a weekly meeting to review project status and shall invite a TSA Deployment representative.
• The project sponsor shall request an update of the availability of equipment and equipment upgrades.
• At a minimum, the following ISAT durations shall be used as initial inputs to the construction schedule with the type of ISAT test being
conducted (single-phase or multi-phase):
Single-Phase ISAT:
o One business day for mobilization to site

o One business day per EDS spur line
o Three business days for system testing (one business day each for System Mixed Bag, System Full Load, and System
Throughput tests)
o One business day for outbrief and demobilization
Multi-Phase ISATs, each phase (except for final phase):
o One business day per EDS spur line not tested in previous phase
o Two business days for system testing (System Mixed Bag and System Full Load)
Final Phase:
o One business day per EDS spur line not tested in previous phase
o Three business days for system testing (System Mixed Bag, System Full Load and System Throughput) conducted across all EDS
in final form
• The Project Sponsor shall consult with the TSA Project Coordinator and their TSA Acceptance Testing representative no later than 90
days prior to ISAT to refine projected commissioning durations.

8.2.1 Construction Phase Deliverables
Table 8.1: Construction and Training Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Construction and Training Deliverables –
In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Construction Phase
• Changes to approved 100% design submittals
• Construction schedules
• Courtesy copies of shop and installation draw ings
• Cybersecurity plan
• Cybersecurity incident handling plan
Training Phase (Section 8.4)
• Training materials and documentation
The Construction Phase deliverables shall include the following documents:
• Any changes or amendments to the approved 100% design including contract document addenda, change requests and RFIs
• Courtesy copies of shop and installation drawings to ensure the original intent of the design as reviewed up to and including the 100%
design review submittal process
• Cybersecurity plan. The plan shall be specific to the CBIS and shall include the following sections, where applicable (not all sections
apply to all systems, e.g., not all systems have remote access capabilities):
System architecture drawings
User and account management controls
Remote access policy and procedures
Access log retention policy and procedures
External network connections and access controls
Disaster recovery plans and procedures
• Cybersecurity Incident handling plan (as described in Section 16.2.2).

8.2.2 TSA Construction Phase Responsibilities
During the Construction Phase, based on the construction schedule, TSA Headquarters will confirm the availability of equipment and equipment
upgrades and the schedule for delivery of specific equipment. TSA will also deliver and install TSA-furnished equipment.
8.2.3 Meetings
Regular meetings shall be conducted with the Project Sponsor/ILDT and TSA to monitor system construction.
construction phase.
8.3 System Change Implementation and Test Data
A descriptive summary narrative of the procedures and protocols in place to implement, test, and document changes made to the CBIS shall
include at a minimum the items listed in this section.
8.3.1 CBIS Change Requests
Any changes made to the CBIS from the TRR forward must be approved by the TSA prior to implementation. TSA’s CCR form shall be used for all
pre- and post-ISAT change requests. All requests for changes shall be submitted to TSA Acceptance Testing and System Acceptance (ATSA)
Branch at BASEteam@TSA.DHS.gov. The CCR form is found in Appendix A, Section A.5.
When any change to the CBIS is required during the TRR, a change request shall be submitted to and approved by TSA’s Site Integration (SI)
contractor prior to implementation.
When any change to the CBIS is required post-Test Readiness Notification (TRN), between the TRR and the completion of ISAT, a change
request shall be submitted to and approved by TSA’s Acceptance Testing contractor prior to implementation. The only difference for changes
made during this part of commissioning is that the CCR form is to be submitted to the Acceptance Testing Contractor Site Lead in addition to TSA
ATSA Branch.
When any change to the CBIS is required post-ISAT, a change request shall be submitted to and approved by TSA ATSA Branch prior to
implementation. Upon completion of the approved CCR, all required documentation and updated PLC code as required in the CCR shall be
submitted to ATSA Branch at BASEteam@TSA.DHS.gov.

8.3.2 Change Request Log
A log of each change made to the CBIS post-ISAT shall be maintained. This log shall be included in the change request submittal for TSA
approval. The log shall include the following data at a minimum:
• CBIS designation
• Name of persons implementing the change
• Description of change
Reason for the change (i.e., problem being resolved)
Expected resolution
• Identification / location of the change
Name of device (e.g., PLC-1, HM1-1, SC-1, etc.)
Name of program / subprogram
Location in the program / subprogram (e.g., rung 1, line 1, etc.)
• Test methodology
Description of test
Expected results
8.3.3 TSA Approval
In response to the change request submittal, the TSA will provide direction on the request. The proposed change shall be implemented for testing
and live operations if and only if approved by the TSA. The testing results shall be submitted to the TSA within five business days upon the
completion of testing.
8.3.4 Testing Procedures
Testing procedures shall be developed and followed during any BHS testing on the CBIS post-ISAT. At a minimum, the procedures shall include:
• Available times for testing

• Contingency plan

• Documentation
• Definition of testing process
Software download / upload
Hardware modification / restoration
Wiring modification / restoration
• Notification to all stakeholders
Testing Period
Live Operations
8.3.5 Test Results
Empirical data shall be recorded during testing. A summary of the data shall be provided explaining how the collected data met (or did not meet)
the expected results.
8.4 Training
8.4.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training
CBIS use and logistics training, distinct from maintenance training, shall be provided by the Project Sponsor to TSA for mechanical, electrical, and
computer functions required to properly operate the staffed portions of the system including, but not be limited to:
• Any BHS-provided equipment in the CBRA

• Bag induction and handling procedures
• Any BHS-provided equipment in the OSRA
• BHS control interface provided to conduct the Image Quality Test (IQT) procedures (see Appendix D)
• CBIS orientation and layout
• CBIS fail-safe procedures and layout (see Chapter 12)
• System safety

• Bag jam and fault clearing procedures
• BHS reporting system
The BHSC shall provide training on how to access and download BHS reports as well as SSI training for any BHS reports classified as SSI;
training must comply with Federal Government SSI guidelines. SSI Best Practices and Quick Reference Guides for more information on SSI
handling, sharing, and destroying procedures can be found on the TSA.gov SSI webpage.
See Appendix A, Section A.1 for an example documentation outline. All operators or individuals with access to either viewing or printing reports
shall have completed SSI procedures training prior to operation. The training sessions shall be conducted prior to the operational startup of the
respective BHS.
8.4.1.1 Training Deliverables
Training materials and documentation to be presented shall be submitted to TSA for review 60 days prior to the first scheduled training session.
8.4.2 TSA Training
8.4.2.1 EDS Training
Local TSA management must coordinate with the TSA Training and Workforce Engagement to schedule training on the EDS equipment for TSOs
and TSA management to be concurrent with CBIS Use and Logistics Training. The training must be specific to the EDS and ETD models utilized
in the CBIS and completed prior to the established commission date.
8.4.2.2 Procedural Training
Local TSA management must coordinate with the TSA Training and Workforce Engagement (or a local TSA trainer) to schedule training on the
current Checked Baggage SOP as it is associated with the On-Screen Alarm Resolution Protocol (OSARP) and CBRA application to ensure
qualified TSOs are available to properly staff the OSARP and CBRA functions. This training must be completed (as needed) prior to the
established CBIS commission date.

CBIS PROJECTS 9: TESTING AND COMMISSIONING PHASE
CHAPTER 9: TESTING AND COMMISSIONING PHASE

9.1 Testing and Commissioning Phase Overview
ILDT Tasks and TSA responsibilities for the Testing and Commissioning phases are addressed in the following paragraphs and shown in Figure
9.1.
Figure 9.1: Sum m ary of Com m issioning And Testing Phase
9.2 Pre-Commissioning Requirements
Prior to the CBIS being approved and used for security screening operations, at a minimum, the activities listed below must be completed. All
IATA tags for all phases of BHS testing, Pre-ISAT, TRR, and ISAT shall be provided by the airport or airline tenant.
The Site Acceptance Test (SAT) is conducted by the OEM and TSA to ensure that EDS equipment meets performance standards.
The Pre-ISAT (for in-line CBIS only) is a series of independent checks and confidence tests conducted by the Project Sponsor which may be
witnessed by TSA and count as the TRR. The Pre-ISAT is intended to independently evaluate CBIS performance and capability to meet the
design standards and performance requirements defined in Chapter 12. These tests shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements set
forth in Appendix D. The project sponsor shall provide a TRR Readiness confirmation letter to TSA DLD prior to the start of TRR Testing. This
letter shall be accompanied by written documentation of successful demonstration and acceptance of Pre-ISAT Test results. The project sponsor
shall also provide copies of all unlocked PLC code to DLD prior to ISAT testing.

From the TRR forward, the Project Sponsor shall ensure that change management processes are stringently adhered to. Section 8.3 details the
conditions under which change requests must be initiated. In addition to the process outlined in Appendix D, a benchmarked copy of the PLC
program controlling CBIS components from induction points to the cleared bag sortation ATR shall be submitted at the following points:
• Post-ISAT
• Post-Operational Run-In
PLC code representing the CBIS under test shall be provided to TSA's Acceptance Testing Contractor at ISAT, and PLC code representing the
post-operational run-in state shall be provided to TSA’s Acceptance Testing Contractor during on-site observations for the run-in period or be
submitted remotely upon successful completion of the run-in period if observations are not made. Passwords for any and all portions of “locked”
PLC code shall be provided along with the code.
The TRR is a series of tests to be conducted by the Project Sponsor as outlined in the ILDT Test Plan and witnessed and validated by TSA or a
TSA contractor to ensure that the CBIS is ready for the Testing and Commissioning phases. The TRR is recommended to be a part of pre-ISAT
and does not need to be a separately conducted test from pre-ISAT. If the CBIS fails the TRR, subsequent testing shall be conducted at intervals
of no less than 14 calendar days.
The following guidelines will be used to assist the Project Sponsor with projecting testing schedules for phased recapitalization and optimization
projects only:
• A combined TRR/ISAT consists of the Project Sponsor completing pre-ISAT and requesting TSA’s contractor to be on site to conduct
record testing. This allows for seamless transition from BHS pre-ISAT to record ISAT testing.
• A single EDS unit (defined as from spur line divert to Level 1 Decision point) is phased into the existing CBIS – A combined TRR/ISAT
may be conducted provided only the EDS line is being modified.
• If changes upstream of the spur line divert and downstream of the Level 1 decision point (including CBRA) are implemented and able to
be tested with the first single EDS replacement, a combined TRR/ISAT can still be conducted.
• Testing duration is expected to be no more than three business days if provided a six-hour test window. This would cover line testing and
a Full Load Test, depending on the changes to the CBIS. Any throughput testing would be conducted after the entire CBIS is complete.
• A combined pre-ISAT/TRR shall be conducted with the ISAT scheduled separately when there are multiple EDS, multiple changes to the
in-feed or out-feed, or changes to the OSR or CBRA subsystems.
• TSA testing will be conducted based on the total changes made to the system.
• Questions on ISAT schedules should be directed to the Acceptance Test Lead.

The ISAT (for in-line CBIS only) is conducted by TSA following the completion of all pre-requisite milestones shown in Figure 9.2 with logistical
and labor support from the Project Sponsor.
Figure 9.2: ISAT Pre-Requisite Milestones
Logistical and labor support shall include at minimum:
• Operational EDS Network Printers to print EDS images

• Operational BHS network printers to print BHS reports
• Baggage handlers to assist in bag induction
• Tugs and carts to move test bags to test locations
• Fork lift support for TSA-owned Unit Load Devices that transport test bags
• Bag tags for test bags
• Secure storage space for test bags
• Security Identification Display Area (SIDA) badging support for TSA contractor test team
• SIDA escort support
TSA will ensure that the CBIS meets design performance requirements set forth in Chapter 12. This test is conducted for all in-line CBIS types in
accordance with the requirements set forth in Appendix D. Test bags will be provided by TSA.
TSA test bag dimensions are included in Appendix D.
If the CBIS fails the ISAT conducted by TSA, subsequent testing shall be conducted at intervals of no less than 30 calendar days.

The Run-In Period shall consist of an initial 14-day period to collect operational data (BHS and EDS) to support a thorough analysis that
accurately depicts the system performance. If during the 14-day period there are anomalies in the data, an additional 14-day run-in period may be
performed. This determination will be coordinated with the Regional Deployment Coordinator (RDC) and Acceptance Test Team.The Run-In
period may be extended at TSA direction until open issues are resolved or if new defects are detected during the operational run-in. For multi-
phased projects, incremental 1-2-week data collection periods may be conducted until the final phase of ISAT.
During the Run-In period, the Project Sponsor or its designees shall submit weekly data reports in electronic format, preferably in PDF or native
Comma-Separated Values (CSV) file format to the TSA Acceptance Testing Contractor. Should native CSV format not allow correct separation of
tabular data, especially for event reports where locations and events are listed, reports should be available in Microsoft Excel (.xls or .xlsx) format.
These reports shall include all BHS reports required by PGDS Section 12.13 (CBIS Reporting Requirements) as well as select EDS reports. Prior
to the Run-In period, the TSA Acceptance Testing Contractor will provide a Data Collection Plan that will include points of contact for delivery,
delivery dates, report format, report time-frames, submission method, specific report names, and other Run-In data collection details.
The Post-ISAT Audit will be directed by TSA on a periodic recurring basis or as the result of reported system performance anomalies.
Upon notification from TSA APM that a Post-ISAT Audit has been directed, the authority with jurisdiction at the airport (along with local TSA) shall
submit to the TSA Acceptance Testing Contractor and the TSA ATSA Branch, the immediate past 30 days of BHS and EDS reports in electronic
format, preferably in native CSV or PDF format. Should native CSV format not allow correct separation of tabular data, especially for event reports
where locations and events are listed, reports should be available in MS Excel (.xls or .xlsx) format. These reports shall include all BHS reports
required by PGDS Section 12.13 (CBIS Reporting Requirements) as well as select EDS Reports. Prior to the Post-ISAT Audit, the TSA
Acceptance Testing Contractor or the TSA Engineering Team will provide points of contact for delivery, delivery dates, report format, report time-
frames, submission method, specific report names, and other Run-In data collection details.
TSA does not test a partial or incomplete CBIS. The system must be in final configuration for ISAT as defined below. Any CBIS components not in
final configuration, or any situation requiring phased commissioning (see also the ILDT Section 4.2.2 and Project Sponsor Responsibility
Section 4.2.3 above), shall be submitted to TSA for approval using the Request for PGDS Variance Template found in Appendix A, Section A.7
prior to the start of TRR testing. Final configuration is defined as when the physical, programming, networking, and reporting capabilities of the
entire CBIS are in final operational state. More specifically, this includes (except by approved RFV):
• All induction points are tied in (unless phased);

• All BHS conveyors, pathways, and components are operational (CBRA lines, OOG/OS lines, Re-insert lines, clear outbound paths, BMAs,
ATRs, etc.) including legacy BHS components delivering bags to and taking bags away from the CBIS;
• All BHS interfaces are operational (including manual encode stations, IQ, E-stops, BIS Bag Status Displays (BSDs), jam control stations,
etc.);
• All BHS functionality (e.g., bag allocation, load leveling, merge logic, purge logic, and other conditional performance programming) is
complete;

• All EDS components (EDS, Control Interface [CI], PVS, SVS, printers) are installed and networked in final - not temporary - configuration,
to include redundancy if applicable;
• BHS network is in final configuration accessible via the BHS control room and its interfaces, including redundancy if applicable; and
• Complete BHS/CBIS reports are available.
TSA does test a CBIS once it is tied in to the broader BHS. However, to avoid costly change requests to the CBIS after TSA testing (as a result of
failed tests that may require a CBIS change), it is recommended that testing by the Project Sponsor’s contractor and designer be conducted prior
to TSA testing. It is recommended that the test be conducted as soon as the operator receives the TSA test plan, but prior to the TSA ISAT to
ensure that TSA can officially complete the test in the allotted time.
9.3 Testing and Commissioning Phase Deliverables
Table 9.1: Testing Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Testing and Closeout Phase Deliverables –
Testing and Com m issioning Phase (Section Chapter 9)
• Pre-ISAT documentation
• ISAT documentation
The Testing and Commissioning Phase deliverables shall include the following:
9.4 TSA Testing and Commissioning Phase Responsibilities
• Conducting SAT
• Witnessing the TRR
• Conducting the ISAT

9.4.1 Integrated Site Acceptance Testing
An ISAT is required to be performed after each major phase of a multi-phase project or at the end of construction for a completely new CBIS. Prior
to commencing an ISAT, Owner’s testing and the TRR must be successfully completed. A TRN must be provided to the Acceptance Test Team at
least five days prior to the commencement of the ISAT. The ISAT must be completed and successfully passed prior to screening of live
operational baggage.
The ISAT process consists of three phases: ISAT Pre-Execution, ISAT Execution, and Operational Run-in & Closeout. Following is a description
of the events in each phase with the required documentation and expected output for each phase. The process flowchart in Figure 9.3 provides
the tasks and a high-level overview of the ISAT Process through all three phases. This process is notional and there are instances where steps
are combined within a phase, but the functions will not transfer between phases.

Figure 9.3: ISAT Process Flow

9.4.1.1 ISAT Pre-Execution
Description: The ISAT Pre-Execution phase is designed to get the test team involved with the ILDT/Airport Team early in the project to ensure
there is a continuous dialog within the team about scheduling, conduct, and expectations of testing. At the discretion of the RDC, the Independent
Acceptance Testing (IAT) team will be invited to the normal ILDT/Airport meetings to begin the discussion about testing logistics and coordination.
It is expected that the involvement of the IAT in these early planning meetings will greatly enhance the successful completion of the overall project.
During this phase a Pre-ISAT checklist of required CBIS information will be provided to the ILDT/Airport Team by the IAT Pre-ISAT Execution
Team. The ILDT/Airport Team will review this checklist and, through a designated Point of Contact (POC), provide feedback to IAT. This checklist
and the subsequent feedback will be used to generate a Project Portfolio which includes, but is not limited to, an overall project contact list, system
descriptions, drawings, equipment serial numbers, expected throughput, an expected test list, and any approved RFVs and CCRs. The Project
Portfolio will be handed off to the ISAT Execution Team at least 30 days prior to the commencement of the ISAT. The designated POC will
continue to be the primary contact between the ILDT/Airport Team and the IAT throughout the completion of the project to ensure continuity of
communication and a smooth testing transition throughout.
Required Documents: BDR, CONOPS Documents, Project Schedule, Bag Hygiene Policy, Jam and Fail-Safe Clearing Procedures, Integration
Specifications, System Drawings, and Phasing Plan (if applicable).
Outputs: At the end of the Pre-Execution phase a Project Portfolio will be provided to the ISAT Execution Team at least 30 days prior to the
commencement of the ISAT. This Project Portfolio is an internal IAT document that will direct the ISAT Execution team in performing all required
tests as well as provide a system overview, coordination activities, and test strategies.
9.4.1.2 ISAT Execution
Description: ISAT Execution is the testing and certification of the CBIS. Thirty days prior to commencement of the ISAT, the IAT Site Lead (SL)
and Deputy Site Lead (DSL) will take over the coordination of the ISAT from the Pre-Execution Team. From this point forward, they will participate
in the ILDT/Airport Team meetings and will coordinate with the ILDT/Airport Team to monitor and potentially participate in the testing phase of the
TRR. The actual execution of the ISAT will normally take place over a one-week period:
• Monday: the test team travels to the site

• Tuesday – Thursday: conduct the ISAT
• Friday: used as a backup testing day if necessary, or the test team departs the site) per phase
The duration of the ISAT is dependent on the amount of testing time available each day. If there are at least six hours available each day, then
testing can be completed in two test days, barring any issues. A shorter available testing time may extend the overall testing window past the
planned duration.

During the ISAT, various test protocols will be utilized to determine if the system is “suitable” and “efficient” for TSA Operations. All tests performed
will be based on the tests included in this section. Based on the findings of Suitability and Efficiency, a recommendation will be provided to the
RDC as to whether the system is capable and secure enough to be utilized in live screening operations. The RDC will provide the Go Live
notification at their discretion.
Required Documents: None.
Outputs: Quick Look Report (QLR) will be submitted to TSA within five days following the completion of the ISAT.
9.4.2 Operational Run-in & Closeout
Description: The Operational Run-in will commence two weeks after the completion of the ISAT. The Operational Run-in will normally last for two
weeks. The IAT Data Analysis team will forward a data analysis plan to the site upon completion of the ISAT which provides a list of items that are
required for the analysis. During the run-in period, TSA expects that the airport and the BHS and EDS teams will provide the requested reports to
support the data analysis effort. If the system is shown to be performing adequately and within established efficiency requirements, the run-in will
stop and the Test Summary Report (TSR) will be drafted. If performance is not within the established efficiency requirements, or at the discretion
of the RDC, another two weeks of data collection and run-in will be performed prior to the drafting of the TSR.
Upon completion of the two week (or as prescribed) run-in period, the Data Analysis team will perform an analysis of the submitted reports. Upon
completion of their analysis, the TSR will be drafted and issued to the RDC. The RDC will then provide the TSR to the ILDT/Airport Team.
Required Documents: Data Analysis Plan and requested BHS and EDS reports.
Outputs: Verbal confirmation of the ISAT results and the Test Summary Report (TSR).
In order to have a successful ISAT, both Owner’s and TRR testing should be robust enough to ensure that the system performs in accordance
with the requirements outlined in this document. If during testing, the tests outlined in Appendix D of this document are completed successfully
then the system should pass the ISAT.

CBIS PROJECTS 10: PROJECT CLOSEOUT PHASE
CHAPTER 10: PROJECT CLOSEOUT PHASE

10.1 Project Closeout Phase Overview
Deliverables and TSA responsibilities for the Project Closeout Phase are listed below and shown in Figure 10.1.
Figure 10.1: Sum m ary of Project Closeout Phase
Once the CBIS has been allowed to proceed to Live Bag Screening operations and all CBIS deficiencies have been corrected, TSA will provide
official approval of the CBIS for beneficial use and the following actions are the responsibility of the Project Sponsor and ILDT to close out the
project. Please see a complete list of configuration information in Section 10.3.
10.2 Project Closeout Phase Deliverables

Table 10.1: Closeout Phase Deliverables for In-Line and Mini In-Line CBIS
Testing and Closeout Phase Deliverables –
Project Closeout Phase
• As-built CBIS documentation submittal
• Final copy of the PLC program w ith draw ings
• Final copy of disaster recovery procedures

The Project Closeout Phase deliverables shall include the following:
• As-built CBIS documentation shall be submitted to TSA, in both Computer-Assisted Design (CAD) and PDF file format, as follows:
Final Description of Operations
A complete set of BHS as-built mechanical and electrical drawings, including:
o Mechanical
o Cover Sheet & Index
o Legend
o Overall Plan View
o Overall Plan Existing (if available)
o Isometric (if 3D)
o CBRA Egress Plan
o ETD Egress Plan
o EDS Egress Plan
o EDS Removal Path
o ETD Plan View (1/2” scale if possible)
o CBRA Plan View (1/2” scale, if possible)
o Flow Chart
o Standard Details
o 1/8” scale plan views
o 1/4" scale elevation views
o Catwalk Drawings
o Structural attachment drawings (including load drawings)
o Structural Details
o Phasing Drawings
o Electrical Sheet
o Cover Sheet & Index
o Legend
o Manifest with power summary and belt speeds
o Control Device Plans 1/8” scale

oE-Stop Zones
oControl Device Details
oNetwork Architecture
 Upper (Sort Controller)
 Lower (PLC)
• The PLC program shall be submitted to TSA in accordance with Chapter 9.
• PLC and software disaster recovery procedures shall be submitted to TSA, including software recovery applications.
10.3 Control Configuration Architecture Documentation
The TSA requires that all configuration information be submitted at various stages of the system life-cycle for each and every CBIS. The
requirements of these submittals are described in this section.
10.3.1 Electronic File Naming Convention
The electronic file names shall conform to the following convention:
ABC_XXXX_LOCATION_MMDDYYYY_TYPE_DESCRIPTION.EXT
Where:
• ABC is the FAA airport identifier

• XXXX is the IATA airport identifier
• LOCATION is a unique description of the project location such as T1, NODE1, etc.
• MMDDYYYY is the file date represented as month, day, and year utilizing leading zeroes where applicable
• TYPE is the file type as follows:
NARR is a narrative
PLC is a PLC program
NET is a network configuration
DWG is a drawing
VFD is a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) configuration
IDX is an index

HMI is an Human Machine Interface (HMI) configuration
LIST is a spreadsheet list
FIRM is a firmware listing
• DESCRIPTION is a free text field to describe the file contents
• EXT is the file extension
10.3.2 Submittal Format
The submittal data described in this section shall be submitted to the TSA as follows:
• 30-Day Post DBU Submission: Within 30 days following DBU, the initial submittal, as defined in Section Chapter 9, shall be made.
• Submission Procedure: Submission of all data shall be coordinated with the FSD or designee. All data shall be submitted via electronic
files – paper copies will not be accepted.
10.3.2.1 Summary
A descriptive summary narrative of the submittal shall be included in Microsoft Word and PDF format. Refer to Section 10.3.2.1 for the electronic
file naming convention. This summary shall include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Airport name and area of the airport included in the submittal such as terminal, matrix, node, etc.
• Description of the included area including:
Number and type of EDS units
type and quantity of infeed conveyor systems such as ticket counter sub-systems, curbside sub-systems, mainlines, etc.
type and quantity of outfeed conveyor systems such as mainlines to sort piers, make-up units, etc.
• Description of the conveyors / sub-systems and their controller equipment. At a minimum, the following information shall be provided:
List of each PLC and the conveyors / sub-systems it controls
List of each MCP and the conveyors / sub-systems it controls
• Contact information for:
Airport director, engineering manager or other primary contact point responsible for this CBIS
Airlines primary contact for this CBIS

Operation and maintenance contractor (if applicable) primary point of contact
Point of contact responsible for follow-up submittals
10.3.2.2 Index
An index of the documents included in the submittal shall be included. This index shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel and PDF format. The index
shall include, at a minimum, the title of each file, the file date and the electronic file name.
10.3.3 Control System Architecture Drawing
A control system architecture drawing shall be summated for each CBIS. This drawing shall be submitted in DXF and PDF format. All high and low
level networks shall be included. Detail shall be down to the motor control panel or PLC chassis level for high-level networks. Detail shall be down
to the photoelectric cell (PEC) or control devices for low level networks. Configuration information such as node numbers and IP addresses shall
be included. Multiple drawings by different network types will be acceptable provided a high-level overall drawing is provided. This information may
be segregated by airport, terminal, matrix or other functional level to correspond with individual projects.
10.3.4 PLC Code and Associated Configuration Information
The low level, or PLC control, submission shall include the following at a minimum.
• PLC Program: A copy of the PLC program shall be submitted in its native format for all PLCs included as a part of the CBIS. In the event
multiple levels of PLCs are utilized all programs are to be included. This shall include any redundant PLCs that may exist. All software
keys and or passwords shall be provided if programs are protected and or locked in some way.
• Network Configuration: A copy of all network configuration files shall be submitted in its native format. This shall include any redundant
networks that may exist.
• VFD Configuration: A copy of the configuration of each VFD (including any firmware information) in the CBIS shall be submitted in its
native format. The configuration submittal shall include all parameters including unchanged or default settings.
• Communication and Other Controllers: A copy of the configuration and code for all other devices as a part of the control system shall
be submitted in its native format. An example of these devices might be co-processors or multi-vendor interfaces.
• Firmware Configuration: A spreadsheet listing all control devices and their associated firmware levels, where firmware is used, shall be
submitted. This spreadsheet shall be submitted as both a Microsoft Excel document and as a PDF file. All devices which have firmware
shall be included. Examples of these devices are PLC chassis, PLCs, I/O modules, Network modules, Communication modules and
VFDs.

10.3.5 HMI Configuration
A copy of all HMI configurations shall be submitted in their native format. Examples of these HMIs are control room graphical display systems,
operator interface panels, bag display monitors or any other computer or dedicated display modules. Refer to Section 10.3.7 for configuration
software requirements.
Soft copies of these programs shall also be proved including any portion which is required to operate the system. This includes applications such
as those residing in touch screens or other types of dedicated displays or interfaces.
10.3.6 High-level Computer Configuration
A descriptive narrative of the high-level computer equipment of the CBIS shall be submitted in Microsoft Word and PDF format. Included in the
narrative shall be a description of each computer and the function/task of the computer. Any data exchange between any computers or PLCs that
control or affects bag decisions shall be included. In addition, the narrative shall describe the results of any computer failure and the ability of the
CBIS to continue screening baggage.
10.3.7 Programming and Configuration Software
A spreadsheet listing all programming and configuration software with the revision level used shall be submitted. This spreadsheet shall be
submitted as both a Microsoft Excel document and as a PDF file. Examples of this software are PLC programming software, network configuration
software, HMI configuration software and multi-vendor interface programming / configuration software.
10.3.8 CBIS/ISAT Benchmark Data
A descriptive summary narrative of the system status at time of submittal shall be included in Microsoft Word and PDF format. This summary shall
include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Scan time for each PLC, average and maximum

• Memory utilization for each PLC
• Network utilization for each network, high and low level networks. Where deterministic networks with set update times are used provide all
settings and times.

10.3.9 Change Summary Log
A log of all changes made to the CBIS post-ISAT shall be maintained. The log shall be an itemized list of all the implemented and pending
changes to date. This log shall be included in all submittals after its creation. The log shall include the following data at a minimum:
• Name of Change
• Status of change (i.e., in testing, operational, pending, etc.)
• Date of TSA approval
• Date of live operational use

CBIS PROJECTS 11: LIFE CYCLE COST ESTIMATING
CHAPTER 11: LIFE CYCLE COST ESTIMATING

11.1 Life Cycle Cost Estimating Overview
The design principles prescribed in the PGDS emphasize the need to define and implement the most cost-efficient screening alternative for the
particular airport or terminal. To establish the lowest-cost alternative, planners shall calculate the life cycle costs of developing, maintaining, and
replacing the CBIS. These costs will include those to be borne by TSA as well as airport operators and airlines. Life cycle cost is estimated early in
the design process and is refined as the design process progresses. These costs establish the basis for return on investment analysis.
It is expected that the life cycle cost will initially be completed as part of the pre-design phase to help identify a preferred alternative and then
continually refined during the rest of the design phases. The estimated cost of the project is reviewed by TSA during the design review.
11.2 Analysis Assumptions
Life cycle cost analysis assumptions include the following:
• Life cycle cost analysis period

• Equipment life cycle
• Construction period
• Constant dollar cost
11.2.1 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Period
To provide a standardized period for assessing life cycle costs, a 20-year total timeframe shall be assumed based on an EBSP Acquisition
Decision Memorandum to fully capture the upfront capital costs, as well as recurring costs for staffing, O&M, and life cycle replacements. The 20-
year analysis period allows planners to account for accommodating traffic growth beyond the initial project design year (DBU+5 years).
11.2.2 Equipment Life Cycle
For the purposes of this analysis, equipment life cycle assumptions are as follows (see Chapter 2 for details by equipment model):
• EDS Equipment: The useful life of an EDS unit is assumed to be 15 years.

• ETD Equipment: The useful life of an ETD unit is assumed to be 10 years.
• Baggage Handling System: The useful life of a Baggage Handling System is assumed to be 20 years. Mechanical and Control
modifications to systems may be required to accommodate the latest technology and EDS unit throughput rates.

11.2.3 Construction Period
It is expected that the construction period will be, on average, about two years for in-line systems and one year or less for mini in-line and stand-
alone systems. The exact construction period will be project-specific and depend on the complexity of design and contracting requirements.
Therefore, planners should estimate appropriate construction periods for the particular project in question.
11.2.4 Real Dollar Cost
Real values are used to provide a consistent comparison of costs over time and shall be used to estimate all costs considered in the life cycle
analysis. These costs are based on the year in which the analysis is conducted. Therefore, no assumptions regarding cost escalation or inflation
are necessary for this analysis. For an estimate of the present day value of project costs, a discount rate will be applied (see Section 11.7). Cash
flows can be expressed in real or nominal dollars. Nominal (or current) values represent the expected price that will be paid when a cost is due to
be paid. These values include inflation. For instance, if a unit costs $1.0 million today and is expected to cost $1.1 million in 2020, $1.1 million is
the nominal cost of the unit in 2020. Real (or constant) values are adjusted to eliminate the effect of inflation. In the example above, the real value
of the unit is $1.0 million, whether purchased today or in the future.
Planners should calculate overall life cycle costs for all alternatives based (as much as possible) on actual costs. Cost assumptions, averages,
and estimates provided in this chapter should serve as a baseline to verify that actual costs are within a reasonable range. Details regarding
estimation of the above costs are described in the paragraphs below.
11.3 Capital Costs
Capital costs to be considered include:
• Screening equipment acquisition costs

• Screening equipment direct installation costs
• Screening equipment upgrade costs
• EDS removal costs
• EDS residual value and disposal costs
• Required building and BHS infrastructure modification costs
11.3.1 Screening Equipment Acquisition Costs
The cost to acquire screening equipment should be obtained from the TSA Project Coordinator.

11.3.2 Screening Equipment Direct Installation Costs
Direct installation costs relate to the set up and preparation of equipment for use. The components of direct installation costs are summarized in
Table 11.1.
Table 11.1: Com ponents of Direct Installation Costs

Equipm ent Labor Logistics Onsite Installation
• Auxiliary equipment • Program management (on-site and • Warehousing • Site preparation
(including hardw are and TSA Headquarters), including • Shipping and handling • Facility modifications
softw are) technical contracts • Data (training manuals, (construction) and design
• Initial spares/repair parts and • Systems engineering personnel maintenance manuals, operations (see note)
consumables • Initial training manuals) • Integration and multiplexing
• Travel • Testing and evaluation
• Other
Note: Includes any onsite modifications required to install screening equipment. Does not cover expenses related to baggage handling system design and associated
facility modifications. Facility modifications, construction and design are part of the overall project by the project sponsor. Electrical for screening equipment should also
be included by the project sponsor. Integration, testing and evaluation are activities that will have both direct and project-sponsored costs.
Direct installation costs vary significantly among configurations of the same model of EDS unit. For example, the installation of a Reveal CT-80DR
in a stand-alone configuration will cost significantly less than the same unit installed in an integrated configuration. Similarly, a higher installation
cost for a mini in-line system using Reveal CT-80DR equipment compared to one using Reveal CT-80DRXL equipment should be assumed, as
the Reveal CT-80DR EDS is capable of operating at higher throughput rates. The cost to install screening equipment should be obtained from the
TSA Project Coordinator.
11.3.3 Screening Equipment Upgrade Costs
Planners should consult with TSA about upgrade options, as well as the costs of those options that are available for the screening equipment
being considered in the CBIS design for the particular airport.
11.3.4 Similar Screening Equipment Replacement Costs
Whenever it is necessary to replace screening equipment with new screening equipment of similar performance, it may be necessary to modify the
BHS so that it can support the new unit types if the BHS is not already designed to support the new type of screening equipment. However, due to
unpredictable variability in EDS equipment life spans, equipment replacement costs are not to be considered in the LCCE.

11.3.5 Required Building and BHS Infrastructure Modification Costs
Facility modifications and infrastructure costs represent the majority of the upfront costs associated with implementing an in-line system.
Compared with other types of security screening equipment, EDS units require significant facility design and construction costs because of their
size and weight and the need to integrate these units into the BHS. Examples of facility modification work include, but are not limited to:
• Constructing extra baggage make-up rooms to replace existing baggage make-up areas displaced by EDS equipment.
• Constructing CBRAs to provide conditioned workspace for alarm resolution screening (e.g., alarm resolution with OSR or ETD).
• Redesigning and upgrading BHS conveyors to support integration with EDS equipment.
• Moving walls, partitions, and any other structural components.
• Reinforcing flooring to support additional weight.
• Upgrading mechanical and electrical systems (and HVAC systems, if required).
As the nature of the work will vary significantly from airport to airport and greatly depends on the type of checked baggage inspection system
installed, facility modification costs can vary significantly. Planners shall develop a detailed, bottom-up cost estimate for facility modification and
infrastructure costs for all alternatives being considered.
Because of their high upfront capital cost and the high degree of cost variability, facility modifications and infrastructure represent the highest risk
to overall project cost and schedule. Small percentage changes in these costs can significantly affect the life cycle cost of a project.
Facility modification costs shall be adjusted to account for regional differences in construction costs based on the latest RS Means Construction
Cost Data Indexes published by Reed Construction Data or by other industry-standard cost adjustment practices.
11.4 Soft Costs
Project management, construction management, escalation, design fees, and other so-called “soft costs”, many of which are undefined, can vary
greatly depending on project delivery methods.
Project management as discussed in the PGDS refers solely to the airport, project sponsor or project sponsor’s existing Program Management
Office contractor’s oversight and management of activities necessary to install a CBIS solution (whether in-line, stand-alone, or otherwise).
Conversely, construction management, as discussed in this appendix, consists of the management activities undertaken by the general
construction contractor or BHSC to construct and install the CBIS solution (whether in-line, stand-alone, or otherwise).

Soft costs to be considered may include the following:
• Project management
• Construction management
• Construction administration
• Design contingencies
• Construction contingencies
• Escalation
For more information on soft costs as they relate to TSA funding, please reference the latest TSA-issued Funding Policy Memo located on the
Beta.SAM.gov website.
11.5 O&M Costs
O&M costs refer to any expenses incurred by the airport or TSA to operate and maintain the baggage screening system. O&M costs to be
considered include:
• Screening equipment maintenance costs

• Screening equipment operating costs
• Incremental BHS maintenance costs (including additional maintenance personnel)
• Incremental BHS operating costs
Screening equipment O&M is generally funded by TSA while BHS O&M is the responsibility of the airport.
11.5.1 Screening Equipment Maintenance Costs
Screening equipment maintenance costs include costs for preventive and corrective maintenance, related program management, replenishment of
spares, repair parts, shipping and handling, technical update training, data manuals, other direct expenses. Maintenance costs for new technology
equipment are assumed to also be on a fixed price per unit basis, equal to 10% annually of the purchase price.
All EDS vendors provide 2-year warranty periods, so the first 2 years of maintenance costs are included in the equipment purchase price.
Planners should confirm equipment maintenance cost assumptions with TSA for the specific screening equipment being considered as part of the
alternatives under development.

11.5.2 Screening Equipment Operating Costs
The largest operating cost for screening equipment is the electrical consumption of the EDS equipment. Typically, electrical consumption per unit
can be estimated from equipment specifications and duration of use (which can be estimated based on baggage flow). Table 11.2 provides
information regarding the power consumption of screening equipment. Planners should take into account the costs of local electricity (in cents per
kilowatt hour) and calculate overall utility costs of the screening equipment.
Table 11.2: Screening Equipm ent Electrical Consum ption

Screening equipm ent Consum ption (kW)
L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6700 6.2
L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6700 ES 6.2
L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6600 6.2
L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6600 ES 6.2
MD CTX 9800 DSi (Classic) 10.3
MD CTX 9800 DSi (SEIO) 10.3
MD CTX 5800 2.1
Reveal CT-80DR+ 4.4
Reveal CT-80DR 4.4
Reveal CT-80DRXL 4.4
Sources: TSA and screening equipment manufacturers, 2014.
11.5.3 Incremental BHS Maintenance Costs
Planners should account for incremental costs for BHS maintenance directly related to the CBIS. These costs typically include preventive as well
as corrective maintenance to all BHS components above and beyond the current BHS maintenance costs.
For the purposes of the life cycle cost analysis of screening alternatives, planners shall only consider the incremental cost of BHS maintenance
which is calculated by subtracting the existing maintenance cost of the current BHS (with or without a CBIS) from the total estimated maintenance
cost of the new BHS with the proposed CBIS.
For the most part, baggage handling systems repair costs without the CBIS are negligible, except in airports that have large sortation systems.
The overall annual cost of O&M for the full CBIS shall be estimated at 10% of the initial overall cost of the system. As the system ages, a reduction
in this cost may occur if proper preventative and corrective maintenance is performed.

Table 11.3 provides estimated national average costs for incremental annual BHS maintenance. However, planners should obtain accurate
maintenance costs from airport personnel or the BHS operator.
Table 11.3: Estim ated Annual Increm ental BHS Maintenance Costs for Systems Without Existing CBIS
Screening system type Increm ental BHS m aintenance cost per EDS unit
In-line $290,000
Mini in-line (all equipment types) $38,000
Stand-alone $0
Source: Existing in-line systems data, May 2006, escalated to Federal Fiscal Year 2013 dollars.
11.5.4 Incremental BHS Operating Costs
Planners shall compare utility costs for the BHS on an incremental basis. To calculate the incremental BHS operating costs, planners shall
subtract the existing operating cost of the current BHS (with or without a CBIS) from the total estimated operating cost of the new BHS with the
proposed CBIS.
11.6 Staffing Costs
Staffing costs to be considered include:
• TSA TSO and supervisor costs

• Incremental staff costs associated with clearing bag jams or for baggage porters, if not included in O&M costs described earlier
In addition, if other airport-specific staffing costs are expected, such costs should be included in staffing or O&M costs as applicable.
11.6.1 TSA Personnel Costs
TSA will assess staffing costs for TSA TSOs and supervisors. Planners shall request staffing cost estimates for the screening alternatives under
consideration upon submittal of the Preliminary Alternatives Analysis Report (see Chapter 2). As part of this request, planners must provide TSA
with the following:
• Descriptions of the screening zones

• Descriptions of the screening system type and equipment for each screening zone assumed in the concept
• Estimated baggage flow for the Design Day in 10-minute bins

• Assumed annual growth rate based on the forecasts used to determine equipment requirements
• TSA will provide assistance as needed in estimating the total screening cost by year for each alternative under consideration.
11.6.2 Incremental Costs for Baggage Porters and Other Airport/Airline Staff
Any increase or decrease in costs for baggage porters or other airport/airline staff shall be included in the life cycle cost analysis. Planners shall
include only incremental costs for baggage porters or other airport/airline staff.
11.7 Current Working Estimate Submissions
The PGDS requires airport and project sponsors to submit cost estimates as part of the design package submission at each design phase (Pre-
Design, Schematic, 30%, 70%, and 100%). While the Pre-Design and Schematic Design phases require ROM costs, the 30% through 100%
designs require detailed cost estimates based on the Basis of Design Report.
If the Current Working Estimate (CWE) is being submitted for funding request purposes, TSA must be able to verify that it is only funding that
portion of a project that is necessary to implement a CBIS. Airport sponsors requesting funding support from TSA shall provide a detailed cost
estimate summary as included in Figure 11.1 at each phase of design. A Basis of Estimate (BOE) document as described in Section 11.8 will also
be required.

Figure 11.1: Detailed Cost Estim ate Sum m ary

11.7.1 Cost Estimate Breakouts
Estimates submitted for funding request purposes should, at a minimum, include the elements shown in Figure 11.1 and summarized below:
• Subtotal estimated construction values as cost accounts (columns):

Baggage handling system
Checked baggage inspection system
On-screen resolution area
Checked baggage resolution area
Infrastructure construction
-- Each account above should be organized in a report by the most recent version of the Construction Specifications Institute Division
Summary Master Format.
• The CWE includes the following contractor markups:

Insurance and Bond
Home office overhead
Profit
Sales tax
• The CWE also includes the following soft costs:

Construction contingency
Design and programming
Project/construction management
Escalation
• Additionally, the CWE includes BHS estimates listed separately under Construction Standards Institute division 34 “Transportation,” and
includes as separate items each of the following:
Project management
Equipment

Installation
Engineering
Controls
Testing
11.7.2 Cost Estimate Pricing Substantiation
All CWE pricing shall be effective as of the date of the submittal. The BOE documentation should clearly indicate that the estimate is reflective of
current market conditions.
Estimates submitted for funding request purposes shall be accompanied by a market analysis specific to the airport location and timeframe during
which proposed improvements will be implemented. At a minimum, the analysis should include:
• Description of the current bidding climate relative to the number of bidders responding to requests for proposals
• Use of Davis-Bacon Act wage rates, where applicable
• List of current construction projects, including project name, type, approximate construction value, and schedule
• Use of union versus nonunion labor
• Narrative of labor availability
• Narrative of material and equipment availability
• Review of typical contracting methods used in location
11.7.3 Allocable Costs
The CWE can contain both costs that are allowable and allocable and those that are not. TSA non-allowable/allocable costs are segregated in the
Infrastructure column of the CWE. The Project Sponsor shall include both allowable/allocable and non-allowable/allocable costs in the appropriate
CWE column. All allowable/allocable costs associated with the CBIS, CBRA, and OSR room should be included in the appropriate column (see
example in Figure 11.2). TSA will only reimburse the airport or project sponsor for those costs that are considered allowable, allocable and
reasonable under Federal grant rules and guidance and are properly identified as such on the CWE.

Figure 11.2: TSA Reim bursable Funding Breakout Sam ple
For more information on TSA’s funding policy, see the Electronic Baggage Screening Program Policy Memo – TSA Funding of Checked Baggage
Inspection System Project Costs at the Beta.SAM.gov website.
11.8 Basis of Estimate Document
Estimates submitted for funding request purposes shall include a BOE document which includes, at a minimum, the following elements:
• Purpose
• Executive summary
• Project scope description
• Methodology used to prepare the estimate
Work breakdown structure
Tools and data sources

Major cost components: labor, equipment, and material
Subcontractor and prime contractor markups and fees
Allowances
Other factors
Schedule requirements
Assumptions, exclusions, and exemptions
Areas of risks
The cost estimate summary submitted at each design phase should provide a level of detail commensurate with the level of design. Further
explanation of each section of the BOE is provided in the following sections.
11.8.1 Purpose
This section of the BOE is intended to provide a brief description of the major components of the project scope, level of the estimate, and major
exclusions. A clearly stated purpose will provide context for the Executive Summary of the project and those efforts that took place prior to
preparing the estimate, as well as readying the user for the ensuing detail throughout the estimate.
11.8.2 Executive Summary
The Executive Summary shall provide a brief (no more than one page) overview of the project for which the independent cost estimate, cost
estimate validation, or cost to complete report is being prepared. The Executive Summary section shall include, not necessarily in this order,
discussions of:
• Where the project sponsor is in the bid and construction contract award process, if applicable
• Whether construction has already begun and, if so, how much of the construction has been completed, if applicable
• If the airport sponsor has awarded the construction contract, the type of construction contract instrument (firm fixed price, time and
materials, design-build, etc.), if applicable
• Name of the general contractor and BHS contractor, if available
• Name and telephone number of the airport representative that provided the cost information
• Brief statement of the design level the estimate was based on and statement as to whether the Current Working Estimate (CWE) is
authored by a single entity or is a reconciliation of two or more estimates

• Statement of the escalation that has been used, based on a project schedule and a summary of the CWE at a high level to show BHS
costs, other construction-related costs, and soft costs
• Discussion of any known areas of risk
• Total estimated cost
• Statement regarding whether the airport sponsor’s estimate is reflective of current market conditions. This statement should address:
Description of current bidding climate relative to number of bidders responding to requests for proposals
Use of Davis Bacon Act wage rates, where applicable
List of current construction projects, including project name, type, approximate construction value, and schedule
Use of union versus nonunion labor
Narrative of labor availability
Narrative of material and equipment availability
Review of typical contracting methods used in location
• Statement of the currency (i.e., age) of the airport sponsor estimates. Estimates for projects constantly change. In order to maximize use
of limited funding, cost estimates for projects must be current and validated for funding to be approved.
11.8.3 Project Scope Description
This section of the estimate should be organized to correspond to the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and will include a more detailed
description of the major components of the project and the means and methods assumed in the estimate to construct them.
11.8.4 Methodology Used to Prepare the Estimate
11.8.4.1 Work Breakdown Structure
The explanation of the estimate structure plays a significant role in any future required reconciliation. As such, a generic description of the
estimate format and relationships of detailed cost items to their hierarchy shall be presented. A sample WBS is provided in Figure 11.3.

Figure 11.3: Sam ple Work Breakdow n Structure

11.8.4.2 Tools and Data Sources
The BOE shall indicate the primary estimating methodology used in preparing the cost estimate, including that used for cost resources, historical
data, and estimating tools and documents.
11.8.4.3 Major Cost Components: Labor, Equipment, Material
Sources for labor, equipment and material cost elements used in preparing the estimate shall be described, thereby further demonstrating the
estimator’s level of effort and knowledge of the project requirements. For example: “equipment cost estimates were derived from multiple indexes,
including RSMeans' Blue Book equipment rental rates; in the case of the casting yard equipment and specialized erection equipment, actual
invoices from other projects were used.”
11.8.4.4 Subcontractor and Prime Contractor Markups and Fees
Since markups and fees can be subjective, articulating the style of contract and the expected general requirements and fees used is inherent to
the BOE’s purpose.
11.8.4.5 Allowances
Allowances used in the estimate and the reason they were used shall be clearly stated. For example, “a 10% cost allowance has been included for
project phasing due to the contractor being required to fully mobilize and demobilize workers and equipment to the project site each day.”
11.8.4.6 Other Factors
For the effort to be factual and complete, the estimator should describe any other elements bearing on the estimated calculations, including:
project options, cost risks, and deviation from standard practices.
11.8.4.7 Schedule Requirements
A complete BOE must address the project schedule. A complete BOE will address those specific requirements provided for in the estimate to
maintain all major and interim milestones, including: procurement, fabrication, anticipated shift work, and work week schedule. Any assumptions
made regarding the key project milestones should be stated.
Section 7.5 requires the Project Sponsor to submit an updated Construction Schedule to TSA stakeholders at a minimum of every 30 days after
construction award for construction of the BHS/CBIS identified/agreed to in the Letter of Intent or OTA. The schedule should be submitted in both
hard and soft (i.e., Microsoft Project) copies and must contain enough detail for TSA to monitor the status of activities related to the design,

construction, installation, and testing of the CBIS, OSR room, and CBRA. In addition, the schedule should include anticipated delivery dates for
EDS, ETD, and any other equipment TSA is anticipated to provide.
This schedule, in conjunction with the project cost estimate, provides the basis for the Earned Value Management (EVM) information required in
Section 4.7.2.
11.8.4.8 Assumptions, Exclusions, and Exemptions
The BOE shall include three separate and distinct bulleted listings that concisely identify the assumptions, exclusions, and exemptions used in
developing the estimate. The assumptions should document any assumed premiums for shift work, compressed phasing, and work anticipated to
be completed by other entities. Additionally, a clear list of all activities and work that is not included in the assumption or presumed to be excluded
based on the statement of work should be clearly identified.
11.8.4.9 Areas of Risks
Once existing conditions have been established and reflected in the design documents, the estimate should include material and equipment
costs—as either pricing factors on line items or as estimate-wide factors that inflate the costs of labor—as globally as necessary, as well as
assessments for:
o The sequence of work to adjust for labor productivity, shift premiums, unusual daily access to the site, multiple and phased
staging
o Area/space constraints that may require hand tool versus large equipment use
o Any other subsidiary work the contractor will be required to perform to safely proceed with construction
o Any other constructability issues
11.9 Estimate Reconciliation
It is common practice for two independent estimates to be prepared; one by the Project Sponsor and one by the TSA at a given design level to
increase confidence and accuracy in the CWE for project and budget decisions. If a reconciled estimate is sought, which is recommended for
variances exceeding 10% between the Project Sponsor's estimate and TSA allowable costs, the approach to reconcile the estimates will proceed
with the following ground rules:
• Estimate summaries will strictly adhere to the CWE format illustrated in Figure 11.1. As a rule of thumb, variances in excess of 10% for
each division will be reconciled further. The rationale for the reconciliation will be documented to provide an understanding of the
reconciled value.

• The formats for the estimate will strictly adhere to a WBS to evaluate the scope of the project. A sample WBS is provided in Section
11.8.4.1. Scope variance will be reconciled prior to review of pricing. Once scope differences are resolved, updated estimate summaries
will be generated.
• The “reconciled” estimate will be used as the go-forward estimate.
11.10 Estimate Trending
As each subsequent design level is completed, the CWE should be compared with the prior design phase CWE. Any changes to scope or design
shall be identified, documented, and submitted to the TSA Project Coordinator for approval. Once a project budget has been established, changes
in cost should be added or deducted from the design contingencies with Contracting Officer approval.

REQUIREMENTS AND BEST PRACTICES
SECTION III : CBIS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES

CHAPTER 12: CBIS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
CHAPTER 13: ON-SCREEN RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS
CHAPTER 14: CHECKED BAGGAGE RESOLUTION AREA
CHAPTER 15 CBIS OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE BEST PRACTICES
CHAPTER 16: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY


12.1 CBIS Design Principles
A properly designed CBIS will meet TSA’s security, supportability, maintainability and safety standards as defined in this section while maximizing
efficiency, customer service level, and cost effectiveness. This section presents a discussion of:
• Overall CBIS design principles related to security, efficiency, customer service level, cost-effectiveness, and safety.
• Specific design best practices and standards to assist designers and planners in developing CBIS designs in accordance with the PGDS.
The design performance to be achieved by the CBIS designs are described in detail in this section. The requirements will be used by the CBIS
designers in developing CBIS plans and specifications.
• Security: When designing a CBIS, security is a top priority. The CBIS design principles in this section describe key security-related
requirements and best practices to be met in planning and designing a CBIS.
• Efficiency: To operate efficiently, CBIS designs must minimize the frequency of errors and faults. In particular, the frequency or rate at
which non-alarmed bags are sent to the CBRA as Lost in Track or Unknown must be minimized. Manually inspecting these error bags at
the CBRA can increase system operating costs, as well as the time a bag is in the system.
• Customer Service Level: A CBIS must meet TSA security requirements without compromising the level of service that airlines provide to
their passengers. The delay incurred by the baggage screening process must be kept within acceptable limits to ensure that bags do not
miss their intended flights and airline operations are not unduly affected.
• Cost Effectiveness: Alternative system types, if properly sized, will offer equivalent levels of security, efficiency, and customer service.
Therefore, selection of the preferred alternative will be based on cost effectiveness. When evaluating cost effectiveness, it is essential to
consider not only the upfront capital costs involved, but also the recurring costs associated with operating, maintaining, and staffing the
system. The methodology for evaluating cost-effectiveness is discussed in Section 5.7.
• Operational Considerations: A CBIS is designed to accommodate a particular screening process or concept of operation. When
planning and designing a CBIS, the process should begin with a thorough understanding of the concept of operation. Planners and
designers must document a concept of operation tailored to the specific CBIS and CBRA that must accompany the 30% design
submission to TSA. A CBIS concept of operation outline is provided in Appendix A, Section A.2, but a specific CBIS concept of operation
pertaining to the CBIS design for a specific airport should be developed by the designers or planners of that system as stated in the
requirements for Chapter 2. A set of generic CBIS types and related concepts of operation are described in Appendix B and can be used
as a starting point for further development of airport-specific CBIS concepts of operation.
• Proper System Selection and Sizing: In planning a CBIS, proper system selection and sizing are essential to ensuring that the system
provides the required level of security. An undersized system that cannot accommodate the demand routinely experienced presents not

only a security issue but can also negatively affect the customer service level. Separate chapters and sections of this PGDS are devoted
to the key steps involved in proper system selection and sizing:
Chapter 2 describes the range of system types and screening equipment to be considered.
Section 5.5 describes the process for determining baggage screening demand.
Section 5.6 describes the methodology for determining baggage screening equipment requirements.
Section 5.7 describes the process used in developing and evaluating alternatives.
• Safety: In planning and throughout the construction of a CBIS, safety standards and ergonomic design principles will be applied as early
as possible to reduce the potential for injuries caused by improper ergonomic designs. Applicable safety standards and ergonomic design
principles will be applied in conjunction with other security parameters during the planning phase to avoid future costly retro-fitting
solutions to reduce injuries.
12.2 CBIS Planning Standards
Performance requirements specify key operational parameters that a CBIS must meet or exceed. This section identifies those requirements and
describes additional planning considerations to assist Project Sponsors in successfully passing the design review process and the commissioning
of the system.
A CBIS will be evaluated during the design, construction, testing, and commissioning phases to ensure compliance with specific design standards.
• Design Phases: Before receiving approval from TSA, proposed in-line CBIS designs will be evaluated to demonstrate compliance with
the requirements described in this chapter.
• Construction, Testing, and Commissioning Phases:– Before final TSA acceptance, a number of system and component tests will be
performed on an installed CBIS as part of the commissioning process. See Appendix D for a description of how the Integrated Site
Acceptance Test and Site Specific Test Plan will be developed.
12.3 BHS Capacity
For new systems, no component of the CBIS shall constrain the maximum qualified capacity of each EDS unit. For recapitalization projects, the
existing capacity of the CBIS shall not be reduced.
Legacy BHS components shall not affect the performance of the CBIS. To ensure the legacy BHS does not affect the new system’s ability to
deliver bags to or convey bags from the CBIS at the designed throughput, TSA will consider reimbursement of the costs for specific replacement
and upgrade of the conveyor system necessary to support integration of the EDS units. Please contact the TSA Project Coordinator or go to TSA’s

EBSP web page to obtain a copy of the EBSP Policy Memo – TSA Funding for Checked Baggage Inspection System Project Costs.The Project
Sponsor shall ensure compliance with the EDS OEM’s site planning and installation guidelines.
12.3.1 Mainline Requirements
Mainlines shall be capable of delivering bags to the EDS units to equal the capacity of the total non-redundant EDS units. Prior to entering the
STZ, the BHS shall regulate baggage flow to not exceed the capacity of the non-redundant EDS machines. Mainlines taking bags away from the
EDS unit shall be capable of transporting bags equal to or greater than the capacity of the non-redundant EDS units.
A redundant mainline will not be allowed when it will:
• Defeat the purpose of redundant EDS units

• Reduce the efficiency of the CBIS
• Add unnecessary cost
• Impose unnecessary spatial constraints
• Add unnecessary complexity to the system
12.3.2 Tail-to-Head Bag Spacing Requirement
For slider bed conveyors, the space between bags as measured from the trailing edge of leading bag to the leading edge of the trailing bag, or
“tail-to-head spacing” shall be no less than 12 inches prior to entering the EDS unit.
• Bag Spacing shall be measured on the queue conveyor immediately upstream of the EDS machine and shall be adjustable.
• Adjustments to bag spacing shall be done via the main BHS Operator interface (HMI) in the BHS control room. Adjustment is not allowed
on remote HMIs.
• Adjustments to bag spacing are allowed only at TSA’s request and through use of the CCR process.
• Adjustment ranges will be fixed with a minimum of 12 inches and a maximum of 36 inches.
• BHS Bag Spacing reporting shall:
Maintain spacing data for last 100 bags
Omit spacing greater than 36 inches when creating averages
Maintain a column in the “Bag Spacing Report” that shows bag spacing/averages

Trigger an event record when spacing is changed that will include time,date of change, and new spacing setting
The speed of the queue belt immediately before and after the EDS unit (as bags transition into and out of the EDS) shall comply with the EDS
Integration manual. For ICS, the space between carriers shall be as determined by the EDS manufacturer and their ability to clearly delineate
between carriers. The ICS must also be able to maintain positive tracking.
12.4 Screening Throughput Capacity Requirement
A CBIS needs to provide adequate screening throughput capacity and meet the throughput and capacity standards set in this section. The
following are the corresponding screening throughput capacity standards.
The actual screening throughput capacity of the CBIS as tested in accordance with the information presented in Appendix D shall meet or exceed
the EDS throughput rate listed in the 100% approved BDR. If the average bag length used in the BDR differs from the average bag length of the
ISAT test bag set, the tested throughput capacity will be adjusted from the BDR rate to be based on the ISAT test bag set average length. If this
rate is greater than the maximum screening capacity of CBRA, the tested capacity of the CBIS shall not exceed the CBRA capacity.
Note: The actual EDS screening throughput is the overall baggage rate with the OS and OOG percentages subtracted.
• As part of the pre-ISAT testing described in Chapter 9, the average screening throughput capacity per EDS unit will be confirmed by the
Project Sponsor.
• If the design cannot meet the required screening throughput capacity, the Project Sponsor must justify the designed screening throughput
capacity to TSA.
12.5 Bag Time-in-System
When designing the CBIS, the amount of time a bag is in the system needs to be considered. The proposed CBIS will not cause unacceptable
levels of delay to bags processed during normal operations.
12.5.1 Time-in-System Static Calculations
Industry best practice is that the bag time-in-system from insertion at the furthest load point, through the CBIS, to arrival at the sortation system
mainlines that feed the baggage makeup area should be no more than 10 minutes for 95% of peak hour bags during normal operations (shown as
T1-T6 in Figure 12.1).

Figure 12.1: Bag Tim e In System and Bag Tim e In CBRA
The time includes all screening time (i.e., including alarm resolution in the CBRA). Since the vast majority of bags bypass the CBRA by being
cleared by the EDS or the OSR operator, only a small percentage of bags should ever exceed the 10-minute threshold as shown in Figure 12.2.

Figure 12.2: Tim e In System and Tim e In CBRA Standards
The travel time calculations will be provided as part of the Schematic and Detailed Design Phases as referenced in Chapter 2 and Section 5.7.
12.5.2 Time-in-System Modeling Calculations
If flow modeling of the CBIS is performed, the time-in-system calculations should be verified by averaging across a sufficient number of modeling
runs to provide reliable results (industry best practice is commonly 10 or more). See Section 7.2.4 for additional best practices regarding dynamic
modeling programming parameters.

However, for specific CBISs with especially long delivery lines from check-in areas to a centralized CBIS or CBIS with legacy EDS units that
typically have higher false alarms rates, bag time-in-system calculations could result in values longer than 10 minutes for 95% of the bags. In
these cases, the Project Sponsor should engage with the project stakeholders to determine an acceptable solution.
12.6 Bag Travel Time Requirements
The Bag Travel Time (BTT) is the time it takes a bag to travel from the exit of the EDS to the last decision point photo eye.
12.6.1 In-Line Systems
For in-line systems, the CBIS shall allow a minimum of 45 seconds of BTT without holding bags. This minimum BTT allows for sufficient OSR
Viewing Time (OVT) and is the minimum time an operator has to conduct OSR protocols at Level 2. It is critical to ensure adequate OVT when
dealing with consecutive alarm bags to minimize timed out bags going into the CBRA.
12.6.2 Mini In-Line Systems
For mini in-line systems, the minimum BTT shall be 60 seconds, but designers are encouraged to maximize it further whenever possible. This
higher BTT can be achieved without impacting EDS rates, using a combination of:
• Slower belt speeds downstream of the EDS

• Additional queues downstream of the EDS
• Holding of alarm bags downstream of the EDS to take advantage of lag times in between the bags (due to bag flow control upstream of
the EDS)
• For mini in-line systems, the minimum design OVT shall be 25 seconds for each alarm bag, for up to 3 consecutives alarm bags.
12.7 BHS Tracking
This section defines the BHS baggage tracking requirements and corresponding best practices to achieve optimal performance. A key
requirement is using positive bag tracking, which is a method where the BHS maintains a known position for all bags within the CBIS at all times.
Bag positions can be tracked by such methods as monitoring the conveyor belt speeds, distances, routing events, bag length, and other
information associated with its travel path through the tracking zones. Positive tracking is essential to monitoring the threat status of each bag as it
passes through the CBIS.

12.7.1 CBIS Positive Bag Tracking Requirements
• The CBIS shall be capable of maintaining positive bag tracking in the STZ during events (e.g., diebacks, merging, decision point
transitions, etc.) that are typical of situations which may occur in baggage handling systems.
• The STZ starts at the point at which the BHS acquires positive tracking of a bag prior to the EDS (normally at a BMA, an ATR, or a
Photocell where the BHS Tracking ID is assigned). The STZ extends to the Clear Line diversion points and to the BRPs (Baggage
Removal Points) in the CBRA.
• The CBIS will be designed with sufficient control functions so that bags stop on the appropriate conveyor and do not allow any part of the
bag to drift onto the next downstream conveyor.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements
• The BHS shall assign a unique tracking ID (BHS Pseudo ID) to each bag once the bag enters the STZ within the CBIS for the purposes of
positive bag tracking.
• The CBIS shall incorporate an ATR upstream of the EDS matrix.
• ATR read rates shall be no less than 98% for laser arrays and 99% for RFID applications for valid reads for that system during controlled
testing.
• All systems utilizing an ATR shall maintain a relation between the BHS tracking ID and the 10-digit IATA bag tag ID for all bags that are
successfully read.
• The BHS Pseudo ID shall be used as the Primary ID passed from the BHS to the EDS. In all systems where an ATR is present, the 10-
digit IATA bag tag data shall also be passed from the BHS to the EDS.
• CBIS tracking shall in no way be controlled or constrained by a sort controller where the relation is maintained within the PLC.
• The BHS Pseudo ID and, if available, the 10-digit IATA bag tag data shall be transferred between BHS and EDS equipment as defined by
each EDS manufacturer’s interface requirements document or integration guide. If the EDS does not accept both a BHS Pseudo ID and a
10-digit IATA bag tag ID, then the 10-digit IATA bag tag ID shall be transferred to the EDS as the primary ID.
• Upstream IATA tracking accuracy: The upstream IATA tracking accuracy shall be calculated and reported in the CBIS Executive Summary
Report (Figure A.4.1) by summing the quantity of the 10-digit IATA bag tags that are successfully handed off to the EDS units, REDS, with
the quantity of 10-digit IATA bag tags that are seen by the photo eye (PE) just past the OOG divert location, ROOG @ PE, all divided by the

quantity of 10-digit IATA bag tags that are successfully read by the ATR and supplied to the BHS, R. This value shall be displayed as a
percentage and shall be at least 97%. The formula used to calculate Upstream IATA Tracking Accuracy is shown below:
• IATA Handoff Accuracy: The IATA Handoff Accuracy shall be calculated by dividing the total number of 10 digit IATA bag tags sent back
at the exit of the EDS machine by the total valid ATR reads. This measurement shall be displayed in the CBIS Performance report ( Figure
A.4-10).
• If the BHS Pseudo ID becomes unknown or unavailable, the BHS will generate a new BHS Pseudo ID or the EDS will generate an EDS
Pseudo ID for tracking purposes. This format and EDS Bag ID range is specified in the OEM’s integration guide. The BHS OEM shall
ensure EDS Bag ID overlap does not occur between any EDS unit within any matrix.
• BHS Pseudo IDs and EDS Pseudo IDs shall not overlap with IATA requirements for bag tag IDs or repeat themselves within 24 hours (i.e.,
unique BHS/EDS IDs are required for a duration of 24 hours).
• OOG tracking accuracy (absolute): The OOG tracking accuracy (absolute) shall be calculated by dividing the quantity of successfully
tracked OOG bags just after the OOG divert location by the total OOG bags detected at the BMA. This value shall be displayed as a
percentage in the CBIS Executive Summary Report (Figure A.4.1) and shall be at least 97%. The equation used to calculate this value is
shown below, where ROOG @ PE is the quantity of positively read, OOG bags at the OOG divert point; RNR, OOG @ PE is the no-reads at the
OOG divert; ROOG is the positively read OOG bags at the BMA; and RNR, OOG is the OOG no-reads at the BMA.
• Invalid Arrivals at the OOG Line: The Invalid OOG Arrival percentage shall be measured just after the OOG divert location and calculated
by subtracting the known OOG bags, ROOG @ PE + RNR, OOG @ PE, from the total quantity of bags at the same location, all divided by the total
quantity of bags at the same location. This value shall be displayed as a percentage in the Daily CBIS Summary Report (Figure A.4.1).
The equation used to calculate the percentage is shown below:

12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements
• When the EDS passes a decision to the BHS, the BHS shall retain this status throughout the tracking process for each bag and never
override the EDS decision.
• If a decision is not received from the EDS, the BHS shall assign a Communication Error status for tracking purposes.
• At no time shall the system swap or transfer BHS tracking IDs on or between bags, nor swap or transfer security screening decisions on or
between bags.
• If the EDS is controlling the conveyors immediately before and after the EDS, the CBIS/EDS is still required to meet the same criteria for
tracking as in any other tracking zone.
• Invalid arrivals at CBRA shall be monitored and logged via the BHS reporting system. Whether or not a bag arrival is considered Valid at
CBRA will be based on the status displayed on the BSD as the bag initially arrives to the BRP (i.e., not following secondary retrieval
methods that may be available, such as hand scanners).
The ONLY valid bag arrival statuses displayed in CBRA during controlled testing or live operations, provided the status appropriately
conveys the bag disposition as defined in Section 14.6.2, are:
o Alarmed bags
o OOG bags
o OS bags (if applicable)
o SEL-CLEAR (if applicable)
During controlled testing, EDS Error and Timeout arrivals are excluded from the CBRA Arrival Rate calculation. During live operations,
EDS Error and Timeout arrivals are included in the Invalid CBRA Arrival Rate calculation and shall be separately tracked, as any of
these arrivals represent a system deficiency.
Reported statuses should either match the displayed status or further delineate the reason for, and uniquely represent, the displayed
CBRA arrival status (e.g., Unknown bags may be displayed for lost bags as well as security re-reroute conditions detected such as
bags too close or bag length change; EDS errors may be the result of bag spacing errors as presented by the BHS, if delineated by
the EDS disposition code, or due to various EDS fault conditions; Timeout bags can be queue or screen timeouts, provided this
distinction is provided by the EDS disposition code).
• The Invalid CBRA Arrival rate during controlled testing is measured by dividing the Number of Invalid CBRA Arrivals (per above) by Total
Bags Inducted. The Invalid CBRA Arrival rate during live operations is measured by dividing the Number of Invalid CBRA Arrivals (per
above) by Total Bags Inducted during both the Daily Peak Hour and 24-hour Calendar Day. The Daily CBIS Summary Report defined in
Appendix A, Section A.4 may be used to determine the Invalid CBRA Arrival rate during live operations. The Invalid CBRA Arrival rate

allowed for controlled testing and live operations shall not exceed 3% in a CBRA designed with a Bag Reinsertion Line (BRL), and not
exceed 2% in a CBRA designed without a BRL.
• In the event of a BHS or EDS emergency stop (e-stop) activation, the system shall:
Maintain tracking of all bags screened by the EDS and
Maintain the security status of all bags that have been screened by the EDS and
Maintain the security decision transmitted from the EDS to the BHS prior to or after activation of either a BHS or EDS e-stop.
• The EDS shall recover from the e-stop condition in accordance with published criteria from the EDS vendor and the BHS shall recover per
established e-stop recovery procedures defined in the BHS specifications and in accordance with the OEM’s integration guidelines.
• When dieback beyond the last chance divert is inevitable, non-Clear bags should be held at the merges prior to the common OSR line
while Clear bags should continue to be processed through the first chance divert. (As the majority of bags are Clear, this method will allow
OSR Clear bags to be released, potentially minimizing dieback). The non-clear bags should be released as queuing space becomes
available beyond the last chance divert. The release of the non-Clear bags should occur on equal priority basis per lane while not causing
starvation at any CBRA removal point. A non-Clear bag held on a merge as a result of dieback, and is subsequently OSR Cleared, that
bag should immediately be released if the second chance divert is clear.
12.7.1.3 CBIS Detection Requirements
• The CBIS shall be capable of detecting when any bag infringes on the tracking window of any other bag as long as the bags are at or
above the minimum conveyance size and the bag is not on top of, underneath, or directly beside another bag:
Any bag with a conveyable dimension less than 12 inches should be placed in a tub.
The minimum conveyable bag should measure at least 12 inches in any dimension.
• The CBIS shall be capable of detecting when a bag has been delayed or accelerated in accordance with Appendix D, Sections D.3.2 and
D.3.3. Delaying or accelerating a bag beyond the configured tracking tolerance shall result in application of one of the following solutions:
Upstream of EDS (single bag): The CBIS shall reacquire the bag and continue tracking.
Downstream of EDS (single bag): If the bag has already been screened and traveled downstream of the EDS, any security status
assigned to the bag will no longer be considered valid and the bag shall be routed to the CBRA. For ICS, if the identification of the
carrier can be reacquired prior to the last divert point and the status of the bag is clear, the carrier can be rerouted to the sortation
area.

Downstream of EDS (multiple bags): If multiple bags are involved and tracking windows have been infringed upon, then the CBIS shall
be capable of detecting this condition and route all bags involved to the CBRA. For ICS, if the identification of the carrier can be
reacquired prior to the last divert point and the status of the bag is clear, the carrier can be rerouted to the sortation area.
• The CBIS shall be capable of detecting when a bag has been added within the tracking zone as long as that bag is added anywhere other
than on top of, underneath, or directly beside another bag.
Upstream of EDS (single bag): The CBIS shall acquire the bag and continue tracking.
Downstream of EDS (single bag): If the addition occurs downstream of the EDS and only the added bag itself is affected (added bag
does not infringe on the tracking window of another bag), then the added bag shall be routed to the CBRA.
See Section D.3.4 for testing standards related to added bags.
12.7.2 Bag Tag Identification Best Practices
Bag tag identification is a method in which a tag or chip with a unique readable Bag Tag ID number is physically attached to each bag and linked
to the Passenger Name Record (PNR). The bag tag is positively identified by scanning or reading the attached tag or chip.
The technology used for positive identification may be based on either optical or RFID, as long as the technology does not affect CBIS throughput
performance.
Best practices that can critically influence the read rate of ATRs and therefore, the association rate of ATR ID to bag image in live stream of
commerce operations include:
• ATR maintenance and adjustments should be performed periodically to ensure optimal reader performance. This includes periodically
cleaning ATR reader heads, realigning and calibrating reader heads, and ensuring ATR to BHS communication performance occurs
reliably. The need for periodic maintenance and adjustments may be planned in accordance with ATR OEM guidelines and historical
operational need. Recognizing the need for unplanned maintenance and adjustments may be determined by periodic physical inspection
and review of ATR performance as reported via ATR or CBIS reports.
• Airline bag tag print quality should be maintained to ensure optimal read performance. Airlines should periodically inspect printed 10-digit
IATA bag tags for print quality and readability (i.e., misalignment, inadequate contrast, streaking, bleed), and maintain tag printers
accordingly. Bag tag printer OEM documentation should be reviewed for performing maintenance procedures properly.
• Bag induction procedures and practice should be inclusive of tactics for optimizing bag tag read performance, including:
Bag tag placement relative to bag orientation should be considered (i.e., tags should not be placed on a part of a bag that will
challenge readability such as under an extendable handle or on the underside of a bag in its induction orientation, and if the bag will

be inducted within a tub tags should not be positioned on bag such that the tag will be hidden from the reader by the tub sides or
bottom).
Previously used bag tags and bingo tags should be removed prior to bag tag placement to avoid multi-tag reads.
Care should be taken not to bend, wrinkle, smudge, or otherwise distort bag tags and their printed bar codes during tag application.
Bag tags should be applied such that bar code information on each side of the applied tag has a reasonable opportunity to be read.
Stickers should not be placed on bag tags and, occluding markers or pens, should not be used to write on bag tags, such that the bar
code is in any way covered. Only highlight markers should be used to mark bag tags before reinserting bags on re-induction lines.
12.8 Conveyor System Design
To properly maintain baggage tracking, CBIS designs must provide for sufficient conveyor control through the use of the components/design
requirements and best practices listed below.
12.8.1 CBIS Conveyor Subsystem Nomenclature
All lines should be given a standard, two- or three-letter designation. The designation can be followed by the line or belt number.
The following nomenclatures shall be used by CBIS designers:
• Mainline Feeds: SF (Security Feed)

• Shunt: SS (Security Shunt)
• Out-of-Gauge: OOG
• OSR Line: OSR
• Clear Line: CL
• Alarm Line: AL
• Re-Insert Line: RL
• Oversize: OS
• Crossovers: XO

12.8.2 Conveyor Inputs
Checked bags typically originate at induction belts located on the public side of the terminal, which deliver bags from ticket counters and curbside
check-in facilities to the baggage screening zone. In addition, the baggage screening zone may be served by input points for international or
interline recheck baggage.
A BMA is typically used to identify bags that are too large to fit into the EDS (defined as OOG bags) for downstream diversion to a separate
conveyor that transfers the bags directly to Level 3 screening at the CBRA (also known as Baggage Inspection Room) to be screened manually
using ETD equipment.
12.8.3 Divert and Merge Requirements
• Bags exiting each EDS unit shall be separated by their clear or non-clear screening status prior to merging onto the post-EDS mainline or
OSR line. ICS carriers shall be separated by their clear or non-clear status at the first opportunity but may travel on the OSR line.
• After clear and non-clear bags have been separated, they shall not be commingled.
• Only clear bags shall be diverted at horizontal diverters; non-clear bags shall pass through. At vertical diverters, clear bags shall divert up
and non-clear bags shall divert down.
• The following requirements apply to diverters in the STZ downstream of the EDS units:
For systems with two decision point diverters, at the first decision point diverter, if the system is unable to divert a clear bag, the bag
shall bypass the diverter on the Alarm Line.
For systems with two decision point diverters, at the second chance diverter, if the system is unable to divert a clear bag, the bag shall
cascade stop and NOT bypass the diverter on the Alarm Line.
For systems with a single decision point diverter, if the system is unable to divert a clear bag, the bag shall cascade stop and NOT
bypass the diverter on the Alarm Line.
The CBIS may have a bypass feature to allow clear bags to bypass all diverters during fault conditions and be sent to the CBRA. The
bypass feature shall be enabled and disabled via an operator’s workstation in the BHS control room. Enabling the bypass feature is to
be coordinated with local TSA. Bypass features that send non-clear bags to the outbound system shall not be allowed.
12.8.4 Baggage Allocation Methodology
Bag allocation methodology (BAM) refers to the logic used to distribute bags between the EDS units. All new CBIS designs shall incorporate a
round-robin BAM, in which bags are routed singularly and consecutively to each available SS line. Deviations from round-robin BAM shall be
submitted through an RFV for review and approval by TSA.

Round-robin allocation is typically accomplished by assigning an ID for each SS line to bags upstream of the screening matrix. For example, if a
matrix has four SS lines, as bags leave the upstream scanning array, SS_1 is assigned to bag 1, SS_2 to bag 2, SS_3 to bag 3, SS_4 and so on.
Under normal conditions, bags are diverted to the corresponding SS lines. If the corresponding SS line cannot accept the bag (shunt or EDS
unavailable), the PLC logic dynamically adjusts to allow another SS line to accept the bag. In the case where an SS line is not available, the
system is expected to maintain that ID in the round-robin count.
12.8.5 Conveyor System Design Best Practices
A CBIS that does not follow the following industry best practices may introduce a high risk of testing failure which could delay the project and incur
additional cost. Historical testing has shown that tracking failures can often be correlated to tracking issues caused by non-adherence to the below
best practices.
12.8.5.1 Gradual Conveyor Speed Transitions Best Practices
The transitions in conveyor belt speeds between any two consecutive conveyor belts should not exceed 30 feet per minute or a 50% difference of
belt speeds, whichever is less, so as not to affect the stability, orientation, or spacing of bags while still maintaining accurate bag tracking.
12.8.5.2 Avoidance of Steep Conveyor Slopes Best Practices
The CBIS should be designed with incline and decline angles no greater than 18 degrees in non-tracking zones (i.e., zones where bags are not
positively tracked) and no greater than 12 degrees in tracking zones (i.e., zones where bags are positively tracked).
A key best practice for conveyor design is avoidance of steep slopes, which lead to baggage rolling and sliding on the conveyor and often result in
tracking losses, bag jams, and bags doubling up. Double bags inducted into the EDS are likely to cause machine faults, reduced throughput,
equipment down time, increased maintenance, and a reduced level of security.
NOTE: Acute turns in the BHS with adjacent inclines or declines may also cause avoidable tracking errors and bag jams. Consult with EDS and
BHS manufacturers to ensure such configurations are acceptable when indicated due to space constraints.
12.8.5.3 Divert and Merge Best Practices
The proper use of diverters and merges is essential to reducing tracking errors and bag jams. Improper merging and diverting and the use of
multiple conveyor merge and divert points on an individual line increases the number of mistracked bags and reduces the overall CBIS throughput.
• Static ploughs and roller diverters should not be used.

• Directly opposing diverters should not be used.

• Pushers should not be used in the CBIS.
Designers should consider incorporating separate conveyors when system throughput or bag tracking would be negatively affected by excessive
merges/diverts on any given line.
12.8.5.4 Bag Orientation Best Practices
CBIS designers should strive to ensure proper bag orientation is maintained throughout the system, and especially into the EDS, to prevent
unnecessary EDS error bags, unnecessary losses in tracking through the EDS, and jam events.
The effective application of bag orientation/positioning devices is achieved through proper application of static deflectors and belt type to guide
bags or tubs off of side walls to improve system throughput prior to baggage induction to EDS equipment, ATRs, or BMAs.
For static deflectors to work efficiently and effectively, a low coefficient of friction belt under the static deflectors should be used. The EDS in-feed
and exit conveyors are typically high coefficient of friction belting.
12.8.5.5 Non-Powered Rollers Best Practices
Non-powered rollers should be avoided when designing the CBIS, as they can cause bag jams and tracking losses as bags slow, hang, and get
caught on the rollers. Frequent cleaning is also required, as bag tags and other stickers get caught and adhere to the rollers.
The only exception is non-powered rollers that are an integral part of the transition plates for High Speed Diverters (HSD).
12.8.6 Recirculation Loop Requirement
The automatic recirculation of bags shall not be designed, either pre-EDS screening or post-EDS screening, except for connected reinsertion lines
in the CBRA as shown in Section 12.8.7.
12.8.7 Reinsertion Line Requirement
Non-cleared bags shall only be reinserted upstream of the STZ. For more details regarding Reinsertion Lines see Section 14.5.6.

12.8.8 Draft Curtains Requirement
All PECs shall be clear of obstructions including draft curtains.
12.8.9 Stack Light Requirements
Stack lights used at decision points in the CBIS shall adhere to the following color designations:
• Green = Cleared
• Red = Alarm
• Blue = Fail-safe
• White = All others (Unknown, EDS Errored, Pending, etc.)
12.8.10 System Conveyable Items
Items that are conveyable in a CBIS vary from system to system. Variables that determine whether or not items are conveyable include: BHS
equipment used, EDS equipment used, legacy system constraints, and cost versus operational advantages, among other variables. Typically, OS
and OOG items in the CBIS create excessive jam conditions.
12.8.11 Oversize Bag Conveyance
The dimensions of OS items exceed the conveyance limitations of any CBIS conveyor belts. Therefore, if automated conveyance of oversize bags
is needed, OS conveyors must be used to transport OS items.
12.8.12 Out-Of-Gauge Bag Conveyance
OOG bags are those bags that can be transported by the BHS, but are too large to be screened by the EDS units deployed for that CBIS. The
CBIS shall transport OOG bags directly to the CBRA. OOG bags should be routed to the CBRA on the Alarm Line. If space or design limitations
exist and routing OOG bags on the Alarm Line is not cost-effective or feasible, then OOG bags should be routed directly to the CBRA on separate
conveyors. OOG bags shall be diverted upstream of the EDS lines as shown in the Generic CBIS examples of Appendix B. The most effective
way to filter OOG is to locate BMAs queues upstream of the EDS lines. To minimize bags on the OOG line, bags that do not have dimension
information or that may have been lost in tracking after the BMA shall be transported to an EDS shunt, not the OOG line. Additionally, an over-
height protective device shall be installed two queues in front of each EDS unit, e.g., an over-height photo eye, light curtain, headache bar or other
similar device to ensure over height bags are stopped prior to the EDS unit.

12.9 Fail-Safe Operation
A fail-safe operation is one that prevents the conveyance of any non-clear bag to airside locations where they would be loaded onto a flight. The
requirements in this section apply to fail-safe operation.
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements
• In the event of a fail-safe activation, the default path for any non-clear bag shall be to a secure location. Non-clear bags shall never be
sent to an airside location.
• Fail-safe activations shall not exceed 0.5% of bag volume for each system test in controlled testing as measured by dividing the number of
fail-safe activations at all Decision Diversion Points by Total Bags Inducted.
• Fail-safe activations shall not exceed 0.5% of bag volume during the Daily Peak Hour and 24-Hour Calendar Day as measured by dividing
the number of fail-safe activations at all Decision Points by Total Bags Inducted using the Daily CBIS Summary Report defined in
Appendix A, Section A.4.
• The sidewalls of all conveyors or portions of conveyors associated with the fail-safe zone shall be clearly marked or identified to support
appropriate bag removal.
• Fail-safe alarms shall be distinct from all other types of system event alarms.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS
The following fail-safe requirements shall apply to in-line CBISs:
• Bag length shall be measured at a photo eye no more than two queue conveyors upstream of the EDS unit. This measurement shall be
established as the bag’s baseline length. The use of a dual belt speed conveyor shall not negatively affect this measurement in any way.
• Bags shall be tracked through each diverter downstream of the EDS units prior to the CBRA. A single bag failing to track from the decision
photo eye upstream of the diverter to the fail-safe photo eye on the Alarm Line downstream of the diverter shall activate a fail-safe
condition.
• Upon activation of a fail-safe:
The appropriate number of conveyors on the clear bag line, as calculated in Item 4 below, shall stop; and,
Activate audible and visible fail-safe alarms.
• The length of clear bag line conveyors to stop shall be calculated as follows:

1. Measure the amount of time (T) for a bag to travel from the tracking/decision point photo eye before the diverter to the fail-safe photo
eye after the diverter.
2. Calculate the distance (D) a bag travels on the clear line in the time established in step #1 above (T), and then add five additional feet.
This distance (D+5) is the portion of the Clear Line identified as the fail-safe zone.
3. All conveyors in the fail-safe zone must be stopped during a fail-safe event.
4. To account for unique project requirements, additional conveyors may be identified and stopped as a part of the fail-safe zone.
However, under no circumstances shall fewer conveyors be identified and stopped as the fail-safe zone.
• For systems with more than one diverter between the EDS units and the CBRA, during a fail-safe activation at the first chance diverter,
clear bags shall pass the diverter on the Alarm Line to be diverted at the second chance diverter.
• For systems with a single diverter, during a fail-safe activation at this diverter, clear bags shall not pass the diverter and shall cascade stop
upstream of the diverter.
• Bag length shall be re-measured at the decision photo eye (or photo eye on upstream adjacent conveyor) immediately upstream of the
diverter. This measurement shall be compared to the bag’s baseline length. Any bag that has increased in length by 12 inches or more at
the decision photo eye (or photo eye on upstream adjacent conveyor) upstream of the diverter shall be conveyed to the CBRA with a
status of “Length Change”.

Figure 12.3 illustrates a typical In-line fail-safe CBIS design.
Figure 12.3: In-Line Fail-Safe Designs

Figure 12.4 illustrates typical fail-safe designs for a Mini In-Line CBIS.
Figure 12.4: Mini In-Line Fail-Safe Designs

12.9.3 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for a Manually Operated Mini In-Line Decision Point CBIS
In case of a fail-safe event, the BHS shall identify non-clear bags and perform one of the following actions:
• Recognize the condition as a non-clear bag on the Clear Line; or,

• Maintain a halt condition on the Clear Line beyond the manually operated in-line decision point except when a clear bag has been
successfully transported through the in-line decision point (i.e., bag information for any non-clear bags has been cleared and a clear bag is
either approaching the in-line point or a bag has been processed manually at the CBRA and is reinserted at the reinsertion point through
the use of local BHS controls); and,
• Activate audible and visible fail-safe alarms.
12.10 Operational Test Kit
Design of Operational Test Kit (OTK) bag insertion and removal locations (such as conveyor sideguards, EDS and BHS e-stops) need to properly
address applicable safety standards and ergonomic design principles. The following are design requirements for the OTK test.
Specific OTK Test controls shall be built into the CBIS in coordination with the EDS and BHS vendors and their integration documentation. The
OTK testing controls shall be appropriately located to control the OTK Test with minimal walking between the controls, OTK load point and OTK
unload point, and between adjacent units so that two units can be tested from one location. The conveyors between the OTK load and unload
points shall be straight with a maximum angle of 0 degrees. Emphasis should be on coordinating in advance with the BHS vendors to optimize the
layout for quick and efficient conduct of the daily OTK Test. These controls shall enable an operator to:
• Stop the normal flow of bags into the EDS without losing track of bags already in the system.
• Allow the OTK bag to be placed safely and properly onto the EDS entrance conveyor or immediately adjacent conveyor. The sideguard
height at this interface point shall not exceed 4 inches and have no protrusions or sharp edges. For safety purposes, the conveyor belt
immediately upstream of the OTK load point shall stop when OTK Mode is activated to prevent a pinch point.
• Restart the EDS entrance conveyor to feed the OTK bag into the EDS.
• Stop the OTK bag on the EDS exit conveyor or immediately adjacent conveyor to allow removal of the IQT bag. The sideguard height at
this removal point shall not exceed 4 inches and have no protrusions or shape edges.
• Allow for repeat of OTK Tests as necessary.
• Return the system to normal screening operation.

All of the OTK processes shall be supported without requiring a shutdown and restart of the CBIS from a MCP or other location. The OTK control
station shall consist of a keyless, selector type switch or HMI graphics to enable the OTK test mode. The OTK test activation signal shall be
annunciated in the BHS control room.
12.11 Bag Jam Rate
There are two types of bag jams. A hard bag jam is defined as an event during which a PEC is blocked for an inordinate amount of time while the
associated conveyor belt is running. A missing bag jam occurs when three sequentially tracked bags are sensed at any tracking PEC and not
sensed at the next downstream tracking PEC.
• The BHSC may utilize the option of setting the missing bag jam counter to a value of one at the clear-bag line divert point.
• CBIS designs will allow for safe, quick, and effective clearing of any bag jam.
• When a bag jam does occur, adequate and proper bag jam clearing procedures are required to ensure safe and secure operations
throughout the CBIS.
The bag jam rate is calculated by dividing the number of jam events (hard and missing) from the ATRs of the SF line through all EDS shunt lines
to the entrance of the EDS by the total bags inducted. The Jam Rate shall be less than 1%.
• During controlled testing, the bag jam rate for each system test shall be less than 1% of inducted bag volume is calculated by dividing the
number of jam events (hard and missing) from the ATRs of the SF line through all EDS shunts to the entrance of the EDS by the total
bags inducted during the test.
• During live bag operations, the bag jam rate shall be less than 1% of bag volume during the Daily Peak Hour and 24-hour Calendar Day
as measured using the Daily CBIS Summary Report defined in Appendix A, Section A.4. The bag jam rate is calculated by dividing the
number of jam events (hard and missing) from the ATRs of the SF line through all EDS shunt lines to the entrance of the EDS by the total
bags inducted during the peak hour and averaging across each daily peak hour measured during the 30-day run-in.
Written bag jam resolution procedures will be developed for all areas within the CBIS, including tracked, non-tracked, and fail-safe zones as
referenced in the requirements listed in Chapter 2 for CBIS Use and Logistics Training. In the case of fail-safe zone jam events, the procedures
must include notification of the event to local TSA personnel for witnessing of the jam removal procedures to ensure proper routing and resolution
of cleared, non-cleared, and unknown baggage.
Please refer to Appendix A, Section A.1 for an outline of the Bag jam resolution procedures that should be provided.

12.12 EDS Maintainability Requirements
12.12.1 Service Access
CBIS designers will provide sufficient access to the EDS units for the following purposes:
• TSA operations (e.g., TSOs conducting regular tests, preventive maintenance (PM) or operation of EDS)
• Corrective Maintenance (CM)
• Equipment removal and equipment replacement
• Equipment upgrades
A minimum service area shall be provided of 3 feet around all four sides of the equipment along with a minimum vertical clearance of 9 feet for the
EDS. Unimpeded access to the equipment for maintenance by engineers and technicians should be planned to the maximum extent possible. If it is
not possible, or if the units are installed on a mezzanine or in other inaccessible areas, provisions should be made for hoisting or transporting heavy
items to the installation site (i.e., trap doors, removable conveyor sections, and overhead lifting equipment). It is recommended that a winch or chain
lift from an overhead beam that is rated and approved for such lifting purposes is available for the movement of heavy and large parts for
maintenance purposes. Failure to provide access or lifting equipment will result in longer repair times.
12.12.2 Environment
The Project Sponsor shall ensure that all operating environmental and maintenance requirements as set in the OEM’s integration guidelines are
met. Within the facility the temperature range in the operating environment must be between 50°F and 80°F. The relative humidity must range
between 10% and 60% non-condensing. There should also be adequate illumination and sufficient dedicated power source outlets to perform
maintenance activities. Adequate HVAC systems are necessary to ensure acceptable performance of the CBIS.
Designers shall not use wet-type fire protection sprinkler systems above or in close proximity to the EDS machines. Other pre-action or dry
sprinkler systems shall be used to minimize any uneccesary damage to the EDS.
Designers shall use the EDS PGDS Maintainability Standards Exhibit (Environment Checklist) displayed in Figure 12.5 to ensure that the required
environmental standards described in this section are met.

Figure 12.5: EDS PGDS Maintainability Standards Exhibit (Environm ent Checklist)

12.12.3 Storage and Spare Parts Access
Secure storage space shall be provided for spare parts and tools. This space should be approximately 150 square feet per CBIS and shall be
located close to the EDS unit.
12.12.4 EDS Replacement
The Project Sponsor shall include access routes for EDS equipment replacement in the CBIS design.
12.12.5 Quick Disconnect Standard
CBIS designers shall identify the appropriate number of conveyor components in the Detailed Design phase immediately before and after the EDS
unit that will be readily removable using commonly available hand or power tools. Designers shall also identify the methodology for removal of any
ancillary equipment before or after the EDS units to allow for easy access to the EDS units for maintenance, removal or replacement.
12.12.6 EDS UPS and Power Requirements
CBIS designers shall coordinate the EDS UPS unit locations and requirements during the early design phases. TSA expects the minimum number
of UPS units possible will be purchased and shared among multiple EDS machines wherever possible to gain economies of scale rather than
providing one UPS per EDS.
12.13 CBIS Reporting
Investment in CBIS error logging and reporting (or some other form of system diagnostic capability) is valuable in CBIS operation. Such capability
allows for monitoring of the CBIS performance so that developing problems can be spotted early, directing predictive or preventive maintenance
efforts. Following are the minimum CBIS reporting requirements.
12.13.1 Reporting Frequency Requirement
The CBIS reporting system shall be capable of providing data in real time (±1 minute) and in hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annual, and
manually entered time periods.

12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements
• The CBIS reporting system shall be capable of providing detailed data by Bag ID number and EDS unit and will be provided by the BHS
Vendor.
• At a minimum, the reporting system shall be capable of providing the following features in reports:
Bag Data
o Bag Tag number (with ATR/RFID installed)
o Time stamped at BMA
o BHS tracking ID number for each bag (shared by BHS and EDS unit)
o Bag type (OS, OOG, In-gauge)
o Time stamped when bag enters the EDS unit or time stamped when OOG bags are diverted to OOG Line
o SSI - Level 1 screening status
o SSI - Level 2 screening status
Critical Tracking PEC: Immediately upstream and downstream of each EDS, prior to and after each tracked divert point, and at the last
tracked PEC entering the CBRA, the BHS shall report the following for each activation of the PEC (NOTE: This is not a report for a
given PE, but rather the status of a given bag at critical PEs in the system):
o Bag ID
o SSI - Bag screening status
BHS Faults
o Fault type (NOTE: A "fault" is defined as a “cause” such as lost in track, motor overload, PEC failure, encoder failure)
o Fault location
o Fault time
o Fault time cleared
o Total fault time
BHS Events
o Event type (NOTE: An "event" is defined as the “effect” of a fault, such as re-establish tracking, fail-safe, or jams, or the “effect” of
human interaction on the system, such as via HMI or control station, e.g., pushing an e-stop or OTK activation)
o Event location
o Event time

o Total event time

EDS Statistics (if data to support these statistics is available from the EDS OEM being installed)
o SSI – Number of bags alarmed by specific EDS unit
o SSI – Number of bags cleared by specific EDS unit
o EDS unit faults (if known)
o Start time of fault
o End time of fault
ATR Performance
o ATR Name
o ATR Description (i.e., Tracking or Sortation)
o Total number of bags seen
o Total number of tags read
o Number of problem tag reads (this can be provided as a single total count or ideally as a set of constituent counts plus a total
count and should be representative of the number of unreadable/missing tags, number of invalid tag reads, number of
conflict/multi-tag reads, etc.)
o Number of associated tag reads (i.e., the number of 10-digit IATA bag tag IDs read and associated with the bag’s BHS tracking
ID)
o Total number of 10-digit IATA bag tags that are read at the ATR and passed to the EDS
o Total number of 10-digit IATA bag tags sent back at the EDS exit
o Upstream IATA Tracking Accuracy
o IATA Handoff Accuracy
BMA Statistics
o Total number of bags through the BMA
o Total number of OS bags
o Total number of OOG bags
System Baggage Volumes
o By input conveyors (ticket counter conveyors, curbside conveyors, oversize conveyors)
o By screening area (including EDS unit and CBRA)
CBRA Statistics – CBRA statistics shall be presented and considered SSI.

o Cleared
 Cleared (CLR)
 PRE-Clear (P-CLR)
 SEL-Clear (S-CLR)
o Alarmed
 Alarmed (ALM)
 PRE-Alarmed (P-ALM)
 SEL-Alarmed (S-ALM)
 No Decision
 Purged
 Queue Time Out (Q-TimeOut)
 Operator Time Out (O-TimeOut)
o Lost in Tracking
 Mistracked
 Bag Length Tracking
 Following Lost Bag
 Too Close
 Security Re-route
o Unscreened
 OS
 OOG
 OOG (absolute) Tracking Accuracy
o Reinsert Line
 Reinserted bags
PEC Tracking Statistics
o Total number of bags seen at each PEC
o Total number of purged bags at each PEC
o Total number of missing bags at each PEC
o Total number of unknown bags at each PEC

o Total number of “hard” jams at each PEC

o Total number of missing bag jams at each PEC
Baggage Process Timer (BPT) Statistics – see Section 14.5.5
o Total number of bags seen
o Average processing time for each bag
o By BIS position
• At the Project Sponsor’s discretion, the reporting system may contain the capability to perform database queries.
• The reporting system shall provide BHS Reports which should be within 5% difference or accuracy compared to the EDS Counts per
screening line. (When analyzing this data, the point of Bag ID acquisition at the EDS must be taken into consideration, i.e., if the ID is
generated at the in-feed and passed to the EDS, the ID may be processed and logged in the FDRS. However, if the unit faults, that ID and
decision may not be passed back to the BHS for logging.)
• For MITs and ICS systems, all CBRA reports shall be generated based on bag status upon arrival at the inspection station location.
12.13.3 Daily Reporting Requirements
At a minimum, the following daily reports in the format shown in Appendix A, Section A.4 shall be available to the local TSA representative via
auto-download and auto-transmittal capabilities to a specified existing email address or secure storage location:
• Daily CBIS Summary Report (Figure A.4.1)

• Daily CBIS Summary Report – Peak Hour
• Daily CBIS Bag Volume Report (Figure A.4.2)
• CBIS Executive Summary Report (Figure A.4.3) – SSI
• CBRA Executive Summary Report (Figure A.4.4) – SSI
• PEC Tracking Reports for all PECs within a tracking zone (Figure A.4.5)
• BPT Summary Report (Figure A.4.6)
• CBRA Bag Report (Figure A.4.7)
• CBIS Hourly Throughput Report (Figure A.4.8) – SSI

• CBIS Bag Spacing Report (Figure A.4.9)

• CBIS Performance Report (Figure A.4.10) – SSI
12.13.4 BHS ID Log Report Requirements
A report of the last 1000 BHS IDs shall be provided as defined below:
• The BHS_ID_LOG shall be considered a First-In-First-Out (FIFO). The FIFO shall capture the last 1,000 Pseudo IDs, associated decisions
and a flag indicating whether the bag has been processed by a TSO (including re-inserted for screening) for each EDS.
• This data shall consist of three elements:
Pseudo_ID
Decision
Processed
• The report shall be provided in both a PDF format and an importable CSV file.
Refer to OEM integration manuals for additional guidance.
12.13.5 BHS Reporting During Maintenance
BHS Reporting capabilities shall be designed such that logging of photo eye activity (i.e., total, missing, unknown, etc.) is disabled on conveyors
not running or operating in a manual override mode. The BHS shall only log PE activity when conveyors are running in a fully automated mode.
Analysis of operational run-in data has been thrown off and skewed when maintenance activities occur while the system was live or logging
events.

REQUIREMENTS AND BEST PRACTICES 13: ON-SCREEN RESOLUTION AREA
CHAPTER 13: ON-SCREEN RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS

13.1 OSR Overview
This section provides ergonomic requirements and recommendations for the layout of OSRAs, including workstation arrangements, the use of off-
workstation visual displays, and OSRA maintenance. This chapter draws on provisions and other information provided in International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) 11064-1, ISO 11064-2, ISO 11064-3, Mil-STD-1472G, as well as the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) website.
Additionally, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70, National Electrical Code and NFPA 101, Life Safety Code or similar standards
adopted by the authority having jurisdiction, shall be used, as appropriate, in the design of OSRAs.
OSRAs are devoted to Level 2 of the CBIS screening process. During Level 2 screening, TSA personnel view alarm bag images captured during
the Level 1 EDS scan, and clear any bags whose status can be resolved visually. This allows the continuous flow of bags through the BHS as bag
decision status determinations are made. Any bags that cannot be resolved at Level 2, and all bags that cannot be directed to Level 1 because of
size restrictions, are sent to Level 3.
The following is a list of key OSRA equipment and components:
• Control/supervisor workstation with a CI, closed circuit television (CCTV) interface, and communications
• Individual workstations with PVS
• Administrative area that includes a printer
• Wall-mounted BHS display
• CCTV display of the CBRA
13.2 General Ergonomic Recommendations
Several high-level ergonomic considerations are listed below which should be used to guide the design process:
• TSO population
• TSO attributes
• Work organization and process flow
• Job aids and work practices
• Shift rotation system
• Personnel qualification
• Training program

• Technology transfer
• Cross-cultural aspects
13.3 Architectural Considerations
13.3.1 Traffic and Routing
When designing OSRAs it is important to take into account the flow of both people and equipment:
• Distances should be minimized while taking travel and communication needs into account.
• Any restrictions placed on access for unauthorized personnel should not impede access for authorized personnel.
• Special consideration should be given to undesirable walking routes, such as short cuts using emergency exits. The layout of the site
should be such as to permit easy access to all areas that might legitimately need to be visited.
• TSOs may feel uncomfortable sitting with their backs to an entrance or frequently used walkways.
13.3.2 Entrances and Exits
Main entrances and exits should not form part of the working visual fields of the TSOs.
Entrances and exits should not be positioned behind TSOs.
NFPA 101, Life Safety Code or similar standards adopted by the authority having jurisdiction must be considered when locating entrances/exits in
light of mean of egress from OSRAs.
Door widths and access to space shall comply with applicable building codes and the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). Access is required for
typical office furniture and computer equipment.
Due to the specific requirements of OSRAs, the design of exits, entrances, and walkways should take into account the following considerations:
• The location and number of the exits and entrances should take account of the number of TSO operators and the functional links to areas
outside the OSRA, including routes of egress from the OSRA.
• A single main entrance and exit offers the best solution for security and staff control. However, other emergency exits may need to be
provided.

• Entrance location should be considered in relation to supporting functions situated around the OSRA, such as restrooms, relaxation areas,
supervisors, and offices.
• The sizes of entrances and exits should allow for the movement of equipment and the introduction of any other maintenance equipment
which can sometimes be required to be used in the OSRA. Entrances that are sized for equipment passage are usually adequate for
persons needing wheelchair access.
• Entrance and exit heights should be at least 7 feet 6 inches tall.
Emergency egress paths should be considered when positioning entrances and exits.
13.3.3 Equipment Requirements for Design Year
OSRA layouts should allow for expansion. As referenced in Section 5.5, the design year for equipment requirements is assumed to be 5 years
after the initial operation startup for a given baggage screening system (i.e., DBU+5 years). This is the time horizon which should be used when
designing OSRAs.
13.3.4 Equipment Requirements for Future Growth
To plan for future baggage growth, the OSR Station equipment requirements for 10 additional years past DBU+5 years are to be listed in 1-year
increments in a separate chart in the Basis of Design Report, from DBU+6 through DBU+15 years (including EDS units, PVS, and SVS
workstations) as stated in the requirement in Section 5.6.7.
13.3.5 Plan Space Provision
The selection of space for an OSRA should be consistent with the following guidelines:
• The selection of a space for an OSRA should be based on the usable area, not the gross area.
• Obstructions and structural features, such as pillars and awkward corners, and overhead obstacles (for example, structural and HVAC
components) within a proposed/planned OSRA, will severely reduce the available space and could result in sub-optimal work layouts.
• Provisions should be made to allow TSOs to cover several monitors at once from a singular position during non-peak hours in order to
account for periods of lighter staffing.
• A typical heuristic value for planning floor-space allocation is to allow for 29 ft2 to 49 ft 2 per working position with a minimum of not less
than 29 ft 2. This has been found to be satisfactory for rooms with more than one TSO workstation which are permanently staffed. It takes
account of typical equipment volumes, seating space and maintenance access and no large, off-workstation shared visual displays.
Precise requirements should be based on a task analysis. This space provision is based on “usable” area. In some OSRAs, where large,

shared overview displays are a dominant operational feature, space allocations of up to 164 ft2 have been measured. These displays may
include control interfaces and split displays showing various CCTV images from BHS and CBRAs.
• If additional staff, for example trainees, needs to be accommodated during off-normal operations, within the OSRA, sufficient space should
be allowed for these additional staff to be housed.
• Temporary positions should be provided alongside permanent TSO operator positions, where this additional staff is expected to be
present during shift changes.
• Square, circular, and hexagonal spaces are preferred for the arrangement of functional groups, because they offer the potential of
maximizing the number of links; long narrow spaces should be avoided since they can unduly reduce options.
• The information presented in Section 13.4.4 illustrates different ways in which workstations can be arranged. Some of the factors
considered include views to shared off-workstation visual displays, operational links between TSO operators and contact between
supervisors and operators. The diagrams are intended to highlight some of the advantages and disadvantages of alternative groupings of
workstations. They are not intended to be exhaustive or prescriptive.
13.3.6 Vertical Space Provision
When designing the vertical space of an OSRA the following should be taken into account:
• OSRAs with a single finished floor height offer greater flexibility for future change and for the movement of equipment and personnel,
especially those with disabilities.
• For a given OSRA, single height ceilings are preferred.
• Slab-to-slab heights should preferably be a minimum of 13 feet, to accommodate false floors, false ceilings, indirect lighting systems and
shared off-workstation visual displays. In practice, such a design would result in finished floor to finished ceiling heights of no less than 9
feet.
• Uncluttered ceilings are preferred to avoid any distractions or stray reflections from luminaries; such as plain finishes, which are also
recommended for walls and structural elements.
• Differing finished floor heights can sometimes offer advantages for viewing areas, supervisory overviews and a means of keeping a “public
area” segregated. To avoid potential safety hazards, including trip hazards, ramps should be considered for movement of equipment and
personnel between floor heights.
NOTE: The viewing of shared off-workstation visual displays by groups of TSO operators can sometimes be improved through the introduction of
multi-level floor heights.

Multi-level Floors: The use of varying floor levels in an OSRA can offer some advantages in viewing shared overview visual displays and
improving sightlines between TSO operators. These benefits can also be achieved by other means, such as the careful layout of the OSRA or the
duplication of overview equipment. When considering the adoption of a solution based on varying floor levels in an OSRA, the following drawbacks
should be taken into account:
• Can restrict direct visual and verbal links.

• Can create obstacles to the movement of people.
• Movement of larger items of equipment can be encumbered or restricted.
• Future changes in room layout can be more difficult and flexibility can be limited.
• Variation in workstation heights and locations of TSO operators can require additional measures to ensure proper lighting and HVAC
control.
• Wheelchair access shall be provided by ramps, which require additional floor space, or wheelchair lifts.
Where changes of floor level are introduced in conjunction with entrances or exits, proper physical aids such as guardrails, handrails, anti-slip
surfaces, and appropriate signage, when indicated, shall be provided to minimize potential workplace hazards.
13.3.7 Windows
Windows, if provided, require solar glare control and adjustable block-out treatments. Windows should be provided in OSRAs whenever possible
for operational, psychological, and physiological reasons, not necessarily for illumination. Large luminance differences between the visual
displays, used at a workstation, and areas around them, need to be avoided. The ratio of luminances for task areas that are frequently viewed in
sequence (for example, screen, document and windows) shall be lower than 10:1 as referenced in Mil-STD-1472G 5.2.1.3.8. Within a static visual
field, a significantly higher ratio of luminance’s can be tolerated between the task area and its surrounds (for example., display housing and walls)
and should not have any adverse effect. Displays shall be free from glare.
The provision of windows often gives rise to conflicting demands sometimes leading to the exclusion of windows from the OSRA (i.e., for security
or safety reasons). When windows are included in OSRAs, the following shall be taken into account:
• Workstations shall not be facing windows.

• Windows shall not be located behind the OSR monitors.
• Windows located on the left or right side of a workstation shall have a minimum distance of 9 feet to that workstation.
• Windows shall be included in meeting and relaxation areas and offer an alternative visual environment to that of the OSRA.

13.3.8 OSR Noise Abatement
The OSRA shall be provided in an environment that minimizes noise as much as possible. Because of the likely proximity to the BHS bag room,
the walls and ceiling of the CBRA require adequate acoustical insulation so that the background noise levels shall not exceed 65 dBA as
measured at the natural TSO sitting points at each screening station using a time-weighted average over an 8-hour shift.
13.3.9 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
The OSRA shall be a climate-controlled space. Temperature and humidity control shall be supplied commensurate with the locale. A separate
temperature control thermostat shall be provided for the OSRA.
If forced-air ventilation is provided, fresh outside air shall be delivered to the OSRA at rates specified by the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 62.1-2016 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. The OSRA shall be
under positive pressure relative to ambient BHS areas to minimize the migration of contaminants (e.g., products of combustion from tugs and
vehicles, as well as outside dirt, dust, and debris) from entering into the OSRA.
13.4 OSRA Operational Requirements
13.4.1 General OSRA Recommendations
OSRA layouts should be based on an agreed set of principles derived from operational feedback (if available), task analysis and an understanding
of the TSO population, including employees with disabilities. These underlying principles should be fully documented (see Section 13.5). The
layout of OSRAs should:
• Facilitate teamwork opportunities for TSOs.

• Reflect the allocation of responsibilities and the requirements for supervision.
• Optimize key operational links, including sightlines between OSRA staff, or direct speech communication between OSRA as well as
between OSRA and CBRA staff (see Section 13.4.3).
13.4.2 OSRA Layout
To develop design specifications for an OSRA arrangement, the following activities should be performed:
• Confirm the functional areas making up the OSRA and what may already exist in other TSA support areas.
• Estimate the space requirements for each functional area, e.g., administration areas, rest areas and provision for visitors.

• Confirm suitability of the planned location within the terminal, for example space restrictions, local hazards, and environmental impacts.
• Acquire current copies of all pertinent standard building codes, user building policies, and the like.
• Verify the availability of necessary utilities and associated services and determine if their current capacity will meet projected
requirements, as well as the future needs of the OSRA.
Determination of the operational links between the functional areas and the development of a preliminary OSRA layout should have been
performed during the Schematic Design Phase.
Functional entities to be included are:
• OSR room
• Meeting room
• Training facilities
• Office
• Break room with a potable water source
• Locker rooms and toilets
NOTE: The proposed design specifications should facilitate the smooth transition between all the activities in the OSRA.
13.4.3 OSR Room Layout
The following tasks have to be undertaken in order to properly design an OSR room layout:
• Determine the usable space

• Identify the furniture, equipment, and workstation components to be accommodated within the OSR room
• Determine operational links which need to be provided between items to be housed within the OSR room, including personnel
• Specify circulation requirements for staff and visitors
• Specify maintenance access and custodial services requirements

OSR Rooms shall include:
• Workstations
• Supervisor/CI workstations
• Separation between the OSR room and the BHS control room; the two cannot be one in the same
• A BHS monitor screen in the OSR room that only shows the CBIS area as related to TSA operations
• A centralized location for remote stop/start devices in order to minimize delays in re-setting EDS in faulted conditions (NOTE: Not
available with L-3 equipment)
• A direct line of communication from the airport operator to the OSR room and to the CBRA as well as a direct line of communication
between the OSRA and CBRA with a visual indicator in addition to an audio indicator
• The lighting in the area shall include dimmers to allow for better screen viewing
• Equipment racks
• Storage both on and off the workstation
• Notice board
• Where counters are used for the receipt or collection of documents, these often need to be near entrances or easily accessible from
certain operating positions and should accommodate organizational bins and file cabinets
• Clear Line of sight to enable supervision of the entrances/exit points
• Access to electrical panel boxes (including disconnecting means)
• Access to first aid equipment, emergency equipment and emergency exits
• Primary workstations shall be shielded from windows present in non-operational areas of the OSR room
• Shared off-workstation displays
• Desks
• Printer stands, photocopying machines and other office equipment, as necessary. NOTE: Isolation cabinets or rooms may be necessary
for devices that exceed 65 dBA at each workstation.

OSR Room personnel circulation is addressed in Section 13.4.6.
A secondary passive CBIS display shall be added to provide real-time performance metrics identical to that required in Section 14.3.3. The display
shall be installed on the supervisor’s desk. The exact location shall be coordinated between TSA and the ILDT during the project submittal phase.
13.4.4 Workstation Arrangements and Ergonomic Considerations
The arrangement of workstations is closely linked to the ergonomic considerations of individual workstations, the positioning of supervisory
workstations, vertical space usage and secondary workstations as all affect space and movement within the OSR room. Before going into details
of each specific consideration there are a number of general aspects that deserve attention:
• OSR rooms that exhibit either overcrowding of work positions or widely dispersed work positions are not recommended. Layouts should
allow, wherever practical, direct verbal communication between TSOs and avoid excessively short separations between adjacent TSOs
(see Section 13.4.3).
• OSR rooms in the same terminal facility should adopt the same ergonomic principles of room layout to facilitate decision-making and
teamwork.
• There are ergonomic benefits in varying postures during periods of work. Wherever practicable, it is recommended that TSO operator
workstation layouts and work regimes allow TSOs to change their posture at the workstation and to move from their workstations from
time to time (see ISO 9241-5:1998).
• Where confidential information is presented on display monitors, it shall not be possible to see this information from the public viewing
areas.
13.4.4.1 Floor Plan Arrangements
A wide range of alternative workstation arrangements can be configured in the OSRA space. The most suitable layout should be determined
through the conduct of a task analysis. Where clusters of workstations are grouped together to form a single unit, the way in which TSO operators
are arranged around the workstation can offer different advantages.
Some of the possible layouts are summarized in Table 13.1.

Table 13.1: Workstation Layouts
Spatial layout Layout description Layout advantages/disadvantages
Single one-sided linear • Off-w orkstation displays can be shared

• Easier access for w alkw ays, emergency egress
TSO and supervisor workstations are
and maintenance
placed linearly facing the same direction.
• Easier to place w indow s
• Does not foster team communication
One-sided m ultiple banks

• Large off-workstation displays may be shared
Variants include positioning of the
• Easier access
supervisor position and staggering the
• Allow s for separation of groups
banks. • Does not foster team communication
Angled banks
Workstations are split evenly into banks.
• Off-w orkstation displays can be shared
These banks are placed angularly (either
• Can foster verbal communication w ithout
at obtuse or acute angles).
interrupting other teams
The supervisor workstation may be placed • Easier access for w alkw ays and maintenance
behind the TSO workstations.
Circular
• Equipment can be shared
Workstations are placed along the
• Difficult for team communication
circumference with the off-workstation
• Difficult from an external lighting perspective
display at the center. • Inefficient access for maintenance
Opposite facing linear row s

• Group separation possible
• Verbal communication encouraged
TSOs can be placed either inside or
• Efficient access for emergency egress and
outside of the arrangement. maintenance
• Equipment cannot be shared
Source: ISO 11064-3: 1999, Design of Control Centers. Part 3: Control room layout.

When designing an arrangement plan the following elements should be considered:
• Operational links between TSOs, such as speech, sightlines or direct voice communication, should be documented using link association
tables prior to developing workstation layouts. These should provide a benchmark against which alternative layouts can be assessed and
detail primary and secondary operational means, including direct visual, message passing, or equipment sharing requirements.
• When considering alternative ways of laying out a number of workstations, the following factors should be considered:
Dedicated or shared workstations between TSOs.
Whether each workstation is identical.
Whether control operations and OSARP can be done from a single dual-use workstation or tasks are spread between a number of
dedicated workstations.
• Where a number of OSRAs operating on the same CBIS are needed, but located at various sites throughout the airport, each OSRA
should have a similar layout. Adopting this approach facilitates the transfer of personnel from one site to another and can reduce training
time and errors.
• Workstation arrangements shall take into account operations under normal and abnormal modes of system operation. For example,
fallback arrangements for information transmission by paper or other non-electronic means.
• Where ventilation systems, light fixtures, and windows have already been installed, positioning of workstations should take into account
these existing conditions to avoid draughts, and glare and reflections on visual display screens.
• Luminance shall be measured at the center of the monitor, and found to be in the range of 300 to 500 lux.
• Light sources should not be placed directly behind workstations, rather lighting should be diffuse throughout the OSRA so as to limit glare.
• Workstation layouts should provide an operationally satisfactory working environment under both maximum and minimum staffing levels.
• Workstation layouts should provide for the convenient storage and display of all necessary reference documentation which TSO operators
require to access as part of their duties, as well as items which can be required in operational emergencies.
• Where workstations are grouped together, the minimum distances between adjacent positions should not result in individuals sitting within
each other's personal space. While occasional close working relationships may be necessary and acceptable, working positions adopted
for extended periods should avoid TSO operators having to intrude within each other's personal space.
• Spacing between TSO operators should take account of shared equipment, where consideration of common reach zones or potential
problems of interference due to noise need to be applied.
• Approximate workstation sizing for initial room layout purposes should take into account such factors as equipment size, flat worktop
provision, and the requirements for on-workstation storage and accommodation of employees with disabilities. Any such layouts should be
fully checked through workstation and room trials prior to being finalized.

• When selecting room layouts, attention should be paid to training requirements for TSO operators, for example, additional space for
equipment adjacent to a normal operator's position or a separate, discrete training workstation.
• Layouts should take into account maintenance requirements and access space for technicians and equipment removal, particularly where
this involves bulky components.
• The general arrangement of workstations should be such that flow from general circulation areas is inhibited. However, the use of actual
physical barriers to do this is not advocated.
• Layouts should optimize key operational links, such as sight lines to BHS, displays, CCTV displays, and communication links between
OSR and the CBRA staff
13.4.4.2 Control Workstations
OSRAs will have an area designated as the Supervisory/CI workstation and additional requirements can be associated with their location in the
OSRA:
• The Supervisory/CI workstation should take full account of the additional reference material which is sometimes required to be stored,
displayed, and used at these workstations.
• In arranging Supervisory/CI layouts, it should be considered that the person at this workstation will be monitoring the EDS and CBRA
processes, as well as providing supervisory support to the OSR operation. Layouts should place a high priority on equipment positioning
(CI, CCTV, BHS monitors), while allowing for direct verbal communication with those positioned at the OSR workstations.
• A Supervisor/CI workstation shall include communications infrastructure for telephone and TSA network access.
• Layouts should allow for additional circulation around Supervisory/CI area and for the temporary accommodation of visitors.
• Where major screening incidents are handled from the Supervisory/CI area, the provision of extra vertical display surfaces needs to be
considered for the presentation of additional images or procedures. Additional space may be required for extra staff who may also need to
be accommodated in this area.
13.4.4.3 Secondary Workstations
Where it is impractical to store all equipment or reference material at the workstation (or at another workstation that can deal with an overflow of
tasks during peak workloads), the provision of a secondary workstation should be considered. The layout and design of any such workstations
should adhere to the same ergonomic principles as presented for primary positions and their layout based on a task analysis.

13.4.4.4 Specific Ergonomic Considerations
When designing workstations, the following specific ergonomic considerations should be taken into account in order to achieve a neutral body
position that reduces strain on muscles, tendons, and the skeletal systems and allows TSO operators to vary their postures throughout the day.
Figure 13.1 provides a visual reference, while Table 13.2 summarizes many of these points.
Figure 13.1: Neutral Body Position
Source: United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety & Health Administration
available at OSHA’s computer workstation webpage.
Table 13.2: Monitor/Desk/Task Chair Ergonom ic Design Reference

Monitors Desks Chairs
• Height: top of monitor shall be at or slightly below • Height: shall be • Height: shall be fully adjustable w ith a minimum
eye level adjustable betw een range of 16-in.
• Size: 20-23-in. monitor shall be sufficient 20-in. and 28-in. • Backrest: shall be at least 15-in. high and 12-in.
• Distance: shall be 20-40-in. from the eye to the • Clearance: shall be w ide, and should recline 15 degrees from vertical
front surface of the monitor 15-in. for knees and • Seat Size: seat pan length shall be 15-in. to 17-in.
• Position: shall be directly in front of you, so your 24-in. for feet, w idth at and depth adjustable
head, neck and torso face forw ard when view ing least 20-in. • Chair Base and Rotation: shall be 5-legged base;
the screen. Monitors should not be farther than • Glare: desktops shall 360 degrees unrestricted rotation
35 degrees to the left or right have a matte finish, • Armrests: shall be removable, distance betw een
• Glare: shall be positioned aw ay from w indow s avoid glass tops them shall be at least 16-in. and adjustable
Source: United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration available at OSHA’s computer workstation web page.

NOTE: Where physically disadvantaged TSO operators or visitors (those exhibiting a physical disability) are expected to use the OSRA, these
measurements will differ. Please refer to any local or national regulations that would be applicable in these circumstances.
• Workstations should be designed to allow the hands, wrists, and forearms to be in-line and parallel to the floor.
• Workstations should be designed to allow the TSO’s head to be level and in-line with the torso.
• While seated, the design of the workstations should allow the TSO’s elbows to stay in close to the body and be bent between 90 and
110 degrees.
• Accommodations should be made so that while TSOs are seated at their workstations in an ergonomic task chair their backs are fully
supported vertically or leaning back slightly.
• When seated, the design of the workstation should allow for the TSO’s knees to be at the same height as the hips with the feet slightly
forward.
• The preferred viewing distance from TSOs to their monitors should be between 18 and 24 inches and the center of the monitor screens
should be located 15 to 20 degrees below the horizontal eye level of the TSO operators (see Figure 13.2).
Figure 13.2: View ing Distance
Source: United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety & Health Administration
available at OSHA’s computer workstation webpage.
• Adequate desk space should be provided to allow the placement of monitors within the viewing range of 18 to 24 inches to TSO operators,
as well as to provide adequate room for the placement of any reference materials/other equipment which may be needed.

• Desks should have a leg clearance of between 20 and 28 inches. Ideally, height-adjustable desktops should be provided to afford
maximum flexibility within the TSO population.
• Task chairs should have proper lumbar support that allow the TSO operators to recline up to 15 degrees from vertical, and which are
height-adjustable.
• OSR room dimensions and workstation layout dimensions and features for which end-user sizes are relevant, for example, seated view
over workstations, should take into account the range of TSO operators for which these items are being provided.
13.4.4.5 Additional Considerations
In particular, the following must be considered:
• The OSRA workstation layout should take into account the requirements that are likely to be in place at the end of the planned life span of
the OSRA (refer to Section 5.6).
• The needs of persons with disabilities should be considered during the layout of the OSRA, for example, by allowing additional circulation
spaces and introducing ramps for wheelchair access.
• Adequate provisions should be made for the storage of personal items at workstations (briefcases and purses) or outside the OSRA in
adjacent locker rooms (for clothing and other personal effects).
• Hard-copy information storage should be classified such that the most appropriate provisions can be made within the OSRA such as
storage in a lockable drawer. An appropriate classification is suggested in Table 13.3.
Table 13.3: Control Room Storage – Classification of Types

Storage requirement Typical location Exam ple
Immediate access Primary w orkstation • Operational procedures
• High-priority telephone numbers
• Emergency procedures
• Diagnostics
Secondary access Secondary w orkstation • Internal telephone directory
• Secondary operating procedures
Secondary access Adjacent w orkstation • Architectural/engineering draw ings
Occasional access Library • Non-critical screening equipment failure procedures

13.4.5 Off-Workstation Shared Visual Displays
The layout of the OSRA shall ensure that all off-workstation shared visual displays necessary for the TSO operator task are visible from all
relevant workstations (see Section 13.4.3).
The requirements presented in this section concern the location of shared visual displays within the OSRA. Many differing technologies can be
used for overview visual displays, including banks of CCTV monitors, projected displays, hard-wired mimics and static maps/diagrams. When
designing OSRA layouts for these differing solutions, the constraints imposed by the various solutions should be considered. Such constraints
include limitations on viewing angle, contrast ratios, and image construction.
As an alternative to large shared displays, the option of presenting this information on the workstation, with smaller schematics, should be
considered.
13.4.5.1 Horizontal and Vertical Viewing Distances
In particular, the following has to be taken into account:
• Where off-workstation shared visual displays need to be used on a regular or continuous basis, the preferred position is directly in front of
the TSO operator where they can easily be seen when looking over the workstation or can be scanned by eye-movement alone (see
Figure 13.3).
Figure 13.3: Preferred Location of Off-Workstation Shared Visual Displays

• Where the information presented on an off-workstation shared visual display does not have to be read while operating the console or
provides secondary information, the displays can sometimes be mounted to one side of the workstation. Such displays should be
positioned so that all information required can be reliably read from the TSO operator’s normal position, by a simple rotation of their task
chair.
• For very large off-workstation shared visual displays which need to be monitored on a continual or regular basis, it is recommended that
TSO operators be allocated sections of the common display which they can effectively and conveniently monitor.
• Where the information on an off-workstation overview visual display needs to be regularly used by TSO operators, the design of the visual
display and the layout of the OSRA should ensure that all of the information that needs to be used by a TSO operator can be seen from
the normal working position for both the vertical and horizontal planes.
• Necessary information presented on shared overview visual displays shall be visible by personnel, with applicable 5th to 95th percentile
body dimensions of the TSO operator population, from their normal working positions. There can be a requirement for safety critical
information to be seen. Under these circumstances, the user percentile range to be accommodated may need to be greater.
• Operational information presented on the lowest part of an off-workstation shared visual display shall be visible to a 5th percentile, seated,
non-upright TSO operator. The following formula may be used to determine this measurement:
Where
H1 is the lowest height at which the visual display can be seen;
He is the design-eye-position, measured from the floor to the outer corner of the eye; 5th percentile shall be applied;
NOTE: He is a combination of the adjusted seat height and the anthropometric data of “eye height, sitting.”
Hc is the height of the console;
D is the horizontal distance between the front edge of the console and the surface of the wall panel;
Dc is the depth of the console;
d is the horizontal distance between the design-eye-position and the front edge of the console.

13.4.5.2 Relationship of Shared Visual Displays to Other Features
In particular, the following should be taken into account:
• Windows should not be located adjacent to off-workstation shared visual displays or within the same field of view.
• Artificial room lighting should not interfere with the visibility of any sections of the off-workstation, shared visual displays.
• Finishes around off-workstation, shared visual displays should be carefully controlled so as not to interfere with the visibility of parts of the
shared visual display.
• Entrances and exits should not be located within the same field of view as major off-workstation shared visual displays.
13.4.6 Personnel Circulation and Custodial Services Access
The requirements and recommendations presented in this section concern the provision of appropriate space for general circulation.
Circulation of OSRA staff, maintenance staff, and all visitors should be achieved with minimum disruption to the work of TSO operators (see
Section 13.4.7).
Where it is anticipated that the Supervisory/CI positions will give rise to additional circulation from outside the OSRA, it is recommended that these
positions be located close to main entrances.
OSRA designs should incorporate a means of restricting thoroughfare access.
All aspects of OSRA layout shall take into account the requirements for maintenance and custodial services access as stated in Mil Standard
1472G Section 5.9.
13.4.7 Personnel Circulation
Planning for the circulation of personnel throughout the OSRA shall include the following:
• Adequate general circulation, such that OSRA operations are not interrupted by either visual or auditory distraction.
• Adequate circulation areas where shift changeover is protracted and two shifts are present in the OSRA at the same time.
• Orderly evacuation of the area via easily identifiable routes of egress in the event of an emergency, such as a fire alarm.

• OSRA circulation routes arranged to avoid cross-circulation.
• Restricted ceiling heights, where present, be indicated using ceiling-mounted warning.
13.4.8 Custodial Services Access
As with maintenance, the ability of custodial services staff to carry out their duties without interfering with the operations of the OSRA is very
important to the day-to-day operations of the facility. Planning for regularly scheduled cleaning activities should rely on the following guidelines:
• Inadvertent activation of any safety-critical controls shall not be possible during cleaning tasks.
• An adequate number of power outlets should be provided which will enable cleaning appliances to be used without causing electrical
interference or disturbing OSRA operations.
• Where gaps occur between items of equipment or furniture, adequate clearances should be allowed for proper cleaning task to be
executed.
• Special provision is sometimes required where food and beverage are permitted to be consumed in the OSRA.
• The OSRA layout should not give rise to unsuitable working conditions or working movements or postures for cleaning staff.
13.5 Verification and Validation of OSRA Layout
Verification and validation should be integrated with the design process and should be performed in parallel with top-level design and detailed
design. It is recommended that verification and validation be an iterative process during the development of the design. This process should give
feedback to the designer in moving towards the best possible solution and may include a number of different methods and techniques.
Examples of these are:
• Guideline evaluations (or use of checklists), i.e., using human factor guidelines and standards to check the design.
• Different task analysis techniques such as link analysis or timeline analysis, where communication and coordination
• The use of “walk and talk through” techniques, where the idea is to work through scenarios/sequences in the new design.
• Evaluation criteria, compromises and decisions based on ergonomic principles should be documented and securely stored so that future
modifications can take proper account of these factors.
In all cases, local, state, and Federal regulations regarding design and construction shall supersede the recommendations included in this section.
This is especially relevant concerning the provision of allowances for the disabled as covered by the ADA.

REQUIREMENTS AND BEST PRACTICES 14: CBRA PLANNING STANDARDS
CHAPTER 14 : CHECKED BAGGAGE RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS

14.1 CBRA Overview
The CBRA provides the space and equipment needed by TSOs to conduct bag inspection per the Checked Baggage SOP as mandated by the
TSA. The proper layout and furnishing of the CBRA are essential to ensuring that TSOs can effectively, efficiently, and safely perform their duties.
Careful consideration needs to be given to the operational controls, environmental and ergonomic configuration, and equipment specified for the
CBRA.
Although each airport is different and the available space may differ, all CBRAs need to follow the same layout concept, BIS configuration,
functionality, and BSD operations. This standardizes training and improves personnel utilization across multiple CBRAs within an airport. The
following sections provide details in these four aspects of the CBRA design. Deviations from Chapter 14 requirements shall be submitted through
an RFV for review and approval by TSA.
14.2 CBRA Layout
The CBRA layout shall be designed to optimize TSO utilization, avoid bag lifting, and reduce equipment costs. The CBRA layout shall be
centralized and incorporate the following:
• Single Alarm Line (AL)

• Connected to the end of the AL, a Reinsert Line (RL) with no side guard to ease bag placement during manual reinsertion
• Transport of OOG bags via the AL and leave via the Clear Line (CL)
• Transport of OS bags via a dedicated conveyor line
The CBRA layout should include a single CL unless physical constraints require additional lines.
For smaller configurations, the optimal layout shall include a straight Alarm Line (AL) and a parallel Clear Line (CL) as shown in Figure 14.1. For
larger configurations, the optimal layout shall include a “U” shape AL as shown in Figure 14.2. These layouts have been found to be appropriate
for most CBRA designs. TSA understands there may be preferable alternatives to these layouts for some CBRAs. The ILDT can consider other
layout options, which would be reviewed and approved, if appropriate, through the RFV process.

Figure 14.1: Optim al CBRA Layout for Sm aller System s

Figure 14.2: Optim al CBRA Layout for Larger System s

14.3 Baggage Inspection Stations
The BIS is a workstation that provides the TSO with all the tools needed and an ergonomically sound space for inspecting bags. In previous
versions of the PGDS, the BIS included a back wall and a sliding-top, stainless steel table. However, in order to promote innovation, new designs
and technologies for the BIS will be considered. An example BIS is shown in Figure 14.3 and a BIS cross section in Figure 14.4.
Figure 14.3: Exam ple Baggage Inspection Station
Note: The table shown in the figure is only for reference. Other baggage inspection work surface solutions may be used.

Figure 14.4: CBRA Workstation Cross Section
BIS designs shall include a flat work surface for the TSO to place the bag and remove any objects inside the bag as needed. The work surface
shall be made of a non-porous material that can withstand isopropyl alcohol decontamination. The BIS work surface shall be 30” W x 60” L and be
placed at 30” high above the finished floor.
The BIS design shall be capable of processing bags year-round in an environment with a temperature range of 50-100°F and a humidity of 30-
70%. The baggage to be screened may weight up to 125lbs. The BIS shall provide a 36” W x 60” L workspace in front of the working surface for
the TSO to move freely. In addition, the BIS shall allow maintenance access to all components and shall accommodate all the CBRA ancillary
equipment listed in Section 14.3.1.

Kick panels shall be installed at all locations where a bag is opened along the AL and CL.
The BISs for the OS line do not require the SVS, scan gun, or BSD as these bags were not screened by the EDS.
The bag inspection process requires the use of certain tools that will vary depending on the bag. The BIS shall provide a storage system for these
tools to increase TSO efficiency, prevent theft, and avoid leaving tools inside passenger luggage after the inspection. The tool storage system
shall be:
• Organized for easy inventory checks at the end of each shift by the TSM
• Visually trackable for quick inventory checks after each bag inspection by the TSO
The storage system shall allow quicker access to primary and secondary tools as these are the most used, while the special tools may require
more time to obtain since they are only used occasionally. A list of primary, secondary, and special tools to be stored can be found in Table 14.1.
Table 14.1: List of Tools Needed for the Bag Inspection Process
Prim ary Secondary Special
Lock Keys Alcohol bottle Screw driver
TSA note Paper tow el Pry-bar
ETD w and Gloves box HAZMAT note
ETD disks Hand sanitizer Scissor
Marker Box cutter
Bolt cutter Tape gun
Figure 14.5 illustrates the BIS position between the alarm and clear lines and the positioning of ancillary equipment with respect to the BIS and the
standing position of the TSO.

Figure 14.5: CBRA Workstation Elevation
c
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment
The BIS shall include all the supports needed to mount the ancillary equipment listed in this section.
• The BSD is the interface between the TSO and the BHS. It displays specific baggage information and allows the TSO to take action on a
given bag. One BSD shall be installed per BIS. The BSD shall be color and touch capable with an 8” to 12” diagonal display size. The
bezel of the BSD shall not exceed 1” in any direction and shall be located near the BRP at a 45-degree angle. The BSD mounting solution
shall be adjustable in X, Y, Z dimensions without the use of tools.

• The SVS is the interface between the TSO and the EDS. It permits the TSO to conduct searches using the bag ID and image of the bag.
The SVS is provided by the EDS OEM and may include one or two monitors, a keyboard, a mouse, and a computer Central Processing
Unit (CPU). The SVS monitors, keyboard and mouse shall be located towards the middle of the BIS and shall be adjustable in X, Y, Z
dimensions without the use of tools. The SVS CPU shall be located in a lockable compartment where it will not interfere with the screening
process.
• The Scan Guns are devices that read the 10-digit IATA bag tag and transfer the information to the BSD, which then sends the information
to the SVS for image retrieval. The scan gun shall include a shock absorbing protector (rubber or similar) and be located near the adjacent
BRP on a retractable reel. Scan guns shall be corded with stationary mounting solutions.
• The ETD is a device used to screen a bag for explosives. The CBRA design shall provide means to place and share an ETD between two
adjacent BISs. The ETDs are provided by the TSA.
• The Emergency Stop (E-stop) shall stop all conveyors in a contiguous line when pressed during an emergency. Each BIS shall have an
accessible E-stop. An E-stop lanyard the length of the alarm line or a control station-type E-stop can be utilized. E-stop stations at other
locations (such as the CL or an OS line) are also encouraged. A single start push button per E-stop zone shall be installed to ensure the
system can only be started (reset) from one location within the zone after an E-stop has been activated.
• The UPS is a device capable of temporarily providing power to the TSA-provided BIS equipment whenever power outages occur. The BIS
shall provide a place to locate the UPS.
14.3.2 Baggage Removal Point
The BRP is the queue conveyor where bags stop for removal and processing by the TSO.
• The BRP shall be 48” L and 32” H (floor to the conveyor bed). The photo eye (PE) location and programing of the BRP shall ensure that
arriving bags are centered (with respect to the width of the conveyor) and stop next to the corresponding BIS. In addition, the photo eye
reflector cover shall be of a slim design no more than 1” H that allows bags to be slid over it. Refer to Figure 14.6 for an example.

Figure 14.6: Photo Eye Reflector Cover
• The queue conveyors situated between the BRPs are termed “Intermediate Queues” and shall be a minimum of 48” L and 32” inches in
height. Intermediate queues shall be installed in the space between BIS pairs adjacent to the workspace for the TSOs.
14.3.3 CBRA BHS Displays
The CBRA shall be equipped with a display of additional BHS information that is useful for the TSA to effectively respond to system issues or bag
surges. This information shall be visually available as follows:
• BHS Status Display – A visual representation of the conveyor belt design shall be included that uses industry-wide standard color codes to
communicate real-time equipment status.
• BHS Remote Reporting Workstation – A remote thin client BHS workstation shall be provided to TSA in OSR/CBRA at supervisors desk
depending on system size and TSA needs.
• The BHS Remote Reporting Workstation display of all reports shall include an optional setting that refreshes the information on the display
at a selected interval so that the report can be left open on the display and show current operational data.
The number, locations, and size of displays will depend upon the BHS design, TSM desk location, and CBRA layout. Smaller airports may require
one to two smaller displays (22” to 27”), while bigger airports may require one to three larger displays (42” to 60”). The exact configuration of
CBRA BHS displays shall be coordinated between TSA and the ILDT during the project submittal phase.

14.4 Horizontal Clearances
The following horizontal dimensions shall be maintained in the CBRA:
• The work space at the workstation and visual acuity ranges for off-station displays shall conform to the following ISO standards:
11064-01:2000 Ergonomic design of control centres – Part 1: Principles for the design of control centres
11064-02:2000 Ergonomic design of control centres – Part 2: Principles for the arrangement of control suites
11064-03:1999 Ergonomic design of control centres – Part 3: Control room layout
Designers shall verify with local authorities that routes of egress within and external to the CBRA comply with applicable life safety codes.
Additionally, sufficient clearance for utilization of bomb disposal robots shall also be taken into account.
14.5 CBRA Functionality
This section provides a description of the functionality and controls required by the equipment in CBRA. The CBRA shall be programmed to
automatically apply two different queuing methods—the normal alarm line queuing method and the alternate alarm line queuing method—based
on three queuing prioritization levels. These queuing methodologies have been found to be appropriate for most CBRA designs. TSA understands
there may be preferable alternatives to these methods for some CBRAs. It is strongly recommended the ILDT always consider other queuing
options, which would be reviewed and approved, if appropriate, through the RFV process.
BISs shall be enabled in upstream sequence only beginning with the furthest downstream station enabled and available station. The BHS shall
inhibit an upstream station from being enabled if downstream BISs are enabled and available for operations. This applies to conventional conveyor
and MIT CBRA layouts.
14.5.1 Normal Alarm Line Queuing Method
A BIS is considered enabled when an operator is logged in. An enabled BIS is considered available when it is not occupied with a bag for
screening.
During normal operations, bags arriving on the AL shall be assigned to the BIS that has been available for the longest period of time. If there are
no available BISs, the bags shall queue and hold on the BRP prior to the most-upstream enabled BIS. If there are no enabled BISs, the bags shall
queue at the second most downstream BRP.
When a bag is assigned by the BHS to an available BIS, the bag cannot be reassigned to another BIS unless the BIS is disabled (i.e., the operator
logs out).

The queuing prioritization levels shall be as follows:
1. Disabled BRPs, starting from the most downstream

2. Storage space outside of CBRA
3. Intermediate queues starting from the most upstream
Figure 14.7 assumes that BIS-1, BIS-2, and BIS-3 are enabled and available and five bags arrive in the CBRA consecutively. Following the logic
above, the first three bags will be assigned to BRP-1 through BRP-3, respectively. Bag 4 and Bag 5 will queue at BRP-4 and BRP-5. Whenever a
BIS becomes available, Bag 4 will advance to it and Bag 5 will advance to BRP-4. If a TSO logs into BIS-4, then Bag 4 is automatically assigned
to the station and the operator may proceed with the screening as needed.

Figure 14.7: Norm al Alarm Line Queuing Method
14.5.2 Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method
When the CBRA becomes overwhelmed and the queuing prioritization level 3 reaches capacity, the system shall switch to an Alternate Queuing
Method (AQM) where the system starts advancing all additional bags arriving in the CBRA one conveyor at a time.
While the AQM is taking place, bags may pass unavailable BISs, blocking the path to the RL for any subsequent bag. Operators at the associated
BISs will be instructed by the BSD to manually reinsert bags as necessary. The BRPs affected by AQM shall return to normal operations when the
condition is lifted (i.e., a clear conveyor path to the RL is reestablished).

For example, as shown in Figure 14.8, if all 8 BISs are available and 14 consecutive bags are sent to CBRA, the first 8 bags will proceed to the
respective BIS’s BRPs. Since only four bags can be stored upstream of BRP-8, the BHS will automatically force Bag 9 to BRP-7 and Bag 10 to
BRP-8. Since Bag 9 passed an unavailable BIS (BIS-8), BIS-8 goes into the AQM and restricts this operator to only reinsert bags manually. Note
that if BIS-8 proceeds to inspect Bag 10, no clear path to the RL is available due to Bag 9 being in the way). When a BIS becomes available and
Bag 9 is removed from the BRP, the AQM mode on BIS-8 is lifted and returns to normal operations. BIS-7 can still automatically reinsert Bag 9
since no other bags are stopped on downstream BRPs.
Figure 14.8: Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method

14.5.3 Baggage Removal Point
After a bag has been removed from a BRP and an action button has been selected on the BSD (the chronological order is irrelevant, but both
conditions must be met), the system controls shall have an adjustable lag timer for the BRP belt to resume operations (i.e., advance other bags).
The default value shall be three seconds.
14.5.4 Scan Guns
The scan guns shall be connected to the BSD so data is passed from the BHS to the SVS via a predefined communication port.
14.5.5 Baggage Process and Screening Timers
The BHS shall use a BPT to record every bag processing time at each BIS using the arrival of a bag at the BRP as the start signal for the timer.
BPT information is considered SSI and requires SSI training to access. The BHS shall also use a Baggage Screening Timer (BST) to record the
bag screening time at each BIS using the SEARCH button on the BSD as the start signal for the timer. Both BPT and BST use the CLEARED
button for the stop signal and are recorded in the CBRA Bag Process report. Example reports are provided in Appendix A, Section A.4.
14.5.6 Reinsertion Line
Under normal mode, the RL conveyor shall automatically start when a reinserted bag is detected on the upstream queue conveyor and the bag is
automatically transferred onto the RL for rescreening.
Bags eligible for either automatic or manual reinsertion shall be assigned a new unique BHS tracking ID prior to rescreening.
A control station shall be provided to operate the RL conveyor and allow for the manual placement of a bag under the AQM mode. AQM only
allows manual reinsertion. At the manual reinsert points, located in optimal layouts shown in Figure 14.1 and Figure 14.2, the design shall
incorporate a control station with the functionality of “Insert Bag” which will stop the conveyor and queue bags upstream to allow a bag to be
manually placed on the conveyor (manual reinsert process). After the bag is placed on the conveyor, pressing a “dispatch” button shall send the
bag downstream tracked with a status of “REINSERTED”. In the case of the optimal layout in Figure 14.2, bags are placed in the center reinsert
point (bottom of the horseshoe). Reinserted bags shall not stop at enabled BRPs and will be advanced directly to the RL line.
14.5.7 Serial Communication Requirements
BSD to SVS serial communication requirements are being refined by the TSA to include, in part, two-way communications. This section details
information pertaining to the serial communications between the BSD, controlled by the BHS, and the SVS, controlled by the EDS network.

Projects based on this version of the PGDS shall include provisions for these requirements to be incorporated during the project or as defined by
the EDS Integration Documentation at the time of installation.
Figure 14.9 depicts one option to accomplish the serial interface as outlined.
Figure 14.9: Serial Com m unications Configuration Option
Note: The BSD is shown over the conveyor for clarity in the figure but is normally installed over the baggage inspection work space.

When the operator logs into the SVS, a heartbeat will be sent from the SVS and used by the BHS to automatically enable the BSD/BRP for bag
processing.
When a bag arrives in the CBRA, the BSD will send the associated ID to the SVS based upon the options available to the operator as described
below. This data will be used by the FDRS to log the time an image was sent to the screen to the time a final disposition was rendered by the
CBRA operator.
After each bag has been processed by the TSO, the SVS will send back the associated ID string in addition to the bag’s disposition to the BSD
based upon the actions taken at the SVS. For example, if the operator renders a clear disposition on a given bag, that information will be sent
back to the BHS. This will in turn be used by the BHS to declare that position available.
14.5.7.1 Communication Port Parameters
The SVS serial communications port shall be configured for two-way communications send and receive, with the following parameters:
• Baud Rate – 9600

• Data Bit – 8
• Parity – 0
• Stop Bits – 1
14.5.7.2 Communications Data Format
Data formatting between the BSD and SVS shall comply with the American Standard Code Information Interchange (ASCII) standards.
For any instance where either no BHS Pseudo ID or IATA ID is available from the BHS to the SVS or SVS to the BHS, the 10 digits shall be
populated with “?” marks (where a “?” is equivalent to an ASCII 63).
Note: Numbers below within “( )” indicate the ASCII equivalent value.
14.5.7.3 BSD to SVS
Data format is <<STX,Pseudo,IATA,ETX>> where
• STX (02) = Start of Text

• . (44)

• Pseudo = BHS generated ID for tracking purposes and displayed on the BSD
• , (44)
• IATA = IATA ID Displayed on BSD
• . (44)
• ETX (03) = End of Text
14.5.7.4 Order of Bag ID Lookup
1. The SVS will use the BHS Pseudo ID as the primary ID to recall the associated image.
2. Where a bag cannot be recalled due to BHS issues such as lost in tracking, the EDS will use the IATA as a secondary means to recall the
image.
3. Where no ID is found, either BHS Pseudo or IATA, the SVS will provide a positive response that no image was found associated with the
IDs provided. This will be indicated as a “popup” message on the SVS monitors.
14.5.7.5 SVS to BSD Heartbeat
When the operator has logged into the SVS, a heartbeat will be sent from the SVS to the BSD denoting it is active and available to process bags.
When the BHS detects the heartbeat from the SVS, the BSD shall automatically be enabled and the active screen will be “Waiting For Bag”.
This data will be a toggle between two separate ASCII values and shall be as follows every two seconds:
Data format is <<STX,HB,ETX>> where

• , (44)
• HB = Toggles between H (72) and h (104)
• , (44)
Note: The BHS is expected to monitor this data for a change of state. If a change of state is not detected within 10 seconds, the BHS is expected
to automatically log out of the BRP and declare the BRP unavailable.

14.5.7.6 Bag ID and Disposition String Format
Data format is <<STX,IATA,Pseudo,Disposition,ETX>> where

• , (44)
• IATA = IATA ID Displayed on BSD
• , (44)
• Pseudo = BHS generated ID for tracking purposes and displayed on the BSD
• , (44)
• Disposition
Clear = C (67)
Alarm = A (65)
No Image Found = F (70)
• , (44)
14.6 BSD Operations
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design
The BSD Interface comprises different elements and specific visual characteristics that shall be replicated on every design. The visual design shall
include:
• Font style: The font shall be a web-safe sans-serif typeface such as Arial, Verdana, or Calibri.
• All Capital Letters: Bag statuses, Unique Identifier Cells (UICs), and operator messages shall be displayed in all capital letters. Everything
else will follow the typical format of the first capital letter only.
• The elements to screen size ratio shall be maintained regardless of the display size. For instance, when determining the width of the
elements:
Data fields – 10% each (or 40% total)
Operator Message – 10%

Primary Buttons – 40%
Secondary buttons – 20%
• All colors used throughout the displays shall follow the colors in Table 14.2:
Table 14.2: BSD Color Requirem ents
Color Pantone R G B
Blue 2955 C 0 51 102
Gray Cool Gray 6 C 176 177 179
Red 187 C 204 0 51
Light Blue 307 C 0 102 153
Green 370 C 51 153 0
Orange 159 191 87 0
Yellow 102 C 246 229 0

The BSD structure shall include the following key elements illustrated in Figure 14.10:
Figure 14.10: Elem ents of Bag Status Display Screen
• Station ID: Numbering convention in the form of “STATION –XX”, which correlates to the BIS number in which it is mounted.
• Bag Information Fields:
Bag Status: Disposition of the bag as indicated by designator and color listed in Section 14.6.2
RBS Level: The EDS algorithm used to screen the bag (This is a placeholder for now. No additional information is available.)
IATA ID or RFID: If an ATR is being used upstream of the EDS units, the IATA number shall be populated here. If an RFID system is
being used, the RFID ID shall be displayed.
PSEUDO ID: The generated pseudo ID (either by the BHS or the EDS) shall be shown.
EDS ID: EDS screening line and EDS serial number used to process the current bag in the format of SS8 (G500)

UIC: Used to identify when any of the following scenarios occur:
o Duplicate IATA
o Timeout
o Communication Error
o Length Change
o Others may be added with an approved RFV
Found at PE: PE ID that correlates to the location where bags that have been lost in tracking were “found”.
• Operator Message Area: Used to display any messages for the operator.
• Primary Buttons: These represent the primary action typically taken by the operator. These also work as a trigger for the Bag Auto ID
Transfer functionality when needed, as referenced in TSA’s Integration Requirements Document (IRD).
• Secondary Action Buttons: These provide an optional action for the operator under certain circumstances.
Throughout the following sections, multiple BSD screens will be presented to show the desired results from each processing step. The ILDT is
required to match every aspect of each screen including colors, font style, button location and size, messages displayed, and others. If the ILDT
desires additional functionality, or would like to propose changes to improve operations, an RFV could be submitted to start the dialogue.
14.6.2 BSD Statuses and High-level Processing Procedures
Baggage that arrives in the CBRA shall be limited to the following five statuses with their corresponding designator codes, color, and RBS level.
• CLEARED (Green) – Bags that received a clear status from the EDS or OSR. Cleared bags include:
Clear – Standard bag with RBS level - 0
PRE-Clear – Pre-Check bag with RBS level - P
SEL-Clear – Selectee bag with RBS level - S
• ALARMED (Red) – Bags that generate an automatic alarm on an EDS unit and were viewed but not cleared by the Level 2 OSR
Operator. Alarmed bags include:
Alarmed – Standard bag with RBS level - 0
PRE-Alarmed – Pre-Check bag with RBS level - P
SEL-Alarmed – Selectee bag with RBS level – S

Timeout – Bags that received an alarm status from the EDS but timed out during OSR or didn’t make it to the OSR at all. RBS level
can be 0, P, or S.
• OUT OF GAUGE (Orange) – Bags that do not fit into EDS units. RBS level - UNK
• EDS ERRORED (Yellow) – Bags that received an error status from the EDS. RBS level – UNK
• UNKNOWN (Blue) – Bags that have become lost in tracking between the exit of the EDS and the BRP or forced unknown for security
reasons. RBS level – UNK
Communication Error – BHS will assign this status in scenarios where a disposition has not been received by the BHS from the EDS.
This status is NOT an indication of an EDS or BHS error, but indicates a possible communications error. Where the status is
persistent, the BHS and EDS engineers should review the possible condition causing the error. RBS level – UNK
Length Change – BHS will assign this status to bags that are believed to have “changed” their length. RBS level - UNK
These five statuses will be processed primarily utilizing five operator sub processes as shown in Figure 14.11. These sub processes are discussed
in greater detail in the next sections utilizing diagrams to illustrate multiple tasks happening simultaneously throughout each bag status resolution.

Figure 14.11: High-level Procedure Per Bag Status

14.6.3 Station Disabled and Waiting for Bag Screens
After the BHS startup procedures are completed, the BSD shall remain DISABLED until an operator presses the ENABLE button shown in Figure
14.12 or logs on to the SVS with two-way communication.
Figure 14.12: Station Disabled (left side) and Station Enabled (right side) Screens
MANUAL MODE allows for processing of bags hand carried to a BIS. MANUAL MODE can only be entered from a “DISABLED” BSD. While in
MANUAL MODE, the BHS will not queue bags on the associated BRP and the BSD will assume that every bag has an “UNKNOWN” status in
order to allow for a tag scan. The processing of bags while in MANUAL MODE follows the sequence for UNKNOWN bags shown in Section
14.6.4.5. The MANUAL MODE BSD screen in shown in Figure 14.13.

Figure 14.13: Station Disabled (left side) and Manual Mode Activated (right side) Screens
14.6.4 Bag Processing by Status
The figures in this section depict the following information regarding bag processing:
• The BSD screens required for processing all five bag statuses
• The physical sequence of operations required by the operator to complete the process, and;
• The controls requirements throughout the process

14.6.4.1 Cleared Bag Processing
The BPT starts and the BIS becomes unavailable when the bag arrives at the BRP. The bag status, IATA ID, EDS ID, RBS level, and Pseudo ID
information cells are populated. The bag status cell is green and displays the status CLEARED. The primary action button is green and displays
REMOVE. The TSO presses the primary button, which then changes to display CLEARED. The TSO transfers the bag to the clear line, and
presses the primary button again to stop the BPT and make the BIS available again.
Figure 14.14: Cleared Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations

14.6.4.2 Alarmed Bag Processing
The BPT starts and the BIS becomes unavailable when the bag arrives at the BRP. The bag status cell is red and displays the status ALARMED.
The IATA ID, EDS ID, RBS level, and Pseudo ID information cells are populated. The primary action button is red and displays SEARCH. The
TSO presses the primary button, which then changes to green and displays CLEARED. The TSO inspects the bag, transfers it to the clear line,
and presses the primary button again to stop the BPT and make the BIS available again.
Figure 14.15: Alarm ed Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations

14.6.4.3 Out of Gauge Bag Processing
The BPT starts and the BIS becomes unavailable when the bag arrives at the BRP. The bag status cell is brown and displays the status OUT OF
GAUGE. The IATA ID, EDS ID, RBS level, and Pseudo ID information cells are populated. The primary action button is red and displays SEARCH.
The TSO presses the primary button, which then changes to green and displays CLEARED. The TSO inspects the bag, transfers it to the clear
line, and presses the primary button again to stop the BPT and make the BIS available again.
Figure 14.16: Out of Gauge Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations

14.6.4.4 EDS Errored Bag Processing
The BPT starts and the BIS becomes unavailable when the bag arrives at the BRP. The bag status cell is yellow and displays the status EDS
ERROR. The IATA ID, EDS ID, RBS level, and Pseudo ID information cells are populated. The primary action button is dark blue and displays
REINSERT. The TSO presses the primary button, which then changes to green and displays CLEARED. The bag automatically advances to the
reinsert line. The TSO presses the primary button again to stop the BPT and make the BIS available again.
Figure 14.17: EDS ERRORED Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations

14.6.4.5 Unknown Bag Processing
The BPT starts and the BIS becomes unavailable when the bag arrives at the BRP. The bag status cell is blue and displays the status
UNKNOWN. The IATA ID and EDS ID information cells are blank. The RBS level and Pseudo ID information cells are populated. A normally
empty information cell displays the words “found at” and the photo eye ID. The primary action button is not displayed. The secondary action button
is dark blue and displays HAND SCAN FAILED. If the scan fails to retrieve the bag information, the TSO presses the secondary button. The
screen changes to display a dark blue primary button that says RE-INSERT and a red secondary button that says SEARCH. Whichever button the
TSO presses, the screen changes to the corresponding reinsert or search screen.
Figure 14.18: UNKNOWN Bag Processing Screens and Sequence of Operations

14.6.5 Unique Identifiers Cell
There are four messages that may be displayed in the UIC: Comm Error, Length Change, Timeout, and Duplicate IATA; these shall be displayed
as shown in Figure 14.19. These messages are used mostly for troubleshooting purposes. Additional UIC messages may be used if submitted
through an RFV and approved by the TSA.
Figure 14.19: Unique Identifier Cell Messages

When a positively tracked bag arrives in CBRA with a Duplicate IATA message in the UIC, the system shall process the bag according to the bag
status. In the event that a Duplicate IATA is retrieved following the hand scanning of a Unknown bag arrival, the unknown bag screen shown
below in Figure 14.20 is used and search function is limited to recalling images using the BHS Psuedo ID.
Figure 14.20 : Unknow n Bag Duplicate IATA

14.6.6 Alternate Queueing Method
When the BHS trigger the AQM in CBRA, any operator working on a bag requiring reinsertion at an affected BIS will notified by the BSD to reinsert
the bag manually. This slightly different process applies only to OOG, EDS ERRORED, and UNKNOWN statuses. The associated BSD screens
shown in Figure 14.21, Figure 14.22, and Figure 14.23.
Figure 14.21: AQM Out of Gauge Bag Screen

Figure 14.22: AQM EDS ERROR Bag Screen
Figure 14.23: AQM Unknow n Bag Screen

14.6.7 Bag Waiting Alerts
In an attempt to mitigate unnecessary dieback in the CBRA, a flashing visual alarm shall alert operators to a condition where manual intervention
is required.
The following conditions shall trigger the Bag Waiting Alert on the BSD:
• If the BIS is available and a bag requiring manual intervention (i.e., pressing a button) is queued at the adjacent BRP, a bag waiting timer
shall start.
• If the bag is left unattended for 15 seconds the BSD shall display a flashing BAG WAITING TOO LONG message in red until an action is
taken on the bag as shown in the example in Figure 14.24. This applies to all bag type screens.
• If the bag is left unattended for 45 seconds the bag shall advance to an available downstream BRP.
• After the 45 seconds time has expired the BHS shall lock out the search bag button for 3 second before the bag departs to the next
available Downstream BIS.
Figure 14.24: Exam ple of Bag Waiting Alert for Alarm Bag Screen

14.7 General CBRA Design Considerations
The following sections describe general design considerations for TSA’s “no bag lifting” policy, reinsert lines, OOG and OS lines, and screening
station queuing at CBRA.
14.7.1 Bag Storage Capacity
The TSA staffing methodology allows for 10 minutes of bag processing in CBRA per TSO. Therefore, the CBIS design shall be capable of storing
the proper quantity of bags needed to avoid system diebacks. The following equations shall be used to determine the bag storage needed to meet
this requirement:
For example, Table 14.3 shows how the storage capacity changes based upon the number of BISs and the average processing times.
Table 14.3: Exam ple of CBRA Accum ulation

Default BRPs/ Bag Storage Capacity Needed for Bag Storage Capacity Needed for
# of BISs Interm ediate Queue Dom estic @ 3 m in/bag INTL @ 4 m in/bag
4 6 10 6
8 12 19 12
12 18 28 18
16 24 38 24
20 30 47 30
30 45 70 45
40 60 94 60
When analyzing the bag storage capacity needed for a particular design, the ILDT shall consider the third and fourth column from Table 14.3.
For instance, using a CBRA with 4 BISs and a 3-minute average screening time, the conveyor system will need to accommodate up to 10 bags.
Since the layout will include four BRPs and two intermediate queues, another four bags will need to be stored somewhere else.

The bag storage capacity shall be achieved using a combination of queues, inch and store conveyor belts, or other cost-effective means between
the OSR 2nd/last chance divert point and the entrance to the CBRA as well as BRPs and Intermediate Queues within CBRA. CBRA Physical
Space Requirements
14.7.2 Architectural Features
The CBRA shall be fully enclosed with segregating partitions extending to the structural deck to allow for the security and comfort of the TSOs.
The CBRA shall be provided with finished horizontal and vertical surfaces as follows:
• Flooring shall be composed of a safety/anti-fatigue material configured for a continuous installation under all TSO work and movement
areas except for MIT pathways with a service-life of no less than seven years.
• Walls shall have durable, impervious surfaces, such as painted masonry, plastic laminate or drywall that is taped, bedded, and textured
with epoxy or enamel paint.
• Ceilings shall include the use of painted suspended drywall, or suspended, lay-in acoustical tile at a minimum height of 9 feet. An
acceptable design can include exposed structure with no ceiling. See Section 14.7.8 below for noise abatement recommendations.
• Access shall be provided with at least one set of double doors (or a rollup door) for access for equipment movement into and out of the
area.
Designers shall consult with local authorities to determine the proper protocols and routing for the removal of threat bags from the CBRA including
a designated exit path for TSOs when a threat is discovered, as well as adequate access to the CBRA room for local authorities with threat
containment units.
14.7.3 CBRA Physical Space Requirements
The size of the CBRA is dictated by the number of queues and BISs required to adequately meet the screening demands of the CBIS.
The space requirements for the staging room for OS bags shall be based on the individual airport handling of OS bags. For instance, if the OS
area is located at the lobby it is unlikely that many bags will arrive at the same time. If the OS bag screening is performed in the CBRA, the airlines
may send multiple bags via carts or tugs.
In addition, space shall to be allocated for the storing of hazardous materials outside of the CBRA. The space requirement shall be based on the
historical frequency of these materials and the frequency to which the airport collects them.

The only equipment installed in the CBRA shall be directly required for the operations in that space, e.g., SVSs, BISs, and BSDs. No other
equipment such as motor control panels, UPSs for EDS equipment, IT racks or any other equipment not directly related to CBRA operations shall
be installed in the CBRA.
14.7.4 Lighting
Proper illumination is required in the CBRA to allow the TSOs to perform their duties without unnecessary fatigue and eye strain. Luminance shall
be measured at the surface of the BIS and found to be in the range of 500 to 750 lux. In other areas of the CBRA, the luminance shall not fall
below 300 lux.
These values are easily realized with the proper placement of light sources. Color rendition by the TSO is important. Color corrected and full
spectrum lighting lamps shall be used and fluorescent lights are preferred.
14.7.5 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
The CBRA shall be a climate-controlled space. Temperature and humidity control shall be supplied commensurate with the locale. A separate
temperature control thermostat shall be provided for the CBRA.
If forced-air ventilation is provided, fresh outside air shall be delivered to the CBRA at rates specified by the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 62.1-2016 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. The CBRA shall be
under positive pressure relative to ambient BHS areas to minimize the migration of contaminants (e.g., products of combustion from tugs and
vehicles, as well as outside dirt, dust, and debris) from entering into the CBRA.
14.7.6 Power and Communications
Power shall be provided to the CBRA to support TSA- and airport operator-provided equipment. The Project Sponsor shall coordinate the final
requirements based on the actual equipment list and layout, but as a minimum:
• Two quad receptacles (120V/20A) shall be provided for each BIS to support screening operations and ancillary equipment.
• One duplex outlet shall be provided on the side of the back wall between the two BISs for access by cleaning personnel.
• Convenience outlets shall be provided on the perimeter walls as required by local codes.
The CBRA requires both voice and data communication provisions. The ILDT will determine the requirements based on the actual equipment
selected for the CBRA, but at a minimum:

• A wall-mounted telephone shall be provided for use by TSOs, with access to the airport communication network, and for placing outside
calls.
• The network cabling shall be provided to support the BHS, EDS, and TSA workstations.
• All cabling and associated outlets shall be installed in a location where they cannot to be damaged by BISs or cause a safety hazard.
14.7.7 Connectivity to TSA Network
The connection of the CBRA ETD equipment to the TSA Network (TSANet) shall be provided via a “Dual Drop” consisting of 2 RJ45 Cat5e/Cat6
connections terminated at a wall or floor box.
This connectivity allows TSA to collect valuable information on the screening performance of the equipment in place within each CBIS. Please also
refer to the STIP Data Requirements listed in Section 16.8.
In addition, the following requirements shall be met:
• All core drilling shall support a minimum of 4 “Dual Drops”

• All new fiber installations shall be single in conflict with 7.2.13.3-mode, 6-strand bundles enclosed in innerduct
• All cabinet installations require 2 110v 20A service
• All cabinet installations shall meet the local seismic rating requirements and can be floor/bracket mounted
14.7.8 CBRA Noise Abatement
The CBRA shall have adequate acoustical insulation so that the background noise levels do not exceed 70dBA as measured at the natural TSO
standing points at each screening station using a time-weighted average over an 8-hour shift.
14.7.9 Ergonomic Design Dimensions
Peripheral equipment stations shall have sturdy and durable mounting systems that are adjustable to allow TSOs to function from a standing
position with good posture in accordance with DOT/FAA/CT-03-05, Human Factors Design Standard for Acquisition of Commercial Off-the-Shelf,
Non-developmental, and Developmental Systems to accommodate the 95th percentile male and 5th percentile female.

14.7.10 Conveyor System Crossovers and Catwalks
CBRA conveyor system crossovers shall consist of up and down treaded stairs, a full railing system, and a toe-boarded catwalk. Crossover
configurations can be straight, L-shaped, U-shaped, or Z-shaped to conform to existing immovable structures within the CBRA footprint.
14.7.11 Conveyor Belt End Points on Alarm Line
End points of in-bound conveyor belts shall have a photo eye installed across the conveyor belt to stop baggage from falling off the end.
Termination photo eyes shall be located sufficiently upstream to prevent baggage straps from becoming entangled in the conveyor belt at the end
point.
14.7.12 Design for Safety
The AL conveyor belt surfaces shall be smooth or semi-smooth to facilitate easier baggage retrieval. Such surfaces minimize the amount of
exertion required by TSOs to remove bags from in-bound belts.
All motor drives and associated tracking devices shall not be intrusive to the screening workspace. The design shall use motor drives mounted on
the opposite side of the inbound and outbound lines from screening personnel or, if this is not feasible, the designers shall ensure that all
hazardous moving parts (e.g., drive shafts, roller spindles, bearings, bearing components etc.) are guarded and free from sharp or pointed edges
to prevent accidental contact.
End caps shall be installed on conveyor shaft bearing assemblies within TSO-occupied spaces to avoid operational hazards. End caps shall be
attached to conveyor shaft bearing assemblies via mounting hardware. Press fit end caps or caps retained by tabs shall not be used.
Any moving part located in any area of the CBRA where TSOs are required to perform their duties shall be shielded to avoid injury.
All aspects of the CBRA layout shall take into account the requirements for maintenance and custodial services access as stated in Mil Standard
1472G Section 5.9.

REQUIREMENTS AND BEST PRACTICES 15: CBIS O&M BEST PRACTICES
CHAPTER 15: CBIS OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE BEST PRACTICES

15.1 CBIS Operating Best Practices
During the Operations and Maintenance stage, the ILDT and TSA operate the CBIS and monitor its performance. TSA’s ATSA Team and
Baggage Assessment and System Evaluation (BASE) Team are available to support local stakeholders in CBIS troubleshooting and
improvements when needed. However, many potential operational issues can be avoided by heeding the collective lessons learned of the
industry.
Designing an optimal CBIS should include implementation of design practices that will ensure optimal CBIS O&M. High quality and cost-effective
operation and maintenance of CBISs can help maintain good performance of the CBIS and prevent unnecessary performance degradation. CBIS
performance monitoring can be used to help identify corrective maintenance and schedule preventive maintenance actions to improve the overall
operations.
This section discusses CBIS O&M best practices that designers should be cognizant of during the CBIS design phase. Optimal CBIS design
allows for implementation of O&M best practices when the CBIS is operational to ensure a high-quality and cost-effective CBIS operation.
15.1.1 CBIS Remote Reporting Workstation
A CBIS Remote Reporting Workstation (a real-time display of key CBIS statistics and data) in the BHS control room is important to facilitate cost-
effective monitoring and quick detection of any CBIS performance degradation or malfunction.
One recommended method of designing and implementing a CBIS Remote Reporting Workstation is to use a separate thin client Internet-based
system from the BHS control system to combine the output into one user-friendly dashboard. Output information is displayed on screen and also
allows for audible and visible alarms when required.
15.1.2 CBIS Reporting Trends
One of the most effective tools used to monitor CBIS performance, ensure seamless operations, and quickly identify and address problems is to
be able to review CBIS operating trends. The following are key trends that provide important information about CBIS performance and are vital to
detecting CBIS performance degradation:
• Increase in CBRA error percentages – The error rate established when the system was commissioned should remain within a relatively
constant range. An increase trend can signal that more bags are labeled as unknown or error bags, which may be due to CBIS
performance degradation or malfunction (e.g., bag tracking system).
• EDS false alarm rates – EDS false alarm rates should remain relatively constant over time (assuming no changes in protocol). An
increasing or decreasing trend may indicate degradation in the CBIS or EDS performance.

15.1.3 CBIS Testing
The most valuable CBIS tests are often the most difficult, and costly, to perform. A complete battery of tests cannot be completed on a live CBIS
without a severe interruption of regular operations. Therefore, in addition to the above-mentioned improved diagnostics and monitoring CBIS
trends through the use of reports, spot checks (subsets of the ISAT) are the best way to ensure that the system is efficient, secure, and not
deteriorating.
Ensuring that EDS-required detection levels are maintained can be achieved through the periodic use of test bags, such as the TSA-qualified OTK
kit or other TSA-qualified test bags. Designers should allow for the conduct of such periodic testing as seamlessly as possible with regular
operation of the CBIS. An example of such design principles is: communications system between TSO testing at the EDS and TSO testing at the
CBIS control room (TSOs need to switch the EDS to test mode and switch back to regular screening mode after the test is complete).
15.1.4 BHS O&M Contracts
System monitoring should be used to avoid “break-fix” contracts, which allow for the slow deterioration of the system. Performance metrics should
be used to monitor system performance for maintenance contracts.
15.1.5 Communications
An important key element to ensuring efficient and high-quality CBIS operations is effective communications between all relevant stakeholders.
Communication is vital to quickly identify and address problems that will inevitably arise during the course of operation. Considerations related to
communications between stakeholders should include the following:
• Ensuring that the proper communication can occur between EDS units and the BHS control room.
• Improved communications between TSA and the BHS operator (e.g., BHS operators should be notified by TSA of any EDS failure).
• Review of data by all stakeholders (airport operators, airlines, airport engineers, TSA, BHS operators) and the scheduling of biweekly (or
at least monthly) meetings to review both non-SSI and SSI CBIS reports.
While Project Sponsors or airlines are usually responsible for BHS maintenance, TSA is responsible for the maintenance of EDS units, which are
owned by TSA. As such, non-TSA personnel clearing bag jams from EDS units may create contractually challenging situations. Therefore, only
authorized TSA personnel or other TSA designees are allowed to clear bag jams from EDS units.

15.2 Maintenance Best Practices
Effective CBIS maintenance is an important element in ensuring that the CBIS is operating as required and is efficiently remediated during
malfunctioning. The following is a list of recommended preventive and corrective maintenance best practices.
15.2.1 Maintenance Responsibility Matrix
TSA and the BHS operator (and the contracted maintenance providers) must have a clear picture of their responsibilities. A responsibility matrix
should be created once the core team is established. An OTA or Memorandum of Understanding document between TSA and the Project Sponsor
should be created outlining all responsibilities and include technical upgrades to the CBIS. Table 15.1 identifies the equipment types which are
procured, delivered, installed and maintained by the TSA. All other equipment is the responsibility of the Project Sponsor.
Table 15.1: TSA Procurem ent and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix
Category Equipm ent Type TSA Procured TSA Maintained
Screening Equipment EDS, ETD Yes Yes
Ancillary Equipment SVS, PVS, MCS, UPS, Netw ork Servers Yes Yes
Furniture OSR Chairs Yes Yes
15.2.2 Operator Training
Operator training is an important element in preventive maintenance, which, if conducted well, can improve CBIS operating time and Mean Time
Between Critical Failure (MTBCF). Training should include items such as what the operator sees, hears, and smells to determine the correct
operation of the CBIS. Operators should report anything unusual that can be an indication of required maintenance. For example, oil stains or
smell of burning rubber/ plastic can be important indicators of a CBIS malfunction or an imminent malfunction and, if reported promptly and
accurately, can be addressed with preventive maintenance. Training should also include Level 1 preventive and corrective maintenance
requirements as identified by the equipment manufacturer (see Section 15.2.5).
15.2.3 Frequency of Preventive Maintenance
Preventive Maintenance (PM) helps improve the reliability of the CBIS. There are two levels of PM for screening equipment. Level 1 PM consists
of user-level activities such as inspecting and cleaning filters or replacing consumables at intervals specified in the OEM user manual. Level 2 PM
is performed by trained service technicians every month, quarter or year according to the OEM guidelines. Level 2 PM is conducted by the OEM
during the warranty period and thereafter under TSA’s Contractor Logistics Support contract.

BHS preventive maintenance should be performed daily, weekly, monthly, and semi-annually in accordance with the airport Project Sponsor
maintenance contract.
15.2.4 CBIS Environment
The cleanliness of the overall CBIS environment can significantly affect the overall performance of the BHS and EDS units, as dust and dirt can
cause computers to malfunction. An adequate HVAC system often helps improve the performance of a CBIS over time and is, therefore, a worthy
investment.
15.2.5 Aligning BHS and EDS Preventive Maintenance
Contractually, aligning BHS and EDS maintenance would be difficult; however, face-to-face communication can greatly improve this alignment and
create good O&M synergy. This successful alignment typically varies from airport to airport. Best practices to allow for such successful alignment
include:
• Routine maintenance
• Onsite teams
• Well-trained people
• Audit teams
Safety EDS maintenance best practices, that when implemented, have led to significant improvements in operating time and MTBCF of EDS units
include:
• Ensuring that work environments are safe for all personnel who work in the area.
• Providing and using appropriately personal protective equipment to service personnel
• Immediately reporting any injuries that occur on site
15.2.6 BHS Maintenance Best Practice
BHS maintenance such as the cleaning of photo eyes should not be performed during live bag operations.

REQUIREMENTS AND BEST PRACTICES 16: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY
CHAPTER 16: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY

16.1 Cybersecurity Demonstration
A cybersecurity plan and cybersecurity incident plan are required deliverables during the construction phase as outlined in Section 8.2.1. At TSA’s
request, cybersecurity measures shall be demonstrated to TSA.
16.2 Cybersecurity Requirement Assumptions
This section assumes the CBIS has an Industrial Control System with discrete components similar to the model in Figure 16.1.
Figure 16.1: Industrial Control System High-level View
Source: National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2015
Industrial control systems of this type are often the target of cyber-attacks at both the computer and controller level. These cybersecurity
requirements are set forth to ensure ongoing system integrity throughout the project lifecycle.

The CBIS and CBIS control system shall have appropriate cybersecurity measures to ensure the system:
• Does not allow unauthorized access to any portion of the CBIS networks, controls systems or components
• Does not allow unauthorized access to data or unauthorized data extraction from the control system, inclusive of both SSI and non-SSI
data
• Employs appropriate equipment and systems to isolate networks
• Has appropriate updates and patches applied throughout its lifecycle to ensure ongoing security
As every project is unique, it is incumbent upon the ILDT to develop the appropriate cybersecurity procedures and processes.
16.2.1 User Accounts
Individual user accounts shall be employed and the use of generic or multi-user accounts shall be prohibited. User accounts shall be terminated
within 24 hours for those no longer requiring access. User accounts shall be audited on a monthly basis to ensure only required accounts are
active. These requirements shall apply to remote access users as well.
16.2.2 Incident Handling
The ILDT shall prepare an incident handling plan to deal with cybersecurity related attacks. Figure 16.2 provides a basic framework for incidental
handling and stakeholder engagement and communication.

Figure 16.2: Cybersecurity Incident Response Fram ework
The ILDT should consult the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-61R2, Computer Security Incident Handling
Guide, Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, when preparing the plan. TSA on both a local and national level
should be included in the Incident Response Team.
16.3 Firewalls
Network firewalls to control the flow of network traffic shall be employed. The firewalls shall restrict connectivity to and from internal and external
networks to those with a need-to-know. It is recommended that additional firewalls be employed to further restrict inter-subnetwork
communications between functional security subnets and devices. Figure 16.3 represents a firewall separation of a control network at the most
basic level. Additional guidance on firewalls can be obtained from:
• NIST Special Publication SP 800-82 Rev.2 May 2015 Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security
• NIST Special Publication SP 800-41 Rev. 1 Sep 2009 Guidelines on Firewalls and Firewall Policy

Figure 16.3: Firew all Exam ple

16.4 Remote Access
Systems allowing remote access need to employ appropriate security measures. At a minimum, the system shall be secured as noted in
Configuring and Managing Remote Access for Industrial Control Systems, April 2011, Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure and the
United States Department of Homeland Security. Figure 16.4 represents a secure remote access example at the most basic level.
Figure 16.4:Secure Rem ote Access Exam ple
Source: United States Department of Homeland Security and Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, 2011

16.4.1 Remote Access Logs
Remote access activities shall be logged and reviewed to ensure all access is by authorized personnel. At TSA’s request, access logs shall be
submitted to TSA within seven calendar days.
16.4.2 External Connections
Remote access shall be enabled only when required. Normal users may require on-demand remote access, but vendor support may only require
remote access rarely. Therefore, vendor user IDs should be disabled until they are required to be enabled and then disable them once again when
they have completed their task. This technique can be applied to any group of users who require only intermittent access. Alternatively, external
network connections can be physically disconnected or otherwise made inaccessible when not needed. The cybersecurity plan will document all
external connections and both physical and logical access controls.
16.5 Software Maintenance and Updates
NIST Special Publication SP800-40R3, “Guide to Enterprise Patch Management Technologies,” notes the following:
“Patch management is the process for identifying, acquiring, installing, and verifying patches for products and systems. Patches correct security
and functionality problems in software and firmware. From a security perspective, patches are most often of interest because they are mitigating
software flaw vulnerabilities; applying patches to eliminate these vulnerabilities significantly reduces the opportunities for exploitation. Patches
serve other purposes than just fixing software flaws; they can also add new features to software and firmware, including security capabilities.”
Therefore, appropriate software maintenance and patch management programs shall be employed to maintain the system security.
16.6 Network Segregation
A typical in-line CBIS will have several network layers including some of the following:
• Device level networks such as DeviceNet or Actuator Sensor Interface.

• Industrial control networks such as Ethernet IP, ControlNet or Profibus.
• High-level networks such as Ethernet.
Each network should include only the equipment necessary for that network. The following networks shall be segregated, or “air-gapped” from all
other networks:

• EDS image networks. Neither the BHS nor any other airport network shall be connected to the network used by the EDS for transmission
of images, e.g., the Morpho MUX or L3 NEDS.
• TSA data network. Neither the BHS nor any other airport network shall be connected to the TSA data network unless specifically directed
and authorized by TSA.
Figure 16.5 shows an example of network segregation.
Figure 16.5:Netw ork Segregation
Source: United States Department of Homeland Security and Centre for the Protection Of National Infrastructure, 2011

Wireless networks, whether part of the CBIS or its control system, shall adhere to the guidelines as noted in NIST Special Publication SP 800-153
Feb 2012 Guidelines for Securing Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs).
16.7 Cybersecurity Best Practices
• Be aware of new and evolving threats. Ensure security updates are installed on a regular basis.
• Audit the system on a regular basis to ensure unauthorized changes have not been made.
• Maintain multiple backups in multiple locations.
• Utilize a defense-in-depth security approach, as shown in Figure 16.6.
Figure 16.6: Strategic Fram ew ork for Cyber Defense-In-Depth
Source: United States Department of Homeland Security, 2009

16.8 STIP Data Requirements for Checked Baggage Systems
The TSA HQ Office of Information Technology (OIT) and Security Technology Integrated Program (STIP) require STIP-enabled transportation
security equipment to have specific connections to securely and reliably network the equipment. Multiple parties play a role in this portion of CBIS
specification and execution.
The TSA Project Coordinator will provide the Project Sponsor with the latest copy of the STIP data requirements.
16.8.1 Roles and Responsibilities for Implementing STIP
As a CBIS is modified as part of a TSA-funded project, the Project Sponsor’s contractor will provide new telecommunications outlets and cables as
needed to support new technology. If a CBIS reconfiguration is initiated as part of a recapitalization/optimization, safety effort, new technology
deployment or any other CBIS redesign initiative, the CBIS contractor will be responsible for restoring the previous state of connectivity (“make
whole”), including development of the scope of work (SOW). Implementation in the field will occur via the CBIS contractor. A working group, must
be formed by the Project Sponsor consisting of representatives from the Airport Authority, FSD staff, APM, OIT and STIP. The group should meet
immediately via conference call once it has been determined that a CBIS is going to be recapitalized or optimized. This action will ensure that ALL
aspects of the CBIS redesign have been identified and assigned to a specific group for action and funding. The Project Sponsor will organize the
working group members, develop, review and approve the SOW. The OIT Field Regional Manager (FRM) will always be consulted when a CBIS
redesign is initiated and will provide the necessary routing information to ensure the checked baggage systems are appropriately cabled to a
networked TSA IT cabinet.
16.8.2 The IMAC Process
The Installation, Move, Add and Change (IMAC) Process is the mechanism by which TSA OIT will procure and install IT hardware (e.g., network
switch) following the IT infrastructure build-out of a CBIS contractor. The TSA Project Coordinator will be responsible for engaging OIT at project
initiation and including the respective regional FRM throughout the construction process.
The IMAC process takes between 30 and 45 days and needs to be initiated to complete the following tasks:
• Procurement, configuration and shipment of IT hardware
• Installation of IT hardware
• Patch cabling of checked baggage equipment
• Validation of network connectivity for checked baggage equipment
• Validations of STIP Enterprise Manager server registration for checked baggage equipment.
It is imperative to engage each team member as early as possible in order to avoid any gaps in IT services.

16.8.3 Specific STIP Design Requirements
Two modular jacks consisting of a flush-mounted telecommunications outlet box plus/minus 10 feet from the equipment are required. Even though
one is redundant, both terminations should be connected using Cat5e or Cat6 4-pair 100 ohm unshielded twisted pair (UTP) or screened twisted
pair (ScTP) cable and terminated on the patch panel in the closest TSA IT cabinet. The data cable type should be based on the existing conditions
at the CBIS. The purpose of this connectivity is so that TSA HQ can review statistical data over the network from screening equipment for a
particular airport and time period without having to go to the site.
Installation or relocation of Cat5e/Cat6 data cabling will meet or exceed the specifications listed in the TSA Structured Cabling System Guidelines
dated April 2018. This document will be provided by the TSA to the Project Sponsor or requested through the TSA OIT.
The following STIP requirements shall be met:
• All ETDs and stand-alone EDSs shall have one “dual telecommunications outlet”.
• When a multiplex server is present, connectivity to TSANet shall terminate at the multiplex server cabinet, therefore connectivity to
TSANet for each EDS is not required.
• All core drilling shall support a minimum of four “modular jacks”.
• All new fiber installations shall be multimode fibers, either multimode fiber, either 50/125 or 62.5/125 micron fibers r 50/125 or 62.5/125
micron fibers, 6-strand bundles enclosed in inner duct.
• All cabinet installations shall have 2 110v 20A service.
• All cabinet installations shall meet the local seismic rating requirements and can be floor/bracket mounted.
• All newly installed and existing data jacks and associated patch panels shall comply with TSA’s approved scheme [see TSA Structured
Cabling System Guidelines dated July 2012].
• Completed Data Capture Sheet and cable certification paperwork shall be provided to TSA prior to established ISAT date.
• All IT cabinet installations shall include a temperature and humidity gauge for monitoring purposes. HVAC requirements in IT cabinet
spaces shall comply with all applicable OEM documentation.
Figure 16.7 illustrates all of the equipment that must be connected to the Main Distribution Frame/Intermediate Distribution Frame IT cabinet for a
stand-alone CBIS configuration. When the EDS are in a stand-alone configuration, each EDS must be connected to the patch panel.

Figure 16.7: Stand-Alone CBIS Configuration

Figure 16.8 illustrates all of the equipment that must be connected to the Intermediate Distribution Frame IT cabinet for a CBIS where the EDS
units are already networked together. When the EDS units are networked together (e.g., MUX and NEDS), the connection only needs to be made
to the EDS Network Servers.
Figure 16.8: Netw orked CBIS Configuration

At a minimum, the following guidelines should be considered when designing a new CBIS or reconfiguring an existing CBIS.
• If an existing TSA IT cabinet is within 295 feet of the CBIS:

Verify that the existing switches have sufficient open ports to accommodate the required number of drops.
Notify TSA OIT Field Regional Manager (FRM) if the existing switch capacity will not accommodate the required number of drops so
that additional equipment can be procured.
Punch down cabling from the individual CBIS devices in the patch panel of the IT cabinet.
• If there is no IT cabinet within 295 feet of the CBIS:
Install an appropriate IT cabinet. Refer to for the IT cabinet specifications below.
Run fiber optic cable from the IT cabinet to an existing TSA IT cabinet.
Punch down cabling from the individual CBIS devices in the patch panel of the IT cabinet.
Initiate IMAC group to install jumper cables from the patch panel to the switch and activate port.

Figure 16.9: IT Cabinet
IT Cabinet Specifications:
• Cabinet size: See Figure 16.9.

• Quantity: One or more per checkpoint, depending on size
• Power requirements
For 24H, 36H and 48H:
o Dedicated
o 20A, 125V, 3KVA/Cabinet
o 2-Pole, 3-Wire Grounding
o NEMA L5-30R Receptacle
o 3KVA UPS
o 6’ power cord from the IT cabinet to the receptacle

For 60H and 72H:

o Dedicated
o 30A, 208V, 6KVA/Cabinet
o 2-Pole, 3-Wire Grounding
o NEMA L6-30R Receptacle
o 6KVA UPS
o 8’ power cord from the IT cabinet to the receptacle
• IT Requirements
Size patch panels to accommodate all TSA data outlets at the checkpoint plus 100% spares, minimum.
Size giga bit network switch to accommodate all data outlets in checkpoint plus 10%.
Provide a minimum of four pair single mode fiber optic cable from IT cabinet to the TSA main distribution frame.
• Additional information
30” front and rear access is required.
These cabinets will receive all data communication lines from the System Services Control Point (SSCP), so the cabinet should be
located as close to the SSCP as possible, but in a secure location. Careful consideration needs to be given to the IT cabinet location
because the exhaust fan for cooling can be loud when located in a confined space with TSA or airport personnel.
Equipment racks can be loaded into the cabinet from the front or the back at the location where the cabinet is installed. Although not
required, side access would improve rack accessibility and TSA personnel mobility around the cabinet.
Refer to Program of Requirements dated July 2005, Section III-D for labeling, cable management and administration of IT cabinet.
Refer to Program of Requirements dated July 2005, Section III-D for acceptance testing of IT circuits.
Wall-mounted cabinets are an option in some instances, but must adhere to all applicable local codes and standards. Recommend
consultation with the Field Regional Manager when considering a wall-mounted alternative.
16.8.4 Advanced Surveillance Program Video Surveillance
TSA’s Advanced Surveillance Program (ASP) recommends the following best practices for all video surveillance systems:
• The system installed should be configurable, expandable, and have a hierarchy of access levels, user IDs and passwords.

• All recorded video should be able to be stored for a minimum of 30 days; airports may choose to increase the length of storage based on
local considerations.
• Cameras and displays should be positioned to minimize any impact on the quality or performance of the video displayed due to light glare.
• Video data should be in a format suitable for use by all airport stake holders (e.g. local TSA, local law enforcement, airport authority, etc.).
• Video surveillance workstations should be provided at reasonable locations.
Table 16.1 shows the recommended minimum Fields of View (FOVs) be captured using any number of devices.
Table 16.1: ASP Recom m ended Fields of View

Field of View Sum m ary Capability
EDS Entrance FOV is the baggage entering the FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
EDS unit. identification of baggage by shape ,color, and - if applicable - identification of the EDS
operator.
EDS Exit FOV is baggage exiting the EDS FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
unit. identification of baggage by shape, color, and - if applicable - identification of the EDS
operator.
OSRA FOV is OSR alarm resolution area. FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
identification of personnel performing screening and monitoring of primary view ing station in
OSR.
Overhead View of CBRA FOV is overhead view of CBRA. FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
monitoring of the baggage as it is taken to the bag inspection table.
CBRA Baggage FOV is baggage entering CBRA. FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
Entrance identification of baggage by shape and color.
CBRA Baggage FOV is bag contents screening and FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
Inspection Tables ETD Sampling. identification of baggage by shape and color; view includes screeners handling any items
from the passenger property; identification of individual items removed from and returned to
baggage should also be included in the view .
CBRA ETD Machine FOV is screener collecting sample FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
to be placed into ETD, screener identification of screener and identifies if ETD machine alarmed.
placing sample into ETD machine,
and results from ETD machine.
CBRA Exit to FOV is baggage exiting CBRA for FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
Reintroduction / EDS re-screening. identification of baggage by shape and color; view also enables identification of personnel
Reinsertion Belt placing baggage onto belt.

Field of View Sum m ary Capability

CBRA Exit to Cleared FOV is baggage exiting CBRA for FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view includes belt
Belt entry into Cleared Belt. and enables identification of baggage by shape and color and identification of personnel
placing baggage onto Cleared Belt.
Personnel Entrance to FOV is personnel entrance to FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
CBRA CBRA. identification of any persons entering the CBRA along w ith identification of baggage
entering CBRA in their possession.
CBRA Personnel Exit FOV is personnel exit from CBRA. FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, the view enables
identification of any persons exiting the CBRA along w ith identification of baggage leaving
the area in their possession.
OS / OOG FOV is baggage entering OS / OOG FOV enables effective situational monitoring of this area; specifically, it enables
belt and then entering the CBRA. identification of baggage by shape and color; if applicable, allow s the identification of the
EDS operator. View enables monitoring of the baggage as it is transferred to CBRA.
Coverage is sufficient to enable review of baggage screening procedures.

SECTION IV: APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: SUBMITTAL OUTLINES, FORM TEMPLATES, AND EXAMPLES
APPENDIX B: GENERIC EXAMPLES OF CHECKED BAGGAGE INSPECTION SYSTEMS
APPENDIX C: BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT CASE STUDY
APPENDIX D: COMMISSIONING AND EVALUATION TESTING
APPENDIX E: CONTINGENCY PLAN EXAMPLES
APPENDIX F: RISK-BASED SECURITY IMPACTS FOR EBSP
APPENDIX G: REFERENCES
APPENDIX H: REQUIREMENTS LISTS

APPENDIX A SUBMITTAL OUTLINES, FORM TEMPLATES, AND EXAMPLES
APPENDIX A:
SUBMITTAL OUTLINES, FORM TEMPLATES AND EXAMPLES

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems A-1 August 21, 2020
This appendix provides the following resources to support implementation of guidance and requirements in the PGDS:
• A.1: CBIS Use and Logistics Training Example

• A.2: CBIS Operations Guide – Sample Outline
• A.3: Baggage and Data Flow Chart Examples
• A.4: Daily CBIS Report Examples
• A.5: CBIS Change Requests
• A.6: MIA CBIS PLC Code Change Proposal Example
• A.7: PGDS Request for Variance Form
• A.8: Government Furnished Information Reqests
• A.9: Industry Comment Template

A.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training Example
The following is an example outline for the required documentation for training TSA on the use and logistics of the CBIS as stated in Section 8.3:
• Startup and shut down procedures

• Overall bag flow from ticket counter to CBRA
Description of bag flow
Identify Conveyor subsystems
Conveyor subsystem nomenclatures
Listing of Photo eye identification numbers correlated to conveyor subsystems
• Bag hygiene for the ticket counter induction and the reinsertion line
• BMA settings
• Fail-safe procedures
• Bag jam clearing procedures including at a minimum:
Applicable activation of e-stop controls (this is not a requirement for the actual clearing of the logical fault)
Lock out/tag out procedures
Removal of articles from the affected jam location
Proper reinsertion of the affected articles either upstream or downstream of the jam location, depending on the specific zone (pre-
EDS, post-EDS, fail-safe, etc.). In any tracked portion of the EDS, care should be taken to ensure proper bag spacing when placing
articles back onto the respective conveyors to ensure bags are not re-inserted into another bag's tracking window.
Restart of the affected conveyor subsystem via normal operating protocol
Safe personnel maneuvering in and around the jam area
Restrict bag jam clearance from an EDS to only authorized TSA personnel or other TSA designees
• E-stop procedures and zones
• CBIS OSR settings
List the available travel time for OSR per EDS line
• CBRA Procedures
Defining the CBIS BSD Statuses
Cross reference of CBIS BSD Statuses to EDS disposition code
Bag Removal from the BRP

Transfer of Bag Information from BRP to BIS

Search for Unknown bags
• CBIS reporting – specifically the Daily EDS reports as outlined in Section 12.13.3
How to retrieve
How to interpret
• Reintroduction Line procedures
• Appendix
Description of operations document for the CBIS
Bag handling policy
Fail-safe Procedures
Jam procedures
• CBIS Interface
• OTK Mode for IQT
• Protocol for coordination aspects between OSR and CBRA
The Local TSA will supplement the CBIS training manuals with the following information:
• Train the OSARP refresher course (recommended)
• Provide applicable documented policies and SOPs
Correct ETD protocol for Unknown Bags
Proper protocol for alarm resolution
• Develop and train OOG procedures (valid vs. invalid)
• Update Staff Allocation Model to ensure proper staffing levels
• Ensure proper inventory of inspection station equipment (i.e. keys, tape, bolt cutter, box cutter)
• Confirm EDS unit location and serial number information for reporting purposes (PMIS, etc.)
• Specialized Screening – weapons, pets, etc.

A.2 CBIS Operations Guide – Sample Outline
The outline provided follows industry standards.
Title page
• Three letter code of the airport in which the system is located
• Title of Project
• Date of System (based on actual date of beneficial use)
• Project Number (as appropriate)
Fore Matter
• Record of Revisions
• Table of Contents
Chapter 1 - Operational Terms and Definitions

• Chapter Index
• Glossary of operation-related terms and equipment identification/designations
Manufacturer codes and abbreviations
Operational terminology and abbreviations
Symbols
• Other related information, such as
Conveyor ID marking rules
Equipment information needed for maintenance calls
Chapter 2 - System Overview

• Chapter Index
• System overview – high-level description, diagrams
• Inputs – locations, number of and types of inputs
• Outputs – locations, number of and type of sort areas
• Functional areas and system design

Ticket counter
Oversize and out-of-gauge processing
CBIS and CBRA
Sortation system – BMAs, ATRs, manual encoding, makeup
Control stations
• System and subsystem conveyor designations
• Processing rate of each subsystem and the total system
Chapter 3 - Baggage Weight and Size Limitations

• Chapter Index
• Normal Size Baggage
• Baggage that can be processed by system but requires special considerations/handling (i.e., skis and golf bags)
• Fragile Baggage
• Oddsize Baggage
Chapter 4 - Detailed Description of System Operation

• Chapter Index
• Detailed operational description for each system and subsystem, with sufficient detail to provide operational personnel such as ticketing
agents, service baggage handlers, skycaps, and TSA agents a thorough understanding of how to operate the system, including:
System start-up, shut down, operational stop/start control stations, jam reset and emergency stop operational requirements
Baggage loading procedures relative to placement of bar coded bag tags
System fault annunciation
Sortation controllers, computers and workstations
All graphic display information systems
Specific sortation controller operation
Placing equipment "in" or "out" of service
ATRs
BDDs
Hand held bar code scanner guns
Bag status displays

Creation of flight/sort assignment tables

All operator initiated reports
All system automatically generated reports
All system fault alarm messages and reports
Explanation of interaction with system, including:
o Thorough explanation and purpose of each command message or report
o Required keyboard or operator response
o All operator interface command entries
• Operator's troubleshooting guide
• Procedures and recommendations for alternative modes of system operation as may be required due to various equipment or subsystem
failures
Chapter 5 - Operational Safety

• Chapter Index
• Safety information related to the proper and safe operation of the specified system and its equipment from an operator's point of view
reflecting the most current OSHA, American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and local code, policies and standards and covering at
minimum:
Pre-operating procedure
Start-up and shut-down procedure
Emergency stop and restart procedure
Jam detection, jam clearance and restart procedure
Equipment lockout/tag-out procedures

A.3 Baggage and Data Flow Chart Examples
Figure A.3.1 through Figure A.3.5 show generic examples of EDS/BHS/CBRA data flows with no ATR, upstream ATR, and downstream ATR,
respectively.
Figure A.3.1: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – No ATR

Figure A.3.2: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – Upstream ATR

Figure A.3.3: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – Dow nstream ATR

Figure A.3.4 shows the outbound baggage handling system flow chart for the International Terminal at San Francisco International Airport.
Figure A.3.4: Outbound BHS, International Term inal, San Francisco International Airport

Figure A.3.5 shows the outbound baggage handling system flow chart for Terminal 8 at John F. Kennedy International Airport.
Figure A.3.5: Outbound BHS, Term inal 8, John F. Kennedy International Airport

A.4 Daily CBIS Report Examples
The following report examples are intended to provide designers and programmers with formats and the level of detail necessary to meet the
reporting requirements stated in Section 12.13.3. Reports that contain SSI will contain appropriate markings.
The Daily CBIS Summary Report – Peak Hour will be identical in layout to the Daily CBIS Summary Report in layout and metrics but the reporting
period will be the rolling peak hour of each day.
Reports will include footers containing term definitions and any equations used for metric calculations to provide transparent data interpretation.
These definitions and equations may differ from system to system and can depend on how the system is programmed to operate. Note that Figure
A.4.1 and Figure A.4.4 show example footers with example definitions and calculations for illustrative purposes but are incomplete. Actual report
footers will have definitions for each term on the report and all calculations. A separate page may be used if needed.

A.4.1 Daily CBIS Summary Report


A.4.2 Daily CBIS Bag Volume Report

A.4.3 CBIS Executive Summary Report

A.4.4 CBRA Executive Summary Report

A.4.5 PEC Tracking Report

A.4.6 CBRA Bag Process Timer Report

A.4.7 CBRA Bag Report

A.4.8 CBIS Hourly Throughput Report

A.4.9 CBIS Bag Spacing Report

A.4.10 CBIS Performance Report


A.5 CBIS Change Request
A.5.1 Change Request Parameters
A change request can be submitted for the following changes:
• Mechanical and electrical drawings

• PLC program pre-change
• PLC program post-change
• Configuration management process
• Testing procedures
• Mitigation/recovery/contingency plan
• Schedule
• Expected results
PLC or computer code changes to the CBIS are defined as:
• Any change that may affect any portion of the system throughput feeding either into or out of the CBIS
• Any change that may affect bag presentation to the EDS units (e.g., merges upstream too close causing double bags to enter)
• Any change to the EDS interface or to how the CBIS handles the bag IDs and decisions
• Any change to the CBIS tracking model (i.e., shaft encoding pulses, merges downstream allowing one bag to encroach into another bag’s
tracking window)
• Any changes to the bag allocation method
• Any change of any type from the exit of the EDS unit to the last clear bag divert point
• Any change of any type after the last chance divert point into the CBRA including the CBRA
CCRs are submitted to TSA ATSA Branch at Baseteam@tsa.dhs.gov. RFVs are submitted to TSA Planning branch at CBTPlanning@tsa.dhs.gov.
Figure A.5.1 contains a flow chart that illustrates the overall change request process.

Figure A.5.1: Change/Variance Request Process

A.5.2 CBIS Change Request Example
The following is an example of a Change Request document provided by Siemens. Designers should follow the same outline when they submit a
design change request.
A.5.2.1 Introduction
The purpose of this document is to describe the changes of the PLC code to be reviewed and approved by TSA or authorized agent.
A.5.2.2 Proposed Change Description

A.5.2.2.1 Purging of the Reconciliation Lookup Table for IR Bag
A.5.2.2.1.1 Detected Problem
When a bag arrives at CBRA with Unknown status it can be reintroduced in the system through the RI line. At the RI, the 10-digit IATA bag tag
is scanned using a hand scanner or entered using the station display. Once scanned, the bag is tracked to EDS2 line and handled just like a
new bag introduced at the ticket counter and scanned by ATR.
BHS includes a reconciliation scanner ATR SB1. The purpose of this scanner is to reconcile bags with the EDS decision when a bag is lost
between exit of EDS and ATR SB1.
Because of the reconciliation process, special attention has to be paid to the reinserted bags that are screened twice. Procedure has to
include provisions to prevent conditions when the bag on the first pass is cleared, on the second pass is alarmed, is lost in tracking
downstream from the EDS and reconciled to the first clear decision. Algorithm of the current program handles this issue correctly. However, in
order to completely avoid possibility of the manual intervention in the reconciliation process, additional safeguards are introduced.
A.5.2.2.1.2 Corrective Action
The 10-digit IATA bag tag of the re-inducted bag will be purged from the reconciliation table in order to guarantee that the bag will never
reconcile with data from the first screening process.
Procedure was added to re-induct functionality (FC98, Network 69) to search through the look up table and delete the record created by the
first screening.

A.5.2.2.1.3 Testing Procedure

In order to validate the requested change, the following test procedures will be performed:
1. Introduce a suspect bag upstream of ATR EDS2

2. Clear bag status from OSR after 10 sec to make sure that bag is routed to SB line
3. Delay bag at SB1-07 just after ATR SB1 to create loss of tracking
4. Re-induct bag from RI1-01
5. Verify that bag is Alarmed by EDS
6. Delay bag on SB1-02 to create loss of tracking
7. Verify that bag is reconciled on ATR SB1 to the Alarmed status and routed to CBRA
A.5.2.2.2 Adjustment of Tracking Parameters for SS3

A.5.2.2.2.1 Detected problem
During high volume baseline test bag ID exchange was detected on SS3-01. After analysis of the Bag History Report and CCTV recording it
was determined that main reason was insufficient gap between bags created at the Ticket Counter merge leading to bag collisions.
Merge window parameters were adjusted and additional gapping introduced on the queue conveyors just downstream of the merge TC1-TC4.
A.5.2.2.2.2 Corrective Actions

In addition to already mentioned changes measures following adjustment are proposed:
1. Increase Run Time delay on EDS1-08 to allow downstream conveyors to clear before restarting EDS line and minimize possible tracking
losses
2. Decrease Missing bag detection timer to improve tracking loss detection
A.5.2.2.2.3 Testing Procedure
Perform Added Bag Test on Zone 1A and 1B for the SS3 line. Added bag test will be performed according to the test procedures outlined in
Appendix D.

A.5.2.3 EDS1-08 Stops When SS2 is Unavailable

A.5.2.3.1 Detected Problem
South Security Matrix consists of three lines SS1 – SS3. When SS2 becomes unavailable it also stops conveyor feeding all three lines -
EDS1-08, even if SS3 is still available. A_Takeaway_Running parameter defines the name of the downstream conveyor in straight direction
that needs to available for EDS1-08 to run. Parameter review showed that it was set to incorrect value.
A.5.2.3.2 Corrective Action

A_Takeaway_Running parameter needs to point to a conveyor downstream from EDS1_08. Replace the Current A_Takeaway_Running with
the true A destination SS3_01.Running Forward. This will ensure that EDS1-08 will continue to run as long as SS3 is available.
A.5.2.3.3 Testing Procedure

1. Disable the SS2 line.
2. Place HSD-SS2 is in Automatic mode.
Expected Result: EDS1-08 to continue to run until SS3 become full.
A.5.3 CBIS Change Request Form
Figure A.5.2 contains the CBIS Change Request Form.

CBIS Change Request
SUBMITTAL OUTLINES, FORM TEMPLATES, AND EXAMPLES
Version 7.0
August 21, 2020
Email Completed CCR in Excel format (.xlsx) to Baseteam@tsa.dhs.gov

TRR iSAT Post Com.
Airport Code: Bag Room / CBIS
Name: Company:
Requested By:
Phone: Email:
BHS Installer / Name: Company:
Maintenance Phone: Email:
BHS Controls Name: Company:
Support: Phone: Email:
Date of Request:
Type of
Fully Semi Mini Other
Integration:
Affected Area Security Tracking Zone (STZ) Non-STZ Pre-EDS Post-EDS CBRA
EDS Type, Model & Quantity
Change Description:
Detected
Figure A.5.2: CBIS Change Request Form
Problem:
Proposed
Corrective
Action/Change:
A-31
Describe Testing
to verify Change:
Implementation
Time (man hrs)
Engineering
Date:
Reviewer
Engineering
Comments
Engineering
Approved Disapproved Deferred to DC
Disposition
Extended
Change Validation
DLD Site Lead TSA LOCAL ATSA (Add to CVR
Required (CVR)
Comments)
Other
Non-Operational
Validation Type Remote Analysis Live Operations (Add to CVR
Hours
Comments)
2 weeks of BHS Other
Documentation Updated
Reporting, Pre-CCR Updated PLC CODE (Add to CVR
Planning Guidelines and Design Standards

required by ATSA Drawing
for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems

and Post-CCR Comments)
CVR Comments
Deployment
Date:
Coordinator (DC)
APPENDIX A
DC Comments
DC Disposition Approved Disapproved Deferred
The approval to implement the changes noted above does not constitute a change in the contract, or commit additional funding to the
project. Contract modifications can only be made by the TSA Contracting Officer.
(If a response or additional information is requested from the TSA and not received within 48 hours the CCR will be returned as
rejected due to insufficient information)
A.6 MIA CBIS PLC Code Change Proposal Example
The following section showing an example of a Siemens CBIS Change Request Form has been reproduced and reformatted with permission.
A.6.1 Introduction
A.6.1.1 Contributors
Nam e/Function Com pany Departm ent
Dave Suarez Siemens Controls Lead
Keith Oliver Siemens SR. System Engineer
Ramdas Kulal Siemens Controls Engineer
Rodney Maynard Siemens SR. System Engineer
A.6.1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to submit change request to TSA to modify locked down MIA PLC code for items found during pre-ISAT, ISAT,
final system testing, or by new change request issued to Siemens. This document includes changes to all screening matrixes contained within the
MIA BHS. The content of this document include changes that are needed to correct issues and to add functionality that is required per the contract
for the MIA BHS. These change requests are the result of punch list items or observed conditions that are not functionally correct or base scope
requirements of the contract. The Additional Faults for the T1, T2 and T3 Doors is scope that has been added to Siemens via change request to
allow the airport to meet security requirements needed prior to live operations.
A.6.2 Remove Bit from X5 Door Clear Fault Logic

A.6.2.1 Area controlled by Change Requested PLC
PLC MCP CONV Area Controlled
32 MCP-14 X5-1, X5-2 East Matrix/Central Matrix
A.6.2.2 Executive Summary of Changed Impact

Criterion Result
Effect on Tested Area None
Effect on Tracking in the Tested Area None
Effected PLC PLC-32
Tested w ith Battelle (w ith current code) Yes

A.6.2.3 Problem Detected

The door clear fault does not come on until the discharge conveyor of X5-2 is running which is down stream of the door X5-1.
A.6.2.4 Corrective Action

The contact of “DR_X5_1.DischargeRunning” needs to be removed from the logic for the door clear fault.
NOTE: All A & B PLC’s will need to be updated with the same changes.
A.6.2.5 Current PLC Code

The screen shot below shows the PLC code in its current configuration in Routine “MCP_14_X5_Door” rung 31.
A.6.2.6 Proposed Change

The contact of “DR_X5_1.DischargeRunning” needs to be removed from the logic for the door clear fault.

A.6.3 Remove Temporary Logic from the C1 Door

19 MCP-92 C1 Door Logic East Matrix/Central Matrix

Criterion Result
Effect on Tested Area None
Effect on Tracking in the Tested Area None
Effected PLC PLC-19

Temporary bit signal disables the proper functionality of the door for the door faults. This bit was used for the testing and was never removed.

Remove the “Z_temp” signal bit from the logic for the door fault. No other graphics changes required, as well this change is not going to affect the
tracking in this PLC.

The screen shot below shows the PLC code in its current configuration in Routine “MCP_92_C1_2_Door” rung 44 and 45.



Remove the “Z_temp” bit from both rungs 44 and 45.
A.6.4 Remove AFI from T5 Door Logic


40 MCP-21 T5-4 East Matrix/Central Matrix
Criterion Result
Effect on Tested Area Yes
Effect on Tracking in the Tested Area No
Effected PLC PLC-40

The T5-4 door failed to open fault did not work during testing with MDAD and it was found that the fault had been disabled with an AFI in the logic.

Remove the AFI in the PLC logic. No other graphics changes required, as well this change is not going to affect the tracking in this PLC.

The screen shot below shows the PLC code in its current configuration in Routine “MCP_21_T5_4_Door” rung 39.


Remove the “AFI” from rung 39.
A.6.5 Change First Scan Delay Timer Preset

A.6.5.1 Area Controlled by Change Requested PLC
PLC-32B, PLC-11B, PLC- NA NA East Matrix/
13B, PLC-19B, PLC- Central Matrix/West
22B, PLC-24B, PLC- Matrix/Cruise Matrix
27B, PLC-28B, PLC-
33B, PLC-34B, PLC-37B,
PLC-38B, PLC-39B, PLC-
40B, PLC-
42B, PLC43B, PLC-
44B, PLC-45B

Criterion Result
Effected PLC PLC-32B, PLC-11B, PLC-13B, PLC-19B, PLC-22B, PLC-24B, PLC-27B, PLC-28B, PLC-33B,
PLC-34B, PLC-37B, PLC-38B, PLC-39B, PLC-40B, PLC-42B, PLC43B, PLC-44B, PLC-45B


The PLC pairs have a minor issue during the process of synchronizing the PLC’s. The B set of all PLC’s are to be set .5 seconds longer on the
First_Scan_Delay Timer so that the A PLC will always become the active primary.

Change the preset of the First_Scan_Delay Timer from 60000 to 65000 (6 seconds to 6.5 seconds).

The screen shot below shows the PLC code in its current configuration in Routine “Switch_Over_Logic” rung 2.

Changed timer preset to 65000.

A.6.6 Add Additional Faults for the T1, T2 and T3 Doors

19 108, 3, 4 T1, T2, and T3 door East Matrix
Central Matrix
Criterion Result
Effected PLC PLC-19
Tested with Battelle (with current code) Yes
The fire doors of T1, T2, and T3 are existing doors and do not have the functionality required to support live operations. Under a change request
issued by MDAD to Siemens the door faults “Failed to Clear” and “Forced Open” are to be added.

Add the logic for the door faults of “Failed to Clear” and “Forced Open.”

Current PLC code for these faults do not exist for these doors and will have to be added. Logic from other doors such as T4 will be used to create
the logic for these new faults. Section A.10.6.6 represents the changes that will be required and is used as an example for the logic to be
implemented.

The below screen shots are from PLC 32 T4-3 door logic and represents the logic that will be used to implement the new faults that will be used
on the T1, T2, and T3 doors.
Door Failed to clear logic.

The Failed to clear latch is used in multiple places in the program and the screen shot below represents all locations.

Door Forced Open logic.

Forced Open latch is used in multiple places in the program and the screen below shot represents all locations.
A.6.7 VFD Faults Using MCP Power Off Bit

All Security Line NA All Security Lines East Matrix
PLC’s Central Matrix
27, 28, 35, 36, 37, 39,
45

Criterion Result
Effected PLC All Security Line PLC’s, 27, 28, 35, 36, 37, 39, 45

During system testing it was observed that an intermittent issue would occur with the VFD operated conveyors that they would become idle and
upstream conveyors would cascade and no fault would be present on the graphics. During the commissioning of the system an issue occurred
that when the MCP was powered off that contained VFD’s all the faults for the VFD’s would be displayed on the graphics. A rung was created to
prevent this however if there is a fault on the C-Net card of the VFD the graphics will not display the fault. Normally the Comm Ok bit would be
used in parallel with the MCP Power Off bit so that if the C-Net card of the VFD faulted without a VFD fault it would still be indicated on the
graphics as a VFD fault. A separate change request has been submitted to MDAD to add C-Net node faults to the graphics.


The VFD_xxx_Comm_OK bit should be replaced with the MCP Power Off bit. The MCP Power Off logic was added later to the PLC’s to indicate
the loss of control power within each MCP. The corresponding MCP bit should be used with the corresponding VFD’s.

All faulted logic for the VFD’s is the same in all matrix PLC’s so only one is used in this example. The below screen shot is for the VFD fault on
SS12-4.

The below screen shot is the example for the VFD fault of SS12-4 using the MCP-112 Power Off bit. Using this instead of the Comm Ok bit will
prevent the fault from showing on the graphics if the MCP is powered off but allow the fault if the C-Net card of the VFD is faulted.


A.7 PGDS Request for Variance Form
Figure A.7.1 contains a PGDS Request for Variance Form.
Figure A.7.1: Request for PGDS Variance Tem plate

A.8 Government Furnished Information Requests
TSA often has historical and forecasted data that may prove beneficial to designers and planners of BHSs that incorporate a CBIS. GFI is
information supplied by the TSA’s engineering department and is intended to aid in the design of BHS projects, specifically projects that involve
the CBIS portion of a BHS.
This data, offered at the preliminary stages of the design process, is contingently applicable, and is very dependent upon the scope of the project.
In order for us to supply GFI, we need to gain a perspective about the overall scope of the project and a general understanding of the project’s
intent. The attached form is used for this purpose. Once we receive the form, we will endeavor to supply the following:
FDRS data: this is the historical data of the quantity of the bags that go through the EDS units. If specific EDS unit numbers are supplied:
• The TSA can supply the 10 minute peaks of every day for the most recent year’s span, by EDS grouping. This will be represented by two
graphs, indicating the peaks chronologically and in ascending order. We’ll also indicate the ADPM day, as well as the day that
corresponds to the 85 percentile for a year’s sampling.
• We’ll also supply a graph of the baggage rate for the 85% day and the peak day. These graphs will show the average of 10 minutes, in
1-minute increments (rolling 10 minute bins), for the 85% and peak days. They do not include the Surge Factor.
• If available, we’ll supply the baggage rate graphs of the individual EDS units for the 85% day. These graphs will indicate the baggage rate
for each minute, by the minute (no averaging, no Surge Factor).
Utilizing the FAA’s Terminal Area Forecast, we’ll supply the anticipated Overall Growth and the Average Compounded Yearly Growth. We’ll need
to know the overall span of the project, from date of design to Date of Beneficial Use plus five years (DBU+5). This span is typically seven to ten
years.
Utilizing the TSA’s Enhanced Staffing Model, we may be able to supply a Baggage rate profile based on Airlines or specific bag zones.
(Knowledge of both the bag zones and the Airlines within each zone, and the correlation of each to a proposed design, are requisite. This
information is usually obtainable by coordinating with the local TSA and the Airline representatives).
Utilizing the TSA – Operations Improvement Branch’s “ESM (year) – OIB Bag Zone Analysis” we may be able to offer some airline specific values
for “Bags per Passenger” that are useful as approximate values. The new ESM provides the capability to calculate the TSA’s weekly staffing
requirements for an airport terminal by hour, by day of the week. By using the ESM application, users will continue to define experiments,
configure airport terminals, and share experiments with other users. ESM will generate a staffing demand in 5 minute increments for a one-week
period based on the configuration data, flight schedule demand data, and service measure of effectiveness (MOE) specified in an experiment.
ESM will also provide statistical results for each experiment in reports

If appropriate, we can supply recommendations for the False Alarm (FA) rate and the OSR rate. Note that these values are influenced by the type
of flights (International or Domestic), as well as the location and size of the Airport.
We can often suggest CBRA baggage processing times which are national averages and would need adjustment based on location of project.
TSA encourages participation in Technical Interchange Meetings throughout the design review process to allow for open lines of communication
and a vehicle to resolve issues or concerns as they arise. Figure A.8.1 and Figure A.8.2 illustrate the overall GFI Request process for TSA- and
airport-funded designs respectively. Figure A.8.3 contains a copy of the GFI request form.

Figure A.8.1: GFI Request Process - TSA Funded Designs

Figure A.8.2: GFI Request Process - Airport Funded Designs

Figure A.8.3: GFI Request Form

A.9 Industry Comment Template
The TSA Acquisition Program Management (APM) will be the recipient of all comments regarding proposed updates to the PGDS. All comments
will be reviewed and considered in a timely manner. The TSA values comments and input from industry stakeholders, but only those comments
and input determined to enhance and improve the PGDS will be incorporated in the next release of the PGDS. An example of the standard form
for comments is provided in Figure A.9.1 below.
Figure A.9.1: Standard Form for Industry Com m ents
Comments should be submitted to the pgds@dhs.gov mailbox, on the comment form at the Beta.SAM.gov website.

APPENDIX B GENERIC EXAMPLES OF CHECKED BAGGAGE INSPECTION SYSTEMS
APPENDIX B:
GENERIC EXAMPLES OF CHECKED BAGGAGE INSPECTION SYSTEMS

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems B-1 August 21, 2020
B.1 Introduction
This appendix provides generic examples of various design concepts of CBISs, relevant operational assumptions for those examples, and specific
best practices related to the CBIS examples to supplement the information contained in Chapter 12 of the PGDS.
The high-level generic examples (i.e., examples that are not highly detailed, but rather convey a conceptual screening system) are provided to
assist planners at the Pre-Design Phase of CBIS design with the development of conceptual alternatives. The examples are not site-specific and
should not be used as is. These examples are intended to serve as a starting point for planners to provide ideas on different concepts of CBISs,
some of the pros and cons of each concept, and some of the best practices that relate to specific CBIS design concepts. When developing design
concepts, planners should consider local operational and spatial conditions, which are likely to significantly influence the actual CBIS design
concepts developed.
The following generic examples of CBIS concepts are presented in this appendix:
• Two variations of linear CBIS design concepts (A, B)

• One ICS CBIS design concept (C)
B.2 Methodology for Developing Generic Examples
The three examples of linear CBIS or ICS designs were developed and evaluated based on in-line system types using Type I EDS units as the
basis of design. Higher throughput could be accomplished in most cases by a substitution of the EDS units. This substitution may require changing
the layout of the main EDS processing system (i.e., changing BHS conveyors in the immediate vicinity of the EDS units, resizing of the CBIS, and
CBRA), but may not require changes to ticketing/curbside belts and bag makeup/sortation conveyors.
In some examples, other minor layout revisions may be required to provide a better match between BHS conveying capacity and EDS design
throughput, but these revisions are unlikely to have much effect on BHS capital costs or building area requirements. Planners should consider
such modifications when developing specific CBIS design concepts. The substitution of a higher capacity EDS unit will likely result in revised
values for OSR and ETD screener staffing requirements and for the associated equipment/space requirements for this equipment and personnel.
A useful strategy may be to design a system based initially on the use of Type I EDS units and subsequent replacement by higher throughput EDS
units as demand increases. This strategy may provide a convenient method of achieving a 35% to 40% increase in system throughput capacity.
There is a chance that significant changes to the OSR and CBRA will be required due to these capacity increases as stated above.

The following assumptions were the basis for developing the generic CBIS examples:
• A separate line is used for OS bags. These bags are too large to be loaded on the ticketing/curbside belts (e.g., surfboards, skis, and golf
clubs) and are screened using ETD for primary screening.
• A bypass belt is used (except in mini in-line applications) to divert OOG bags that will not fit the aperture dimensions of the EDS tunnel.
The diverter directs OOG bags directly to the CBRA, bypassing the EDS units.
• A minimum of 45 seconds of travel time is provided after the bag has been screened by an EDS unit for OSR processing in in-line CBIS
designs. Mini In-line systems will be required to have at least 30 seconds of travel time.
• EDS and ETD throughputs are consistent with the equipment described in Chapter 3.
• Mainlines will be capable of delivering bags to the EDS units to equal the capacity of the total non-redundant EDS units at a minimum.
Mainlines taking bags away from the EDS unit will be capable of transporting bags equal to or greater than the capacity of the non-
redundant EDS units.
B.3 Generic Examples of Linear CBIS Design Concepts
Linear CBIS design concepts typically have a relatively straight forward linear conveyor system transporting baggage from ticketing/curbside take-
away belts to the screening zones and from the screening zones to the CBRA zones and bag makeup devices.
Two variations of linear CBIS design concepts are described below:
• Linear CBIS Design Concept A – Baggage is transferred from ticketing on a single conveyor to the EDS, and vertical sorters or 45-
degree diverters separate clear/alarmed bags soon after the bags exit the EDS units.
• Linear CBIS Design Concept B – Similar to design Concept A, but intended to handle a higher volume of bags transferred from the
induction lines.

B.3.1 Linear CBIS Design Concept A
An example layout of linear CBIS design Concept A is shown in Figure B.3.1.
Figure B.3.1: Linear CBIS Design Concept A

B.3.1.1 Description of Linear CBIS Design Concept A
Ticketing and curbside take-away belts are merged into a single mainline conveyor belt leading to the security screening and bag makeup area. A
BMA is used to identify OOG bags that exceed the available cross-sectional area that can be accommodated by the EDS units. OOG bags are
diverted to a conveyor leading directly to the CBRA for manual inspection and clearance. All other bags proceed to a diverter that allocates bag
flow between the two EDS units. After screening by EDS equipment, bags proceed to a vertisorter (a 45-degree diverter with parallel conveyors
could also be configured) where alarmed bags are transported to an accumulation conveyor, pending OSR inspection by TSA personnel.
Bags that are cleared by the EDS units are immediately segregated from alarmed bags and diverted to a single clear bag line leading to the
baggage makeup area. There is a subsequent merge point for bags cleared by OSR or ETD. Upon reaching the end of the OSR conveyor, bags
that have been cleared by TSA personnel are diverted (vertisorter or 45-degree diverter) to a cleared bag belt, which, in turn, merges with the
clear bag line leading to the baggage makeup area, as described above. Bags that are not cleared by TSA personnel (including bags for which no
clearance decision has been reached by the time the bag reaches the decision point) will default to the CBRA for manual inspection.
Positive bag tracking controls are used to monitor the locations of all bags processed by the EDS units and to enable EDS images of screened
bags sent to the CBRA to be accessed by TSA screening personnel. EDS images are transferred to the corresponding ETD inspection position to
assist with directed ETD screening of the bag. Bags that are cleared after ETD screening and search are loaded onto a return conveyor, which
merges with the clear bag line leading to the bag makeup area. Any “threat” bags identified during the ETD screening and search process are
either resolved or disposed of per the current TSA checked baggage SOP, which typically involves the local law enforcement officer.
B.3.1.2 Evaluation of Linear CBIS Design Concept A
This design concept is well suited for a moderately sized application. However, the concept may involve a high cost for EDS units because a
redundant unit may be necessary to maintain operations in the event of unit failure, resulting in average unit utilization of about 50% during peak
period operations when both units are operational. CBRA space and equipment requirements should be identified in light of the agreed-upon
contingency plan developed by the Project Sponsor (see Section 5.7.2). Separation of alarmed and cleared bags immediately downstream of the
EDS units minimizes the risk of bag mistracking by diverting the majority of bags to an untracked conveyor environment, but involves some system
complexity (PLC programming due to a larger tracking zone) and cost.

B.3.2 Linear CBIS Design Concept B
An example layout of linear CBIS design Concept B is shown in Figure B.3.2.
Figure B.3.2: Linear CBIS Design Concept B

B.3.2.1 Description of Linear CBIS Design Concept B
Ticketing and curbside take-away belts are merged into a single mainline conveyor belt leading to the security screening and bag makeup area. A
BMA is used to identify OOG bags that exceed the available cross-sectional area that can be accommodated by the EDS units. The OOG bags
are diverted directly to a conveyor leading to the CBRA for manual inspection and clearance. All other bags proceed to a diverter zone, typically
consisting of three 45-degree diverters, which divide bag flow among four EDS units. After EDS screening, bags proceed to a vertisorter (a 45-
degree diverter with parallel conveyors could also be configured), where alarmed bags are transported onto an accumulation conveyor pending
OSR screener decision.
Bags cleared by the EDS units are diverted onto a clear bag line leading to the bag makeup area to be discharged to a sort system. Upon
reaching the end of the OSR accumulation conveyor, bags that have been cleared by TSA personnel are diverted (vertisorter or 45-degree
diverter) to a cleared bag belt, which, in turn, merges with the cleared bag line leading to the bag makeup area.
Bags that are not cleared by TSA personnel (including bags for which no clearance decision has been reached by the time the bag reaches the
decision point) default to the CBRA for manual inspection. Positive belt tracking controls are used to monitor the location of all bags processed by
the EDS units and to enable images of screened bags sent to the CBRA to be accessed by TSA screening personnel who perform directed ETD
screening of the bag. Bags cleared after ETD screening and search are manually transferred onto a return conveyor, which merges with the
cleared bag line leading to the bag makeup area. Any “threat” bags identified during the CBRA process are either resolved or disposed of per the
current TSA checked baggage SOP, which typically involves the local law enforcement officer.
In most systems with this throughput capacity, the cleared bag line conveyor leading to the bag makeup area leads to a separate sortation area,
where bags are typically distributed among a number of makeup loops or piers for final sort to individual flights. This process usually requires an
ATR and manual encode spur upstream of the makeup loops or piers. Sortation to individual loops or piers is typically via vertisorters or 45-degree
diverters, as appropriate. The sortation component of the BHS is not included in this analysis
B.3.2.2 Evaluation of Linear CBIS Design Concept B
The use of multiple EDS units increases the average peak period use of each unit (compared with Concept A) from about 50% to about 75%, as
redundant screening equipment represents a smaller percentage of the system. However, the baggage conveying systems serving the EDS units
in this concept are more complex and costly. Linear CBIS design Concept B depends on a single mainline conveyor feeding bags to the EDS unit
array and a single mainline conveyor feeding bags to the makeup/sort area. The bag throughput rate on these single conveyors is also relatively
high during peak periods. This concept generally requires a separate sortation system downstream of the EDS/ETD screening area to sort bags
by flight or by airline.
As with linear CBIS design Concept A, the design for Concept B maintains the separation of cleared and alarmed bags; Concept B potentially has
higher reliability compared with Concept A because the additional conveyors leading to a higher number of EDS units can compensate for an EDS
unit failure.

B.4 Generic Examples of Individual Carrier System-Based CBIS Design Concepts
An ICS-based CBIS design concept typically uses individual carriers to carry baggage through a transport and sortation system, which allows for
the distribution of bags to the EDS units as well as to the CBRA, and if so designed, for the automated sortation of bags to multiple makeup
devices. ICSs typically consist of a closed-loop conveying system on which special-purpose carriers (each accommodating a single bag and
possessing a unique RFID tag) are transported to the EDS. In this type of system, the bag remains in the carrier throughout the screening and
sortation processes. Alarmed baggage is transported to the CBRA (in the carrier) while cleared baggage is conveyed to the sortation system. The
ICS concept is presented to provide planners with a potential CBIS concept for consideration during the Pre-Design Phase.
This concept is illustrated schematically on Figure B.4.1, which is not representative of a physical equipment layout and does not show upstream
ATRs. While this concept is unconventional, it is nonetheless presented to provide planners with a potential CBIS concept for consideration during
the Pre-Design Phase.

Figure B.4.1: Individual Carrier System -Based CBIS Design Concept C

B.4.1 Description of Individual Carrier System-based CBIS Design Concept C
Bags from the ticketing/curbside take-away belts are delivered to three delivery belts and pass a combined BMA/ATR position where they are
measured and identified. OOG bags are immediately diverted to a bypass line leading to a combined OS/OOG CBRA. Standard bags are
transported under tracking control to a carrier loading and induction unit, where they are loaded onto a vehicle or carrier and a destination is
assigned to the carrier. The carrier and bag then proceed to one of four EDS units, with automatic flow balancing to equalize the use of available
EDS units. Bags that clear EDS screening are directed to the baggage sortation system. Bags that alarm are reviewed through the OSR decision
process. OSR clear bags are directed to the baggage sortation system. OSR alarm bags are directed to CBRA for further processing. After CBRA
processing has cleared the bag, the bag is directed to the baggage sortation system. An ICS carrier may be permitted to keep the bag in the
carrier through the EDS screening process if the carrier meets TSA validation to not impact EDS detection per Section 3.5.1. An ICS carrier may
be permitted to keep the bag in the carrier through the CBRA inspection process if the carrier meets TSA requirements for the baggage inspection
stations per Section 14.3. In this concept, it is usually necessary to provide storage lines for empty carriers (for use in off-peak periods when only a
small number of carriers is needed). These empty carrier storage lines can also be used for storing early check-in bags to reduce the makeup
cart/container requirement for the terminal.
B.4.2 Evaluation of Individual Carrier System-based CBIS Design Concept C
By keying the unique carrier number to bag identity, it is possible to accurately track bags and transfer images to TSA personnel in the CBRA. Bag
orientation can also be maintained from the EDS unit to the inspection table. It is possible to subdivide the carrier distribution system in this
concept into two or more independent but connected subsystems, so that a single point of failure condition can be avoided. This concept generally
avoids the need for a separate sortation system downstream of the EDS/ETD screening area, and permits the same system to be used for both
security screening purposes and for sorting bags by flight or by airline. In ICS-based design Concept C, it is relatively easy to add EDS units to
accommodate future growth. In light of the complexity of the system, it is likely to be most suitable for a large installation of a complete baggage
system in a new or extensively renovated terminal, for a major hub airline, or for a large terminal with multiple airlines sharing a common EDS
screening facility.

APPENDIX C BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT CASE STUDY
APPENDIX C:
BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT CASE STUDY
Oakland International Airport

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems C-1 August 21, 2020
C.1 Executive Summary
This Basis of Design Report case study focuses on the Port of Oakland's recent study to identify an optimally scaled checked baggage inspection
system (CBIS) for Terminal 1 at Oakland International Airport (referred to in this case study as “the Airport”).
At the time this recent study was conducted, Terminal 1 served a mix of domestic airlines and their affiliated regional/commuter airlines, and the
majority of bags were screened using explosives trace detection (ETD) instead of explosives detection system (EDS) machines. To improve
customer service and support Airport growth opportunities, the Port was interested in evaluating in-line baggage screening alternatives. Key study
objectives included: (1) minimizing the number of manual baggage screening inspections and (2) improving overall customer service at the Airport
while screening 100% of checked bags.
Several conceptual alternatives for in-line screening, ranging from highly centralized systems with Type I EDS machines to more decentralized
systems using lower-speed Type II EDS machines (a mini in-line CBIS), were considered.
As Terminal 1 was designed to serve a mix of domestic and international airlines, a high-throughput in-line CBIS was not feasible because of the
spatial requirements and additional complexity associated with assigning bags to specific airlines after screening at a centralized location.
Therefore, only four mini in-line CBIS alternatives were found to be operationally and spatially feasible for Terminal 1. For the mini in-line
alternatives, Reveal CT-80 and L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines were evaluated based on life-cycle cost, potential screening capacity, customer
level of service, and other qualitative factors.
To support the evaluation, two models were developed. The first was a life-cycle-cost (LCC) model to determine the cost-effectiveness of each
alternative over a 20-year period, and the second was a flow model to evaluate screening capacity, level of service, and operational performance.
After all constraints were evaluated, Alternative 3, a mini in-line system consisting of seven L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines, was deemed to be
the best CBIS alternative for Terminal 1 at the Airport.
C.2 Case Study Background
In spring 2004, the Port initiated a design study for the replacement of an existing baggage screening system using ETD technology with a set of
automated EDS machines to serve Southwest Airlines (the sole airline tenant at the Airport's Terminal 2). The design concept called for a
conveyor system to transfer baggage from ticket counters to an in-line EDS screening area adjacent to the terminal where EDS machines
automatically screen baggage for explosives and divert false alarm and oversize baggage to a checked baggage resolution area (CBRA).
Baggage cleared by the EDS machines proceeds to Southwest’s outbound baggage makeup carousel. The Terminal 2 in-line system became
operational in February 2006; the in-line design study for that system is not included in this case study.
Terminal 1 serves a mix of domestic airlines and affiliated commuter operators. Currently, three EDS machines are used for screening checked
baggage at Terminal 1.

United Airlines uses one stand-alone EDS machine (MD CTX 2500) located behind the airline ticket counter. Bags moving along the conveyor to
the United Airlines’ baggage makeup area are manually removed and sent through the EDS machine for security screening.
JetBlue Airways uses a semi-integrated EDS machine (MD CTX 5500) located behind the JetBlue ticket counter. A conveyor connects the ticket
counters to the EDS machine. All JetBlue bags are first screened by the MD CTX 5500. Cleared bags are sent to the baggage makeup area and
alarmed bags are sent to a CBRA, where alarms are resolved by Transportation System Administration (TSA) agents.
The remainder of the Terminal 1 airlines use manual ETD screening located in the baggage makeup rooms. In addition, bags that belong to
passengers with a high-risk profile (referred to as "selectees") are manually carried to the third EDS machine (MD CTX 5500) located in the lobby,
where they are screened, sorted, manually placed on the conveyor, and sent to the appropriate airline baggage makeup room.
The Airport is achieving 100% checked bag screening; however, the process is labor intensive, with the majority of the bags undergoing ETD
screening instead of being screened by EDS machines. The Port wants to move ahead with an in-line EDS to improve customer service,
scalability, and Airport growth opportunities.
Existing conditions at Terminal 1 are shown in Figure C.2.1.
Figure C.2.1: Existing Conditions, Term inal 1

C.3 CBIS Alternatives
C.3.1 Zoning Schemes
As explained in Section 5.2, checked baggage can be combined in the screening systems in several ways. Taking into consideration spatial and
operational constraints, two zone hierarchy schemes were developed for Terminal 1, as shown in Figure C.3.1 and Figure C.3.2.
For Terminal 1, the “F3 Zones” correspond to each baggage take-away belt, while the “F1 Zone” consists of the entire terminal. At the intermediate
“F2 Zones,” several options are available to combine checked baggage into screening systems. For the purpose of this case study, two options
were considered for F2 Zone groupings: Option A (Figure C.3.1) divides the ticket counters into three groups combining checked baggage into
three screening systems, while Option B (Figure C.3.2) divides the ticket counters into two groups combining checked baggage into two screening
systems.
Figure C.3.1: Zoning Schem es, Option A, Term inal 1

Figure C.3.2: Zoning Schem es, Option B, Term inal 1
C.3.2 Screening System Types
As explained in detail in Chapter 3, several system types and EDS equipment are available for in-line systems, ranging from highly centralized
systems using High speed EDS machines to very decentralized systems using Low speed EDS machines. As the zoning schemes, the system
type selection, and the estimated demand are inter-related, several iterations were necessary to determine an optimally scaled solution. Thus, at
this early stage of analysis, all spatially feasible system options were considered and carried forward in the evaluation.
The following is a general description of potential system types for three zoning levels at Terminal 1 that were considered initial candidates for
screening alternatives:
• Terminal 1, F3 Zone Groupings – Decentralized screening systems are recommended for F3 Zone groupings. Thus, at the F3 Zone
level, mini in-line systems are acceptable options. Stand-alone EDS machines were not considered because they would present spatial
constraints to any expansion that would be necessary to accommodate growth beyond the design year.

• Terminal 1, F2 Zone Groupings – At the F2 Zone level, depending on the expected checked baggage demand volumes, high-throughput
centralized systems, such as in-line systems, or lower-throughput systems, such as mini in-line systems, are acceptable options.
• Terminal 1, F1 Zone Grouping – A centralized system is recommended at the F1 Zone level. Thus, both high-volume and medium-
volume in-line systems are acceptable options for Terminal 1. The choice between high-volume and medium-volume system types
depends on the date of beneficial use (DBU), since that will dictate the type of EDS equipment expected to be certified by that date. Since
DBU is expected to be after 2008, both high-volume and medium-volume in-line systems would be viable. If a medium-volume system is
ultimately selected, all necessary steps should be taken to make the system flexible enough to accommodate high-speed EDS machines
when they become available.
C.3.3 Qualitative Assessment of Preliminary Alternatives
An initial assessment of a relatively large number of alternatives was performed and all alternatives that were clearly not feasible were immediately
eliminated without further consideration. In this initial assessment, it was determined that structural and spatial constraints would render any
expansion or major building modification required to accommodate the in-line systems cost prohibitive. Accordingly, at Terminal 1, all of the full in-
line concepts were found to be infeasible. Only the mini-in-line system type layouts designed for the F3 Zone were found to be operationally and
spatially feasible at Terminal 1.
For the F3 Zone alternatives, the Reveal CT-80 and L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines were considered to be better options for the Airport
compared to the L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6000 and MD CTX 5500 machines with ViewLink. The Reveal CT-80 and L-3 eXaminer SX machines are
considered superior products because they are newer, have better performance capabilities, and have strong upgrade possibilities for the future.
Therefore, the L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6000 and MD CTX 5500 with ViewLink were also eliminated from further consideration.
Table C.3.1 provides a list of all preliminary alternatives considered and brief reasons for rejecting the initial alternatives.

Table C.3.1: Initial Evaluation of Alternatives, Terminal 1

Zone and Option System Type Accepted/Rejected Alternative nam e/reason for rejection
F3 ZONE - Reveal CT-80 Accepted Alternative 1
MINI- IN-LINE SYSTEM L-3 eXaminer SX Accepted Alternatives 2 and 3
TYPE
L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6000 Rejected Inferior performance and limited upgrade opportunities
MD CTX 5500 (w ith View Link) Rejected Inferior performance and limited upgrade opportunities
Reveal CT-80 Rejected Spatial constraints
F2 ZONE OPTION 1 – L-3 eXaminer SX Rejected Spatial constraints
MINI IN-LINE SYSTEM
TYPE L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6000 Rejected Spatial constraints
MD CTX 5500 (w ith View Link) Rejected Spatial constraints
F2 ZONE OPTION 2 – MD CTX 9800 DSi Rejected Spatial constraints

MEDIUM THROUGPUT L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6000 Rejected Spatial constraints
IN-LINE SYSTEM TYPE L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6600 Rejected Spatial constraints
F1 ZONE – MD CTX 9800 DSi Rejected Spatial constraints
MEDIUM THROUGHPUT L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6000 Rejected Spatial constraints
IN-LINE SYSTEM TYPE
L-3 eXaminer 3DX 6600 Rejected Spatial constraints
C.3.4 Feasible Alternatives

The list of preliminary alternatives was reduced to three feasible alternatives based on F3 zoning and the following mini in-line system types. Each
of the alternatives incorporates the same F3 zoning, i.e., the ticket counters are divided into seven ticket counter groups, one for each take-away
belt, creating seven F3 Zones. These feasible alternatives are investigated further in the following sections.
• Alternative 1: Each F3 Zone is served by the required number of CT-80 EDS machines and one CBRA where the on-screen resolution
(OSR) process is combined with ETD alarm resolution.
• Alternative 2: Each F3 Zone is served by the required number of in-line L-3 eXaminer SX machines. This alternative was split into two
parts, Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b. Alternative 2a incorporates a combined OSR/ETD screening function, similar to Alternative 1.
Alternative 2b incorporates dedicated OSR screening, which would be conducted in a separate screening room.
• Alternative 3: Each F3 Zone is served by the required number of in-line L-3 eXaminer SX machines. ETD screening and baggage
makeup functions are partially consolidated as there would be a common CBRA and baggage makeup area for every two EDS machines.
In addition, OSR would be performed remotely, while ETD screening functions would be performed in the CBRA, as this more staff-
efficient screening method can effectively be used when the CBIS design incorporates common use CBRAs.

C.4 Determination of Design Day Baggage Demand
Using the methodology outlined in Section 5.2, a baseline baggage demand is calculated from the most recent flight schedule data available. The
flight schedule data are used to calculate the checked baggage volume for the average day of the peak month (ADPM) for each screening zone.
This baseline checked baggage demand is then surged and projected to the design day, which is the DBU of the CBIS plus 5 years. Flight
schedules for 2006 were used for this analysis with a projected DBU of 2008 and subsequent DBU of 2013. In projecting future demand, the
capacity of the functional components at the Airport must be considered. The ultimate terminal or Airport capacity should be treated as the upper
limit for projected demand for the purposes of CBIS design.
Based on the Port's strategy for the Airport, it is unlikely that the capacity of Terminal 1 will be increased substantially in the foreseeable future.
The reasons for this slowdown in growth at Terminal 1 include:
• The Terminal 2 expansion plan is under way and, once completed, all international flights and Southwest Airlines flights will be
accommodated at Terminal 2 (making the current four Southwest gates at Terminal 1 available).
• It is expected that either a new entrant airline will begin service at Terminal 1 or a current airline located at Terminal 1 will expand at the
Airport in subsequent years, requiring two of the four Terminal 1 gates currently used by Southwest. This new service is represented by
flights of a fictitious future airline, “XX Airlines”.
Therefore, to ensure that the screening system alternatives were designed based on a realistic growth rate given the constraints on the terminal,
two design days were considered, as described below. For this analysis, the entire Terminal 1 was treated as a single F1 screening zone.
• Standard methodology – This design day was constructed based on the FSA methodology outlined in Section5.5.2.2 using design values
that were current at the time of the calculations. The ADPM flight schedule for Terminal 1 was identified, and using the forecast growth
rates in the then-current Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA’s) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), increased to reflect 2013 passenger
volumes (2013 is DBU+5 years for the proposed in-line system). According to the TAF, total enplaned passengers at the Airport are
expected to grow from 7.12 million annual passengers (MAP) in 2006 to 9.90 MAP in 2013. This represents an average annual growth
rate of 4.82%. Using this method, baggage flows for the ADPM were increased by 4.82% annually to 2013.
• Strategy-oriented methodology – This design day was constructed based on the Port’s future strategy that no additional gates will be built
at Terminal 1 and that Southwest will move completely to Terminal 2. Two of the four vacated gates at Terminal 1 would be used by a
future airline (XX Airlines). The remaining two gates could be used to accommodate growth of airlines currently serving the Airport. To
properly reflect Terminal 1 capacity, the design day flight schedule was based on the 2006 peak day of the peak month (PDPM) flight
schedule. This schedule was sent to the airlines for verification, and new flights were added to the schedule in accordance with the
airlines’ requests. In line with the Port’s strategy for the Airport, Southwest was eliminated from the flight schedule and was replaced by
XX Airlines. The flight schedule for XX Airlines was based on Southwest’s gating schedule for two of Southwest’s four gates at Terminal 1.
Gate utilization was analyzed based on gating information provided by Airport staff. For gates with low utilization, flights were added to

create the design day flight schedule. Using this method, a design day flight schedule based on the detailed information provided by the
airlines and Airport staff was created and baggage flows were generated from this flight schedule.
Determination of the ADPM and PDPM design day values were based on Terminal 1 flight schedules to determine the peak month (August) and
the ADPM (August 26) and PDPM (August 25). Load factors, origin and destination (O&D) percentages, earliness distributions, and checked bags
per passenger for those days were applied to the maximum seat capacities for the ADPM and PDPM flight schedules to arrive at the base ADPM
and PDPM baggage flows.
Two design days were then created. The design days were based on the standard and strategy-oriented methodologies described above. One
design day was created by increasing the ADPM baggage flows to 2013 levels based on the TAF growth rates (standard methodology). The other
design day was created by using the PDPM flight schedule and adding flights based on the Port’s future strategy (strategy-oriented methodology).
The following sections provide details of the design-day selection process.
C.4.1 Peak Month
Table C.4.1 shows the monthly totals and daily averages for all flights in Terminal 1 used to identify August as the peak month.
Table C.4.1: Term inal 1 Peak Month Available Seats 2007

Month Monthly seats Average daily seats
January 279,034 9,001
February 254,786 9,100
March 286,400 9,239
April 271,707 9,057
May 309,719 9,991
June 320,829 10,694
July 324,051 10,802
August 335,573 10,825
September 293,789 9,793
October 299,965 9,676
November 279,911 9,330
December 288,890 9,319

C.4.2 Terminal 1 ADPM and PDPM
The ADPM and PDPM were determined by analyzing the numbers of Terminal 1 daily seats calculated from the Official Airline Guide (OAG) flight
schedules for the peak month (August). The day closest to the peak month’s average daily load determines the ADPM. The day closest to the
peak month’s daily peak determines the PDPM. Table C.4.2 and Table C.4.3 show the daily seat totals, their variance from the monthly average
and the ADPM and PDPM, respectively, for Terminal 1. This analysis determined that August 26 is the ADPM and that August 25 is the PDPM.
Table C.4.2 shows the total number of daily departing seats for all domestic Terminal 1 flights (excluding those of Southwest Airlines) obtained
from the OAG.

Table C.4.2: Average Day and Peak Day of the Peak Month: August 2006
Daily Available Seating
Average day seats: 10,387
Day Available seats Variance from average
1 10,368 -19
2 10,368 -19
3 10,368 -19
4 10,492 105
5 10,388 1
6 10,244 -143
7 10,492 105
8 10,368 -19
9 10,368 -19
10 10,368 -19
11 10,492 105
12 10,388 1
13 10,244 -143
14 10,492 105
15 10,368 -19
16 10,368 -19
17 10,368 -19
18 10,492 105
19 10,388 1
20 10,244 -143
21 10,492 105
22 10,368 -19
23 10,368 -19
24 10,368 -19
25 10,492 105
26 10,388 1
27 10,244 -143
28 10,492 105
29 10,368 -19
30 10,368 -19
31 10,368 -19
Notes:
1. August 25 is the PDPM.
2. August 26 is the ADPM. Source: Official Airline Guide.

The ADPM flight schedule is provided in Table C.4.3. This flight schedule was used in the standard methodology.
Table C.4.3: Oakland Term inal 1 ADPM Schedule

Published carrier Operator Flight num ber Departure tim e Destination Aircraft type Num ber of seats
AA AA 1008 6:26 DFW M80 136
AA AA 1612 8:09 DFW M80 136
AA AA 1092 12:43 DFW M80 136
AA AA 2256 15:06 DFW M80 136
AQ AQ 473 8:00 OGG 73W 124
AQ AQ 441 9:00 HNL 73W 124
AS AS 372 6:40 SNA 734 144
AS AS 355 9:05 SEA 734 144
AS AS 340 12:17 SNA 734 144
AS AS 346 13:40 SNA 734 144
AS AS 365 16:17 PDX 734 144
AS AS 541 17:10 SEA 734 144
AS AS 446 17:20 SNA 734 144
AS AS 459 20:15 SEA 734 144
AS AS 321 21:14 PDX 734 144
AS AS 351 6:00 SEA 739 172
AS AS 343 7:55 SEA 739 172
AS AS 573 10:01 SEA 739 172
AS AS 85 15:33 SEA 739 172
AS AS 378 18:55 SNA 73G 124
AS AS 579 7:20 PDX M80 140
AS AS 357 12:24 SEA M80 140
AS QX 2468 9:10 PDX CR7 70
AS QX 2534 19:10 PDX CR7 70
B6 B6 241 6:30 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 94 7:10 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 474 7:40 BOS 320 156
B6 B6 100 8:50 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 312 9:20 IAD 320 156
B6 B6 472 10:05 BOS 320 156

B6 B6 96 11:05 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 302 12:05 IAD 320 156
B6 B6 102 13:30 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 247 13:30 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 82 15:30 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 253 17:25 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 317 19:20 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 249 20:30 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 110 21:35 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 476 22:35 BOS 320 156
B6 B6 318 22:45 IAD 320 156
B6 B6 270 23:30 FLL 320 156
CO CO 284 0:20 IAH 733 124
CO CO 758 6:30 IAH 738 155
CO CO 231 12:14 IAH 739 167
DL DL 800 7:10 ATL 738 150
DL DL 494 12:05 ATL 738 150
DL DL 709 22:30 ATL 738 150
DL DL 715 13:20 SLC M90 150
DL OO 3796 6:15 SLC CRJ 50
DL OO 3957 9:41 SLC CRJ 50
DL OO 3998 16:02 SLC CRJ 50
DL OO 3928 18:30 SLC CRJ 50
HP HP 855 9:00 PHX 319 124
HP HP 567 6:00 PHX 320 150
HP HP 721 13:46 LAS 320 150
HP HP 191 15:40 PHX 320 150
HP HP 611 20:20 LAS 320 150
HP HP 753 12:29 PHX 733 134
HP YV 6617 9:25 PHX CR9 80
HP YV 6557 18:22 PHX CR9 80
TZ TZ 4627 9:35 OGG 73H 175
TZ TZ 4625 10:55 HNL 73H 175

TZ TZ 4517 17:20 HNL 73H 175
TZ TZ 4523 19:35 ITO 73H 175
UA A296 6515 12:37 LAX CRJ 49
UA A296 6505 16:34 LAX CRJ 49
UA A296 6507 17:35 LAX CRJ 49
UA A296 6501 19:56 LAX CRJ 49
UA UA 1193 6:30 LAX 319 120
UA UA 1230 13:50 ORD 319 120
UA UA 388 22:55 IAD 319 120
UA UA 644 23:00 ORD 319 120
UA UA 1122 6:00 DEN 320 138
UA UA 242 6:20 ORD 320 138
UA UA 386 8:10 DEN 320 138
UA UA 808 15:34 DEN 733 120
UA UA 364 11:05 DEN 735 116
UA UA 738 14:00 DEN 735 116
UA UA 328 16:45 DEN 735 116
Source: Official Airline Guide.
The PDPM flight schedule is provided in Table C.4.4 below. Additional flights, as indicated in the table, were added to the PDPM based on the
Port’s future strategy for Terminal 1. Specifically, flights were added based on feedback from the airlines regarding their future flight strategies as
well as flights for XX Airlines, the new entrant airline that would use two of Southwest Airlines’ four vacated Terminal 1 gates.
Table C.4.4: Oakland Term inal 1 PDPM Schedule

Published carrier Operator Flight num ber Departure tim e Destination Aircraft type Num ber of seats Added to PDPM
AA AA 1008 6:26 DFW M80 136
AA AA 1612 8:09 DFW M80 136
AA AA 9992 10:00 DFW M80 136 *
AA AA 1092 12:43 DFW M80 136
AA AA 2256 15:06 DFW M80 136
AA AA 9993 17:00 DFW M80 136 *
AQ AQ 473 8:00 OGG 73W 124
AQ AQ 441 9:00 HNL 73W 124

AQ AQ 477 10:40 KOA 73W 124
AS AS 351 6:00 SEA 739 172
AS AS 372 6:40 SNA 734 144
AS AS 579 7:20 PDX M80 140
AS AS 343 7:55 SEA 739 172
AS QX 2468 9:00 PDX CR7 70
AS AS 355 9:05 SEA 734 144
AS AS 573 10:01 SEA 739 172
AS AS 340 12:17 SNA 734 144
AS AS 357 12:24 SEA M80 140
AS AS 346 13:40 SNA 734 144
AS AS 9991 14:00 PDX 734 144 *
AS AS 85 15:33 SEA 739 172
AS QX 2409 16:10 SUN DH4 74
AS AS 365 16:17 PDX 734 144
AS AS 541 17:10 SEA 734 144
AS AS 446 17:20 SNA 734 144
AS AS 378 18:55 SNA 73G 124
AS QX 2534 19:10 PDX CR7 70
AS AS 459 20:15 SEA 734 144
AS AS 9990 20:30 SNA 734 144 *
AS AS 321 21:14 PDX 734 144
B6 B6 241 6:30 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 94 7:10 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 474 7:40 BOS 320 156
B6 B6 100 8:50 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 312 9:20 IAD 320 156
B6 B6 472 10:05 BOS 320 156
B6 B6 96 11:05 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 302 12:05 IAD 320 156
B6 B6 102 13:30 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 247 13:30 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 82 15:30 JFK 320 156

B6 B6 253 17:25 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 317 19:20 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 249 20:30 LGB 320 156
B6 B6 110 21:35 JFK 320 156
B6 B6 476 22:35 BOS 320 156
B6 B6 318 22:45 IAD 320 156
B6 B6 270 23:30 FLL 320 156
CO CO 284 0:20 IAH CO 733 124
CO CO 284 0:20 IAH CO 733 124
CO CO 758 6:30 IAH CO 738 155
CO CO 231 12:14 IAH CO 739 167
DL OO 3796 6:15 SLC CRJ 50
DL DL 800 7:10 ATL 738 150
DL OO 3957 9:41 SLC CRJ 50
DL DL 9994 10:30 ATL 738 150 *
DL DL 494 12:05 ATL 738 150
DL DL 1743 13:20 SLC M90 150
DL DL 9995 16:00 ATL 738 150 *
DL OO 3998 16:02 SLC CRJ 50
DL OO 3928 18:30 SLC CRJ 50
DL DL 709 22:30 ATL 738 150
HP HP 567 6:00 PHX 320 150
HP HP 381 7:40 SJD 733 134
HP HP 855 9:00 PHX 319 124
HP YV 6617 9:25 PHX CR9 80
HP HP 753 12:29 PHX 733 134
HP HP 721 13:46 LAS 320 150
HP HP 626 15:40 PHX 733 134
HP YV 6557 18:22 PHX CR9 80
HP HP 539 20:20 LAS 319 124
TZ TZ 4627 9:35 OGG 73H 175
TZ TZ 4625 10:55 HNL 73H 175
TZ TZ 4517 17:20 HNL 73H 175

TZ TZ 4523 19:35 ITO 73H 175
UA UA 1122 6:00 DEN UA 320 138
UA UA 242 6:20 ORD UA 320 138
UA UA 281 7:30 IAD UA 320 138
UA UA 386 8:10 DEN UA 320 138
UA UA 9980 9:40 LAX UA 733 137 *
UA UA 9981 12:00 ORD UA 73G 137 *
UA A296 6515 12:37 LAX CRJ 49
UA UA 1230 13:50 ORD UA 319 120
UA UA 9982 14:50 LAX UA 73G 137 *
UA UA 808 15:34 DEN UA 733 120
UA UA 9983 16:20 ORD UA 733 137 *
UA A296 6505 16:34 LAX CRJ 49
UA A296 6507 17:35 LAX CRJ 49
UA A296 6501 19:56 LAX CRJ 49
UA UA 9996 22:00 ORD UA 320 138 *
UA UA 388 22:55 IAD UA 319 120 *
XX XX 398 6:05 SAN 73G 137 *
XX XX 1380 6:30 LAX 733 137 *
XX XX 825 6:55 ONT 73G 137 *
XX XX 2432 7:25 BUR 733 137 *
XX XX 1233 7:40 SAN 733 137 *
XX XX 1474 7:40 RNO 733 137 *
XX XX 1215 7:50 SEA 73G 137 *
XX XX 997 9:00 MDW 73G 137 *
XX XX 1726 9:35 BUR 733 137 *
XX XX 493 11:00 LAX 733 137 *
XX XX 622 11:10 BOI 733 137 *
XX XX 1409 11:35 LAS 733 137 *
XX XX 1041 11:40 BUR 73G 137 *
XX XX 1284 13:35 BUR 733 137 *
XX XX 530 13:55 LAS 733 137 *
XX XX 1790 14:40 ONT 73G 137 *

XX XX 1385 16:00 LAX 733 137 *
XX XX 907 17:30 LAX 73G 137 *
XX XX 1853 17:35 SNA 73G 137 *
XX XX 1055 18:10 ONT 733 137 *
XX XX 1735 18:15 BUR 733 137 *
XX XX 1381 19:20 SLC 733 137 *
XX XX 1834 19:55 SAN 73G 137 *
XX XX 1795 20:05 ONT 73G 137 *
XX XX 1776 22:00 LAX 73G 137 *
XX XX 530 13:55 LAS 733 137 *
XX XX 1790 14:40 ONT 73G 137 *
XX XX 1385 16:00 LAX 733 137 *
XX XX 907 17:30 LAX 73G 137 *
XX XX 1853 17:35 SNA 73G 137 *
XX XX 1055 18:10 ONT 733 137 *
XX XX 1735 18:15 BUR 733 137 *
XX XX 1381 19:20 SLC 733 137 *
XX XX 1834 19:55 SAN 73G 137 *
XX XX 1795 20:05 ONT 73G 137 *
XX XX 1776 22:00 LAX 73G 137 *
Source: Official Airline Guide.
C.5 Terminal 1 Demand Estimation
C.5.1 Design Load Adjustment Factors
Table C.5.1 summarizes the factors used to determine the baggage load profiles for each of the ADPM and PDPM flight schedules. Load factors
and O&D percentages were directly obtained from the airlines for the month of August. Typical earliness distributions for the domestic airlines
were assumed and later confirmed by the airlines. The number of checked bags per passenger was provided by the airlines. If the airlines were
unable to provide these data, then the data were derived from surveys conducted at the airport in summer 2002.

Table C.5.1: Design Load Adjustm ent Factor Per Airline

Average num ber of
Operator Load Percent originating Percent originating Percent of parties checked bags per
Operator nam e code factor before 9 a.m . after 9 a.m . checking pre-gate passenger
Continental Airlines CO 96% 100% 100% 75% 0.79
Alaska Airlines AS 98 100 100 80 0.71
America West Airlines (domestic HP 83 100 100 84 0.68
destinations)
United Airlines UA 85 100 100 45 0.87
XX Airlines XX 77 100 85 34 0.92
SkyWest Airlines OO 91 100 100 79 0.91
American Airlines AA 98 100 100 90 0.71
JetBlue Airw ays B6 90 100 100 90 0.90
Delta Air Lines DL 89 100 100 92 0.98
America West Airlines (Mexican HP 83 100 100 100 1.30
destinations)
Aloha Airlines AQ 85 100 100 97 1.30
Horizon Air QX 60 100 100 77 0.95
Mesa Airlines YV 85 100 100 51 0.96
ATA Airlines TZ 85 100 80 64 1.23
United Express/ SkyWest Airlines A296 91 100 100 66 0.87
Based on discussions with Airport staff, 1% of all arriving bags were assumed to be out-of-gauge (OOG).
The passenger arrival profiles for the Terminal 1 design day in Figure C.5.1 below were used for passenger arrivals before 9:00 a.m. and after
9:00 a.m.

Figure C.5.1 : Passenger Arrival Profiles
C.5.2 Base Demand Estimation
The baseline CBIS design loads were calculated every 10 minutes over the duration of the design day. A surge factor was calculated according to
the methodology in Chapter 5, and applied to the CBIS design load for each 10-minute time period. These 10-minute results are shown graphically
in Figure C.5.2 and Figure C.5.3 below.
C.5.3 Design Year Demand Estimation
Baggage load profiles for Terminal 1 are provided below. The baggage load profiles calculated using the standard methodology and strategy-
oriented methodology are provided in Figure C.5.2 and Figure C.5.3, respectively.

Figure C.5.2: Standard Methodology Design Load Profile
Figure C.5.3: Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile

A comparison of the two design day baggage flows for Terminal 1 is provided in Table C.5.2 below.
Table C.5.2: Com parison of Design Day Peak Hour Baggage Flow s at Term inal 1
ADPM Standard Methodology PDPM Strategy-Oriented
(8/26/06) Design Day 2013 ADPM (8/25/06) Methodology Design Day
675 bph 938 bph 701 bph 760 bph
Notes:
1. Southwest currently uses its own in-line system located at Terminal 2. Therefore, southwest flights were eliminated from
all baggage flow calculations.
2. The ADPM and PDPM flight schedules used in this analysis were based on OAG data for March 2006 and could vary
from the actual schedules that occurred on those days.
C.5.4 Terminal 1 Design Day Baggage Demand
As Table C.5.2 illustrates, the peak hour baggage flows of the PDPM (701 bags) and ADPM (675 bags) were very similar. The strategy-oriented
methodology increased the peak hour baggage flow by 8% from the PDPM, while the peak hour baggage flows calculated using the standard
methodology grew by 39%. A 39% increase in the predicted peak hour baggage flow is considered to be very aggressive given the operational
constraints of the airlines at Terminal 1.
Based on the above findings and further consultation with Airport staff, the strategy-oriented design day based on the Port’s future strategy for the
Airport was selected as the preferred design day. This design day is used throughout the remainder of this case study.
The design day accepted by the Port is summarized as follows:
• 116 departing operations

• 15,585 departing seats
• 12 gates available (approximately 10 daily turns per gate)
This method for estimating baggage demand differs from the standard methodology described in Section 5.2 and is included here as an example
in which an alternative method can be used if there is sufficient rationale for doing so. The rationale in this case was based on two key
observations. The first observation is that the high gate utilization indicates that the terminal is currently operating at or near maximum capacity.
The second observation is that site constraints limit future gate expansion to two gates. The schedule that was developed represents a reasonable
estimate of the maximum demand that the terminal could accommodate. When using a demand estimation methodology different from that
described in Section 5.2, justification for doing so must be provided to TSA. TSA must review and approve the method and results before design
can proceed.

C.6 Quantitative Assessment
C.6.1 Baseline Demand Estimation
Existing checked baggage screening flows were estimated for each of the seven F3 screening zones. The F3 screening zones and CBRA were
the same for feasible Alternatives 1 and 2. Alternative 3 combines ticket counter groups into common CBRAs. However, each ticket counter group
still feeds its own EDS scanner. Therefore, the baseline demand and design day peak hour surged baggage volume calculations to determine the
required number of EDS machines for each F3 Zone (ticket counter group) are applicable to all of the feasible alternatives.
C.6.1.1 List of Airlines
Table C.6.1 lists Terminal 1 airlines by screening zone. The F1 and F2 Zone groupings have been eliminated, as all F1 and F2 alternatives were
deemed spatially infeasible during the initial assessment of alternatives described in Section C.3.4 above.
Table C.6.1: Com parison of Design Day Baggage Flow s at Term inal 1
Zone Airlines
F31 B6 - JetBlue Airw ays
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F32
CO - Continental Airlines
F33 AA - American Airlines
HP - America West Airlines
F34 YV - Mesa Airlines
US - US Airw ays
AS - Alaska Airlines
F35
QX - Horizon Air
DL - Delta Air Lines
F36 OO - SkyWest Airlines
TZ - ATA Airlines
UA - United Airlines
F37 A296 - United Express
XX - New Entrant Airline
Notes:
1. Refer to Figure C.3.2 for locations of screening zones.
2. Assumed new entrant airline using currently occupied gates that will be available
after completion of the Terminal 2 expansion

The design day flight schedules for each screening zone were created using the strategy-oriented methodology described in Section C.4 above.
These flight schedules identify the maximum number of aircraft seats available and form the basis for the BHS design load profile. Flight
schedules for each screening zone were presented earlier in Table C.4.3 and Table C.4.4.
C.6.1.2 Base Year Demand Estimation
As described in Section 5.2, a separate analysis should be conducted to determine the PDPM for each F3 screening zone based on flight
schedules obtained from the OAG. Because the strategy-oriented methodology was used, and flights were added to the schedule based on
feedback from the airlines, the design day schedule included more seats for each F3 Zone than any of the other days in the peak month (August).
Table C.6.2 below lists the peak month and peak day for each zone.
Table C.6.2: F3 Screening Zone Peak Month and Peak Day

Zone Airlines Peak m onth Peak day
F31 B6 - JetBlue Airw ays August 25
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F32 August 25
F33 AA - American Airlines August 25
F34 YV - Mesa Airlines August 25
US - US Airw ays
F35 August 25
QX - Horizon Air
F36 OO - SkyWest Airlines August 25
TZ - ATA Airlines
F37 A296 - United Express August 25
The Terminal 1 design load adjustment factors and rates identified in Table C.5.1 and the passenger arrival profiles identified on Figure C.5.1 were
applied to the maximum seat capacity identified in each of the PDPM flight schedules for each of the F3 screening zones.

C.6.2 Design Day Demand Estimation
Figure C.6.1 through Figure C.6.7 below are the CBIS design load graphs for the F31 through F37 screening zones based on the strategy-oriented
methodology. The base year CBIS design loads were calculated every 10 minutes over the duration of the design day. A surge factor was
calculated according to PGDS Section Chapter 5 and was applied to the CBIS design load of each 10-minute period.
Figure C.6.1: Figure C.6.2:

Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F31 Zone Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F32 Zone


Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F33 Zone Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F35 Zone

Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F34 Zone Strategy-Orientated Methodology Design Load Profile, F36 Zone

Figure C.6.7:
Strategy-Orientated Methodology Design Load Profile, F37 Zone
Table C.6.3 summarizes the PDPM (2008), PDPM surged, and design day and design day surged peak hour baggage volumes for each of the F3
screening zones.
Table C.6.3: F3 Screening Zone Peak Hour Baggage Volum es

Peak Hour Baggage Peak Hour Baggage Design Day
Zone Airlines PDPM Volum e PDPM Surged Volum e Design Day Surged
F31 B6 - JetBlue Airw ays 236 311 236 311
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F32 188 256 188 256
F33 AA - American Airlines 80 123 84 129
F34 YV - Mesa Airlines 65 105 161 224
US - US Airw ays
F35 164 227 166 229
QX - Horizon Air


F36 OO - SkyWest Airlines 114 166 154 215
TZ - ATA Airlines
F37 A296 - United Express 113 165 186 253
Using the surged peak hour design day baggage volume, EDS, OSR, and ETD equipment requirements can be calculated for each of the three
feasible alternatives based on the high-level methodology described in the following paragraphs, and in more detail in Section 5.6.
C.6.3 Feasible Alternative 1 – CT-80 EDS Machines
This alternative is a conceptual layout for the F3 Zone grouping at Terminal 1. Under this alternative, 17 Reveal CT-80 EDS machines would be
placed directly behind and parallel to the ticket counters. The ticket counters would be divided into seven groups (F3 Zone grouping). Each group
would be served by one, two, or three EDS machines and one CBRA, where combined OSR and ETD screening functions would be performed.
Each grouping of machines would have a single conveyor leading to the baggage makeup area and the CBRA. The differences between
dedicated and combined OSR functionality would be investigated further if Alternative 1 were selected as a preferred alternative; however, given
the highly decentralized nature of this alternative, combined OSR/ETD is likely to be the most cost-effective approach. A conceptual diagram of
Alternative 1 is provided in Figure C.6.8.

Figure C.6.8: Alternative 1 Conceptual Diagram , Term inal
C.6.3.1 EDS Screening Equipment
Alternative 1 is based on the use of Reveal CT-80 EDS machines. The use of CT-80 EDS machines in a mini in-line system yields a throughput of
120 bags per hour (bph). The peak-hour surged baggage volume is divided by the assumed EDS equipment throughput, yielding the quantity of
required EDS machines. The number of required machines should always be rounded up to the next whole EDS machine without considering
redundancy.
As discussed in previous paragraphs, activity at Terminal 1 is constrained by the number of gates and the design year activity was projected
based on this constraint; therefore, additional growth beyond the projected design year levels would not be possible. For this reason, the system
would not need additional flexibility to accommodate growth beyond the design year. Given the decentralized nature of Terminal 1 mini in-line
systems, redundancy would be provided through the use of nearby systems. While the demand profiles indicate that peaks generally occur early in
the morning, some of the EDS machines are not fully utilized and could offer spare capacity if needed.
Redundant equipment is only cost-effective for high-throughput and medium-throughput in-line systems, where machine downtime can have a
significant effect on system performance because of the high throughput of each EDS machine.

Table C.6.4 indicates the number of EDS machines required for Alternative 1.
Table C.6.4: Alternative 1 EDS Machine Capacity Calculations

Peak Hour Bag EDS Throughput # EDS With
Zone Airlines Volum e (bags/hour) # EDS Redundancy
F31 B6 - JetBlue Airw ays 311 120 3 Same
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F32 256 120 3 Same
F33 AA - American Airlines 129 120 2 Same
F34 YV - Mesa Airlines 224 120 2 Same
US - US Airw ays
F35 229 120 2 Same
QX - Horizon Air
F36 OO - SkyWest Airlines 215 120 2 Same
TZ - ATA Airlines
F37 A296 - United Express 253 120 3 Same
C.6.3.2 OSR/ETD Screening Equipment

ETD-Screened Baggage: As a mini in-line system, Alternative 1 is based on the use of OSR and ETD screening functions combined and
performed by the same ETD screener with individual CBRAs dedicated to each screening zone or system. In general, an ETD machine would be
shared between two screeners. Thus, the ratio of ETD screening stations to ETD equipment was assumed to be 2 to 1.
The formula for calculating the combined OSR and ETD station requirements is explained below in accordance with Section 5.6. Please note that
the values used in these calculations are based on the equipment assumptions listed in Chapter 3. The calculation for screening zone F31 is
shown below. Similar calculations were performed for the other six screening zones.
NOTE: All EDS false alarm rates and OSR clear rates are notional and are used for this example only. False alarm rates are considered SSI and
can be requested from TSA, along with OSR clear rates.

The number of combined OSR and ETD screening stations required for zone F31:
Table C.6.5 indicates the quantity of combined OSR/ETD stations and ETD machines required for Alternative 1.
Table C.6.5: Alternative 1 OSR/ETD Equipm ent Calculations

Peak Hour EDS Throughput # EDS With Num ber of com bined Num ber of ETD
Zone Airlines Bag Volum e (bags/hour) # EDS Redundancy OSR/ETD stations m achines
F31 B6 - JetBlue Airw ays 311 120 3 Same 3 2
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F32 256 120 3 Same 3 2
F33 AA - American Airlines 129 120 2 Same 2 1
F34 YV - Mesa Airlines 224 120 2 Same 2 1
US - US Airw ays
F35 229 120 2 Same 2 1
QX - Horizon Air
F36 OO - SkyWest Airlines 215 120 2 Same 2 1
TZ - ATA Airlines
F37 A296 - United Express 253 120 3 Same 3 2
Oversize and OOG Baggage: Based on discussions with Airport staff and analysis of the CT-80 and L-3 eXaminer SX design specifications, it
was assumed that 1% of all checked baggage at Terminal 1 is either oversize or OOG. These bags would be manually carried by the ticketing
agent to the opposite end of the CBIS and given to TSA agents working at the ETD stations for directed trace screening.

C.6.4 Feasible Alternative 2 – L-3 eXaminer SX EDS Machines
This alternative is a conceptual design for the F3 Zone grouping at Terminal 1. As shown in Figure C.6.9, seven L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines
would be used under this alternative. The ticket counters would be divided into the same seven ticket counter groups as under Alternative 1.
However, each group would be served by one EDS machine integrated downstream of the ticket counter take-away conveyor. This alternative was
further split into two parts, Alternative 2A and Alternative 2B. Under Alternative 2A, OSR and ETD screening functions would be combined, similar
to Alternative 1. Under Alternative 2B, dedicated OSR screening would be conducted in a separate screening room. The conceptual diagrams for
Alternative 2A and Alternative 2B are the same, except for the remote OSR room, which is already built as part of the existing in-line system in
Terminal 2.
Figure C.6.9: Alternatives 2A and 2B Conceptual Diagram , Term inal 1
Alternatives 2 and 3 are based on the use of L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines. As each ticket counter line under both alternatives would feed an
EDS scanner, the EDS equipment requirements would be the same under both alternatives. The use of L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines in a mini

in-line system yields a throughput of 350 bags per hour per machine. The peak-hour surged baggage volume is divided by the assumed EDS
equipment throughput, yielding the quantity of required EDS machines. In accordance with the PGDS, machine requirements should be rounded
up to the next whole EDS machine exclusive of redundancy considerations.
Given the decentralized nature of the Terminal 1 mini in-line systems, redundancy would be provided through the use of nearby systems. While
the demand profiles indicate that peaks generally occur early in the morning, some of the EDS machines are not fully utilized and could offer spare
capacity if needed.
Redundant equipment is only cost-effective for high-throughput and medium-throughput in-line systems, where machine downtime can have a
significant effect on system performance because of the high speed of each EDS machine.
Table C.6.6 indicates the quantity of EDS machines that would be required for Alternatives 2 and 3.
Table C.6.6: Alternatives 2 and 3 EDS Machine Calculations

Peak Hour Bag EDS Throughput # EDS With
Zone Airlines Volum e (bags/hour) # EDS Redundancy
F31 B6 - JetBlue Airw ays 311 350 1 Same
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F32 256 350 1 Same
F33 AA - American Airlines 129 350 1 Same
F34 YV - Mesa Airlines 224 350 1 Same
US - US Airw ays
F35 229 350 1 Same
QX - Horizon Air
F36 OO - SkyWest Airlines 215 350 1 Same
TZ - ATA Airlines
F37 A296 - United Express 253 350 1 Same

C.6.4.2 OSR and ETD Screening Equipment
Alternative 2A, Combined OSR/ETD
As a mini in-line system, Alternative 2A is based on combined OSR and ETD screening functions that would be performed by the same ETD
screener, with individual CBRAs dedicated to each screening zone or system. In general, an ETD machine would be shared between two
screeners. Thus, the ratio of ETD screening stations to ETD equipment was assumed to be 2 to 1.
The formula for calculating the combined OSR and ETD station requirements is explained below in accordance with Section 5.6. Please note that
all of the values used in these calculations are based on the equipment assumptions listed in Chapter 3. False alarm rates are considered SSI and
can be requested from TSA. The calculation for screening zone F31 is shown below. Similar calculations were performed for the other six
screening zones.
The number of combined OSR and ETD screening stations required for zone F31:
Alternative 2B, Dedicated OSR Screening
As a mini in-line system, Alternative 2B is based on the use of dedicated OSR and ETD screening functions that would be performed by different
screeners, with individual CBRAs dedicated to each screening zone or system. In general, an ETD machine would be shared between two
screeners. Thus, the ratio of ETD screening stations to ETD equipment was assumed to be 2 to 1.
The formula for calculating dedicated OSR and ETD station requirements is explained below in accordance with Section 5.6. Please note that the
values used in these calculations are based on the equipment assumptions listed in Chapter 3. The calculation for screening zone F31 is shown
below. Similar calculations were performed for the other six screening zones.
NOTE: All EDS false alarm rates and OSR clear rates are notional and used for this example only. False alarm rates are considered SSI and,
along with OSR clear rates, can be requested from TSA.

The number of separate OSR and ETD screening stations required:
Table C.6.7 indicates the quantity of combined OSR/ETD stations and ETD machines that would be required for Alternative 2.
Table C.6.7: Alternative 2 OSR/ETD Equipm ent Calculations

Alt. 2B # Alt. 2B #
Peak Hour EDS Throughput # EDS With Alt. 2A # Com bined Separate OSR Separate ETD
Airlines Bag Volum e (bags/hour) # EDS Redundancy OSR/ETD Stations Machines Machines
B6 - JetBlue Airw ays 311 350 1 Same 2 1 1
AQ - Aloha Airlines
256 350 1 Same 2 1 1
AA - American Airlines 129 350 1 Same 2 1 1
HP - America West
Airlines
224 350 1 Same 2 1 1
YV - Mesa Airlines
US - US Airw ays
229 350 1 Same 2 1 1
QX - Horizon Air
OO - SkyWest Airlines 215 350 1 Same 2 1 1
TZ - ATA Airlines
A296 - United Express 253 350 1 Same 2 1 1

ETD Screening for Oversize and Out of Gauge Baggage
Based on discussions with Airport staff and analysis of the CT-80 and L-3 eXaminer SX design specifications, it was assumed that 1% of all
checked baggage at Terminal 1 is either oversize or OOG. These bags would be manually carried by the ticketing agent to the opposite end of the
CBIS and given to TSA agents working at the ETD stations for directed trace screening.
C.6.5 Feasible Alternative 3 – L-3 eXaminer SX EDS Machines
This alternative is also a conceptual design for the F3 Zone grouping at Terminal 1. Seven L-3 eXaminer SX EDS machines would be used. The
ticket counters would be divided into seven ticket counter groups. Each group would be served by a single EDS machine integrated downstream
of the ticket counter take-away conveyor. ETD screening and baggage makeup functions would be partially consolidated because a common
CBRA and makeup area would serve every two EDS machines. In addition, OSR would be performed remotely, while ETD screening functions
would be performed in the CBRA, as Alternative 3 represents a more staff-efficient screening method that could be effectively used when the CBIS
design calls for common use CBRAs. A conceptual diagram of Alternative 3 is provided in Figure C.6.10.
Figure C.6.10: Alternative 3 Conceptual Diagram , Term inal 1

C.6.5.1 Baseline Demand for Combined CBRAs
Surged PDPM for the Combined CBRAs
Alternative 3 combines ticket counter groups into common CBRAs for OSR and ETD screening. There are currently three common CBRAs
consisting of screening zones F31-3, F34-5, and F36-7. See earlier Figure C.3.1. To accurately calculate the design day peak baggage flow that
would reach the common CBRAs, separate baseline demand and peak day demand calculations must be run based on the combined airline and
flight schedules for each common CBRA.
The peak month and the ADPM for each CBRA zone should be calculated if the standard methodology is used, as shown in Table C.6.8.
However, as the strategy-oriented methodology was used, wherein the design day was created based on feedback from the airlines, this approach
would not apply.
Table C.6.8: Com bined CBRAs Peak Month and Peak Day
Zone Airlines Peak m onth Peak day
B6 - JetBlue Airw ays
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F31-3 August 25
AA - American Airlines
YV - Mesa Airlines
F34-5 US - US Airw ays August 25
QX - Horizon Air
OO - SkyWest Airlines
TZ - ATA Airlines
F36-7 August 25
A296 - United Express
The Terminal 1 design load adjustment factors and rates identified earlier in Table C.5.1 and the passenger arrival profiles identified in Figure
C.5.1 were applied to the maximum seat capacity identified in each of the PDPM flight schedules for each of the combined CBRA zones.

Design Day Demand Estimation for Combined CBRA
Figure C.6.11 through Figure C.6.13 below represent the CBIS design load graphs for the F31-3, F34-5, and F36-7 screening zones. The base year
CBIS design loads were calculated every 10 minutes over the duration of the design day. A surge factor was calculated according to PGDS
Section Chapter 5, and applied to the CBIS design load of each 10-minute period. These 10-minute results are shown graphically in the following
charts.

Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F31-3 Zone Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F34-5 Zone

Figure C.6.13:
Strategy-Oriented Methodology Design Load Profile, F36-7 Zone
Table C.6.9 summarizes the PDPM, PDPM surged, and design day peak hour baggage volumes for each of the combined CBRA zones.
Using the surged peak hour design day baggage volume, EDS, OSR, and ETD equipment requirements can be calculated for each of the three
combined CBRA zones based on the high-level methodology described in Section 5.6.
Table C.6.9: Com bined CBRA Zone Peak Hour Baggage Volum es
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F31-3 412 511 419 520
YV - Mesa Airlines
F34-5 US - US Airw ays 201 271 326 415
QX - Horizon Air


TZ - ATA Airlines
F36-7 175 240 273 354
See Table C.6.6 for EDS screening equipment for Alternative 3.
C.6.5.3 OSR and ETD Screening Equipment
Dedicated OSR Screening
As a mini in-line system, Alternative 3 is based on the use of dedicated OSR and ETD screening functions performed by different screeners in
each of the combined CBRA zones. In general, an ETD machine would be shared between two screeners. Thus, the ratio of ETD screening
stations to ETD equipment was assumed to be 2 to 1.
The formula for calculating dedicated OSR and ETD station requirements is explained below in accordance with Section 5.6. Please note that the
values used in these calculations are based on the equipment assumptions listed in Chapter 3. The calculation for combined screening zone F31-3
is shown below. Similar calculations were performed for the other two combined screening zones.
NOTE: All EDS false alarm rates and OSR clear rates are notional and are used for this example only. False alarm rates are considered SSI and,
along with OSR clear rates, can be requested from TSA.
Table C.6.10 indicates the quantity of combined OSR/ETD stations and ETD machines that would be required for Alternative 3.

Table C.6.10: Com bined CBRA OSR/ETD Calculations

Peak Hour EDS Throughput # EDS With Num ber of com bined Num ber of ETD
Zone Airlines Bag Volum e (bags/hour) # EDS Redundancy OSR/ETD stations m achines
AQ - Aloha Airlines
F31-3 520 350 3 Same 1 2
YV - Mesa Airlines
F34-5 US - US Airw ays 415 350 2 Same 1 2
QX - Horizon Air
TZ - ATA Airlines
F36-7 354 350 2 Same 1 2
C.7 Analysis and Evaluation
The alternatives were evaluated using both qualitative assessment based on expert judgment and quantitative analysis of the life-cycle costs of
the alternatives.
C.7.1 Qualitative Assessment
Table C-18 shows the qualitative assessment matrix and criteria used to assess all spatially feasible alternatives for Terminal 1. Several qualitative
criteria were used to assess the alternatives based on expert judgment, namely:
• Customer level of service – the effect that each alternative would have on the passenger’s experience at the Airport.
• Effect on Airport operations – the reliability and maintainability of the EDS equipment and the contingency procedures that could be
implemented if a machine were inoperative during a peak period, as well as the effect that the alternative would have on the airlines.
• Economic considerations – the costs associated with TSA staff salaries and with implementing and maintaining the alternative.
• Design criteria – the effect that the alternative would have on existing facilities as well as the ease with which the alternative could be
constructed or expanded.

Results of the qualitative assessment are shown in Table C.7.1 by alternative.
Table C.7.1: Qualitative Assessment Matrix

Criterion Alternative 1 Alternative 2A Alternative 2B Alternative 3
Screening capacity Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate
Customer level of service Affected Same Same Same
Operations - - - -
Utilization of EDS equipment Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Reliability and availability Low er Moderate Moderate Moderate
Contingency operations Adequate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Maintainability Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate
Impact to airline operations Moderate Moderate Moderate Higher
Design - - - -
Impact on existing facilities Higher Low er Low er Moderate
Expandability More difficult Feasible Feasible Feasible
Constructability and phasing More difficult Moderate Moderate More difficult
All alternatives would provide adequate screening capacity, meet performance standards, be equally maintainable, and provide moderate EDS
utilization (typical of decentralized alternatives).
• Alternative 1. Alternative 1 would have the greatest effect on customer level of service because lobby space would be reduced by
approximately 40% to accommodate the EDS machines behind the ticket counters. The maintainability of this alternative would be the
lowest because it would involve the highest number of EDS machines. Alternative 1 was determined to be the worst performing alternative
from economic and design standpoints as it would have high capital, maintenance, and operating costs; require the highest number of
TSA screeners; have the greatest effect on existing facilities; and would be the most difficult to construct, phase, and expand.
• Alternative 2A. Alternative 2A was rated the best in terms of the evaluation criteria. It was determined that Alternative 2A is the most
suitable type of checked baggage screening system to be implemented in Terminal 1. Alternative 2A has cost and operational
characteristics consistent with the Port's expansion plans and is sufficiently flexible to quickly adapt to changes (e.g., different EDS
equipment).
• Alternative 2B. Alternative 2B was rated the second best in terms of the evaluation criteria. Alternative 2B would not be as well suited to
the Airport as Alternative 2A because of the higher capital cost required to install the remote OSR. Also the 95th percentile bag time in
system was 8.90 minutes compared with 6.34 minutes for Alternative 2A. Although fewer bags were processed in the Baggage Inspection
Room for Alternative 2B than for Alternative 2A, Alternative 2B still had a higher 95th percentile bag time in system because all of the bags

that were sent to the Baggage Inspection Room were subject to a directed ETD search, which requires a longer processing time than the
combined OSR/ETD search performed under Alternative 2A.
• Alternative 3. Alternative 3 would have a great effect on airline operations because of the combined baggage makeup areas, which are
not airline specific. In addition, the Baggage Inspection Room would not be easily accessible, and that may create operational and security
difficulties. Alternative 3 also has high capital costs; is difficult to construct and phase; and would have a significant effect on the airline
baggage makeup operations because airlines would be required to share baggage carousels. In addition, Alternative 3 would occupy
more space because of the increased number of automated conveyors.
Alternatives 2A and 2B had the highest scores, while Alternative 1 had the lowest score among the alternatives based on the above high-level
qualitative assessment and expert judgment.
C.7.2 Quantitative Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
A life cycle cost analysis of the alternatives was then conducted. Based on the LCC analysis of each alternative, the preliminary ranking, and
discussions with TSA and Airport staff, a decision was made as to the optimal solution that would best meet the Airport’s needs while remaining a
viable cost-effective alternative for TSA.
The LCC analysis was based on the methodology presented in Chapter 11. A real discount rate of 7% per year and an analysis period of 20 years
were used. The costs used in the LCC analysis were based on the costs provided in Chapter 11 unless otherwise stated. A summary of the costs
is provided in Table C.7.2.

Table C.7.2: Unit Costs Used in the Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Alternative 1 Alternative 2A Alternative 2B Alternative 3
Life cycle costs CT-80 L-3 eXam iner SX L-3 eXam iner SX L-3 eXam iner SX
Capital Costs - - - -
Screening equipment purchase $285,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000
Screening equipment installation 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Screening equipment refurbishment 80,000 85,000 85,000 85,000
Screening equipment replacement 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
EDS cost of removal 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Required infrastructure modifications to the building and BHS 350,000 650,000 700,000 2,100,000
Operating and Maintenance Costs - - - -
Screening equipment maintenance $28,500 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000
Screening equipment pow er consumption 1.6 kWh 4.4 kWh 4.4 kWh 4.4 kWh
Incremental BHS maintenance costs (including additional 33,040 33,040 33,040 33,040
maintenance personnel)
Notes:
1. All of the costs listed are unit costs per machine.
2. Costs not provided in the Planning Guidelines and Design Standards, but rather determined using expert judgment.
3. The costs vary by alternative because some alternatives require significantly more infrastructure modifications than others. Whenever necessary, expert judgment
was used.
The methodology used to calculate the LCCs is described below:
• It was assumed that installation of the in-line system would begin in 2007 and that the DBU of the in-line system would be in 2008.
• All EDS machines were assumed to be refurbished after seven years and replaced with new machines four years later.
• All maintenance costs were assumed to be covered by the manufacturer during the first year of operation of a new EDS machine.
• Using expert judgment, incremental BHS operating costs were calculated at 10% of the screening equipment operating costs.
• It was assumed that the EDS machine residual value equals the disposal cost of the EDS machine. As these two costs balance each
other, they were not included in the calculations.
Based on the assumptions and costs provided above, the total net present value of the LCCs for each of the alternatives is presented in Table
C.7.3. Please refer to Table C.7.4 for more detailed calculations.

Table C.7.3: Alternative Life Cycle Costs

Alternatives Life cycle costs
Alternative 1 $41,348,128
Alternative 2A 25,272,491
Alternative 2B 22,771,578
Alternative 3 31,577,852
Note: Life-cycle costs are present value costs over 20 years.
The lowest LCC for Terminal 1 was for Alternative 2B ($22.77 million), with Alternative 2A having the next lowest LCC ($25.27 million).
The difference in LCC between Alternatives 2A and 2B was relatively small (the LCC for Alternative 2B is approximately 10% lower than for
Alternative 2A), so these two alternatives were kept for presentation to stakeholders while Alternatives 1 and 3 were eliminated from further
consideration.
As the LCCs for Alternatives 2A and 2B were similar and Alternative 2A was rated as qualitatively superior to Alternative 2B (Table C.7.1),
Alternative 2A was selected as the preferred alternative for Terminal 1. Note that this decision was based on input from stakeholders, assessment
of the qualitative effects of the systems, and the marginal difference in LCCs between Alternatives 2A and 2B. Therefore, while Alternative 2A
would be slightly more expensive from a life-cycle cost perspective, the qualitative benefits of the system outweighed the slightly higher life-cycle
cost.

Table C.7.4 Term inal 1, Alternative 1, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.4 (page 2 of 2): Term inal 1, Alternative 1, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.5: Term inal 1, Alternative 2a, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.5 (page 2 of 2): Term inal 1, Alternative 2a, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.6: Term inal 1, Alternative 2b, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.6 (page 2 of 2): Term inal 1, Alternative 2b, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.7: Term inal 1, Alternative 3, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Table C.7.7 (page 2 of 2): Term inal 1, Alternative 3, Life Cycle Cost Analysis

C.8 Final Considerations
The development of conceptual alternatives and selection of the preferred solutions for any airport terminal is an iterative process based both on
quantifiable analysis and good judgment. Terminal space constraints, airline preferences, and TSA security and operational considerations play
major roles in determining which zoning schemes can be successfully translated into a feasible concept. Cost considerations are fundamental in
determining which concepts should be eliminated in the process of selecting the preferred alternatives.
In this particular case study, the preferred alternative had the second lowest cost as identified by the life cycle cost analysis, the best design, and
the fewest operational effects on the Airport, as identified in the qualitative assessment matrix (Table C.7.1).

APPENDIX D COMMISSIONING AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS
APPENDIX D:
COMMISSIONING AND EVALUATION TESTING

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems D-1 August 21, 2020
D.1 Commissioning and Evaluation Overview
The system will be evaluated using various test procedures to evaluate system performance and suitability. Additionally, the test facilitators and
TSA will determine compliance with the requirements established in the PGDS. Each CBIS tested will be tested using a test plan approved by
TSA. This test plan will not be shared with the ILDT or Airport Teams. As each CBIS is unique, the ISAT tests may be a subset of this overall suite
and may contain additional or modified tests as needed to evaluate the individual CBIS for adherence to the requirements.
The test and evaluation information described herein apply to all CBIS (In-line and Mini In-line), and associated BHSs, including the delivery to and
takeaway from the screening system unless specifically stated otherwise.
The physical, programming, networking, and reports of the entire CBIS will be in final operational configuration prior to ISAT. This includes (unless
waivered):
• All induction points tied in (unless phased)
• All BHS conveyors, pathways, and components are operational (CBRA lines, OOG/OS lines, RI lines, clear outbound paths, BMAs, ATRs,
etc.), including legacy BHS components delivering bags to the CBIS and taking bags away from the CBIS
• All BHS interfaces operational (including manual encode stations; IQ; E-stops; BRPs, BISs, and BSDs; jam control stations; etc.)
• All BHS functionality (e.g., bag allocation, load leveling, merge logic, purge logic, and other conditional performance programming)
• All EDS components (EDS, CI, PVS, SVS) installed and networked in final—not temporary—configuration, to include redundancy, if
applicable
• BHS network in final configuration accessible via the BHS control room and its interfaces, including redundancy, if applicable
• Complete BHS/CBIS reports
TSA uses bag sets of various sizes to simulate stream of commerce bags during ISAT. The ILDT should ensure bags of varying sizes are used in
its pre-testing. Table D.1.1 shows bag dimensions (LxWxH) of a nominal TSA bag set. Depending on the bag set and local policy, average bag
lengths differ between sites. Bag weights vary from 5 to 50 pounds.

Table D.1.1: TSA ISAT Bag Dim ensions

Length Width Height
Bag Type (inches) (inches) (inches)
1 27 19 10
2 24 15 9
3 22 12 12
4 26 17 10
5 22 15 9
6 21 14 7.5
7 27 19 10
8 24 15 9
9 22 12 12
10 28 23 8.5
11 27 19 10.5
12 23 21 8
13 35 16 15
14 30 15 10
15 17 9 7
16 30 18 18
17 43 16 6
18 52 16 6
In addition to the specific tests described in this appendix, the reporting capabilities defined in Section 12.13 will be reviewed to verify that all
required reports have been provided and that the reports are accurate.
CBIS Testing is divided into four suites. These suites are:
1. Introductory Testing
2. Detailed Testing
3. System-wide Testing
4. Operational Run-In

When any change to the CBIS is required following issuance of the TRN through the completion of ISAT, a change request will be submitted as
defined in Section 4.2.2 and Section A.5.
The specific tests described in Section D.2.1 below contain requirements to verify that the reporting capabilities defined in Section 12.13 have
been provided and that the reports are accurate, as well as that the BHS displays in the CBRA meet the requirements defined in Section 14.3.3.
Testing will confirm other PGDS requirements that include evaluation of CBIS performance relative to the requirements set forth in the following
PGDS Sections and submitted procedures and processes:
Section Requirem ents Verified
8.3.4 Procedures Requirements

• Bag Induction Procedures
• CBIS Fail-safe Procedures
• Bag Jam and Fault Clearing Procedures
10.3.4 PLC Code

• Test and Commissioning (Process, Support, Final Configuration)
12.3.2 Tail-to-Head Bag Spacing

• The speed of the queue belt immediately before and after the EDS unit as bags transition into and
out of the EDS shall comply w ith the EDS Integration Manual

• Item 2: Separated clear and non-clear bags shall not be commingled

• The automatic recirculation of bags shall not be designed, either pre-EDS screening or post-EDS
screening, except for automated reinsertion lines in the CBRA as show n in Chapter 12.

• Non-cleared bags shall only be reinserted upstream of the STZ

• All PECs shall be clear of obstructions including draft curtains
16.8.3 Specific STIP Design Requirement
• All ETDs and stand-alone EDSs shall have 1 “dual telecommunications outlet”

12.13.5 BHS Reporting During Maintenance

• BHS Reporting capabilities shall be designed such that logging of system events and bag counts are
able to be disabled for maintenance activities.
14.2 CBRA Layout and Equipment
• CBRA layout and Equipment Details
• Ergonomic Dimensions of CBRA Interfaces and Component
Chapter 13 OSR Planning

• OSR Components
13.4.3 OSR Room Layout
7.5.3.1 Programming Logic (Contingency Planning)
A.4 Daily CBIS Report Examples
A.5 CBIS Change Request
A.7 Request for PGDS Variance Template
D.2 Introductory Testing
Introductory tests will be performed on each spur line containing an EDS. Bags should be inducted from the point of acquisition of tracking through
the EDS to the points of diversion to the Clear/outbound lines and into the CBRA. During testing bags should be inducted from their natural points
of origin (e.g., ticket counters, curbside) at least once prior to ISAT.
For all EDS, bag spacing—both tail-to-head and head-to-head—should be optimized to meet the required throughput rate and still maintain
positive bag tracking. The ILDT will ensure that all tracking and spacing is compliant with the OEM’s Site Planning and Installation guidelines.
D.2.1 CBRA Equipment and Functionality Test
Purpose: The CBRA Equipment and Functionality Test will be performed to assess compliance with PGDS or TSA-approved CBRA requirements
relating to CBRA equipment, layout, and functionality and controls in Normal and AQM scenarios.
Procedure: This test will be performed in three parts run contiguously as a single test to observe and evaluate the CBIS in distinct functionality
regimes.

Part 1, Normal Queueing and Automated Re-Insertion:
• CBRA Configuration:
Enable two or three BIS, excluding the first/last positions. Ensure that there are one or two intermediate queues between the enabled
BIS.
• Induct enough alarm bags to exercise Normal Queuing logic and invoke use of the intermediate queues. The induction rate and quantities
should be controlled so that queuing logic upstream of enabled BRPs, outside of CBRA, and at intermediate queues can be distinctly
assessed. During this part of the test, Normal queuing priority, automatic reinsert functionality, and the display details and display options
for most bag types will be verified. In addition, SVS information will be confirmed for both the Alarmed bag arrival (via automatic lookup)
and Unknown bag arrival (via scan gun operation).
Create differing bag statuses. Of the bags arriving at enabled BRPs, they should possess differing statuses consisting of those
described in PGDS (i.e., Alarmed, Unknown – lost alarm bag, OOG, Timeout, and EDS Error – as applicable).
o For Unknown status, manipulate a bag post EDS
o For EDS Errored, enable an EDS E-stop when one or 2 alarm bags are in the scan plane of the EDS. Other methods to generate
the EDS Errored status may be used.
o Use an OOG bag only if OOG bags are routed to CBRA and it’s a valid status
o For a Timeout bag, advise PVS Operator to let one Alarmed bag to timeout on-screen in OSR.
Once the target bags occupy the enabled BRP/BIS, document and verify that the Unknown, EDS Errored, and OOG bag present the
option for automatic “Reinsert” on the BIS BSD.
While processing bags from BRPs, confirm that bags are assigned to the BRP from which a bag was most recently cleared, or first
logged in BRP, whichever is available first.
Ensure that the remaining Timeout and Alarmed bags on the BIS are not cleared, i.e., the BIS remains occupied.
Part 2, AQM and Manual Re-Insertion:
• CBRA functionality and manual reinsert logic/functionality during AQM will be verified.
Induct additional Alarmed bags, based on how many intermediate queues are in-between the BIS that were enabled in Part 1. For
CBIS possessing large CBRAs, enough bags will be inducted in this part of the test to permit manual reinsertion from both the RL
queue as well as the center queue.
Create several Unknown status bags to be processed from BRPs under AQM and Normal modes.

These bags should exceed the storage capacity remaining in the CBRA and thus force AQM to occur on one or two, but not all BRPs.
Induct additional bags, if needed.
• Use the bags to perform a manual reinsertion from the next to last BIS/BRP under AQM.
• The furthest downstream enabled BRP should not be under AQM. Confirm this at the BSD and conduct auto-reinsertion for an Unknown
Bag at this location.
Part 3, Resumption of Normal Queueing, BIS E-Stops, and Other Display Assessment:
• During this part of the test, initially no additional bags are inducted, but all remaining bags are cleared per SOPs and the resolution of
AQM on applicable BRP/BISs can be observed.
• Near the end of the resolution of inducted bags, one of the BIS E-Stops should be selected to confirm expected functionality and all bags
statuses should be maintained.
• The display status and options for the remaining bag arrival types not already confirmed will be created while queued bags are processed
following CBRA clearing procedures.
Clear Bag Routing to CBRA: Configure the CBIS final decision point to divert all bags to CBRA and induct an Alarmed Bag that will be
cleared by OSR with 5-10 seconds of viewing time remaining. Confirm BSD status and other display details.
Requirements Verified: The performance of the system is judged against the requirements set forth in the following PGDS Sections:
12.13 CBIS Reporting
14.2 CBRA Layout and Equipment
14.5 CBRA Functionality
14.6 Workstation Sequence of Operations
D.2.2 Travel Time/On-Screen Resolution Test
Purpose: The Travel Time/OSR Test will be performed to ensure that enough conveyor travel distances are available for the use of OSR
protocols. This test will also evaluate bag routing and BHS/EDS network interfaces in accordance with OSR-related settings on the EDS during
late and absent Level 2 OSR screening decisions or when a high percentage of alarm bags are identified during Level 1 screening.

Procedure 1 and Procedure 2 are conducted for each EDS line. Procedures 3, 4, and 5 will be performed a minimum of once per CBIS.
Procedure: The CBIS displays and reporting databases will be evaluated to confirm appropriate bag routing and status information based on OSR
decisions.
• Procedure 1, Operator Timeout: A Suspect bag is screened through the EDS and an OSR Decision is withheld indefinitely, forcing an
EDS decision based on the decision time setting. Measure the length of time between when the bag’s leading edge passes through the
exit from the EDS and the final diversion trigger point to the CBRA without holding bags. Measure the duration from image population at
the PVS to when the image times out and either drops from the PVS display or provides a visual indication to the Operator that the OSR
time has expired. If bags are held while in transit to an active decision point (HSD or Vertical Sortation Unit (VSU)), the hold time is
recorded.
• Procedure 2, Delayed Operator Decision: A Suspect bag is screened through the EDS and an OSR Clear Decision is withheld until the
image has been displayed at the OSR PVS for the maximum time prior to the decision time expiring. Confirm that the Operator screening
decision was correctly transmitted, received, and displayed at the EDS and BHS interfaces and accurately recorded within the EDS/BHS
reporting systems.
• Procedure 3, Operator Timeout/Image Queue Timeout (CTX 9800 Only):
Part A: With a single PVS active and an Operator logged-in, two sequential Suspect bags are screened through an EDS. The OSR
Decisions are withheld indefinitely, forcing an EDS timeout decision on the bag displayed on the PVS and the bag in the MUX image
queue, based on the CTX BMTT setting. The EDS Motion Control (MC) log or Communications Report disposition codes will be
compared with BHS-received dispositions and the CBRA displays to verify compliance with EDS Integration Guides and PGDS CBRA
display requirements. (The Procedure 3 Test, Part A, is conducted to gather system configuration data only and will not be rated as
Pass/Fail.)
Part B: Configure the EDS Decision Mode setting to Operator. With a single PVS active and an Operator logged-in, two sequential
Suspect bags are screened through an EDS. The OSR Decisions are withheld indefinitely, forcing an EDS timeout decision on the bag
displayed on the PVS and the bag in the MUX image queue, based on the CTX BMTT setting. The EDS Motion Control (MC) log or
Communications Report disposition codes will be compared with BHS-received dispositions and the CBRA displays to verify
compliance with EDS Integration Guides and PGDS CBRA display requirements. Reconfigure the EDS Decision mode setting to
Automatic.
• Procedure 4, Multiple Alarmed Objects (L3 OptiNet CBIS Only): One non-Clear bag will be screened with two or more distinct alarm
objects. When the image is displayed for Level 2 (PVS) processing, one of the alarmed objects will remain unresolved (not cleared). After
all other alarm objects are cleared, the bag should be Suspected at the PVS. This procedure will be repeated a second time, except with
the image allowed to time-out onscreen instead of a Level 2 Operator decision. The number of alarmed objects identified in each SVS
image will be recorded and compared with PVS decisions. This procedure will confirm whether PVS settings are consistent with
anticipated TSA operations regarding how threat-level versus bag-level OSR decisions are reported and executed. Each image, alarmed
and timed-out, will be recalled at every available SVS in the CBRA to confirm that only Alarmed objects not cleared at the PVS remain as

threats requiring Level 3 inspection. Alarm objects that were cleared at the PVS should not be highlighted as Alarms in the SVS image.
(The Procedure 4 Test is conducted to gather system configuration information only and will not be rated as Pass/Fail.) Note: If an EDS
OEM technician can demonstrate that the configuration setting associated with each SVS is set appropriately relative to cleared objects
displayed in alarm images on the SVS, this test need not be performed.
• Procedure 5, No Final EDS Disposition: This procedure will confirm that bag routing and status display in the CBRA is only based on
the EDS Final Disposition message and the bag is not routed or displayed based on the EDS Exit Disposition Message.
• CTX-MUX V2 Series Only: Configure the selected EDS Timeout Value Settings to “No Timeout” (Decision Mode - Operator/Show Mode -
Show All) and process one Clear bag through the EDS and CBIS decision points while withholding any Level 2 Operator Decision.
Confirm the bag is routed to the CBRA and the appropriate decision message (EDS Final Disposition message
[CTX_Decision_Bag_Disposition], not EDS Exit Disposition Message [CTX_Exit_Decision_Status]) is reflected in the EDS log file or EDS
to BHS Communications Report.
• L3 OptiNet Only: Increase the selected EDS Time-to-Live (TTL) setting to allow the bag to arrive at the BRP prior to TTL expiring (All
Bags Mode). The L3 Bag ID Timeout setting may also need to be increased to remain 30 seconds longer than the TTL. Process one Clear
bag through the EDS and CBIS decision points while withholding any Level 2 Operator Decision. Confirm the bag is routed to the CBRA
and the appropriate decision message ([EDS_ID.BagIDArray], not [EDS_ID.BagIDArray [13]] correlating with a Pending disposition (code
4)) is reflected in the EDS log file or EDS to BHS Communications Report.
• Reveal Multiplexing Only: (pending)
• Confirm the appropriate CBRA display status of EDS Error when there is no Final EDS Disposition received for a Machine Clear/Operator
Pending bag. This test will be rated as “Pass” if the described confirmation checks are verified. This test will be rated as “Fail” if the results
indicate bag routing or CBRA display status based on the EDS Exit Disposition.
Requirements Verified: The performance of the system is judged against the Requirements set forth in the following PGDS Sections:
12.6 OSR Decision Time Requirements
12.7.1 CBIS Positive Bag Tracking

Item 1: BHS maintenance of EDS status
Item 2: Assignment of Communication Error
Item 5: Monitor and log invalid arrivals at CBRA via the BHS reporting system

D.2.3 Over-Height Bag Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure that the CBIS recognizes Over-Height (OH) baggage and prevents it from entering any EDS. It is
also used to confirm proper routing of near maximum and minimum conveyable height dimension baggage.
This test is to be conducted at each location in the CBIS where OH bag detection is provided.
Procedure:
• Record the measurements at which bags will activate the OH detectors.

• Ensure that this setting is equal to the maximum bag height specification for the EDS in question.
• Introduce a stream of bags upstream of both the point of acquisition of tracking and upstream of the device used to measure bag
dimensions. Bags used for testing will include those slightly greater and slightly smaller than maximum height capability of the EDS. The
bag stream will also include bags near the minimum and maximum conveyable height dimensions.
• Record whether the system properly detects OH bags and prevents them from entering the EDS. In addition, record whether any non-OH
bags are incorrectly detected as OH. At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and bag IDs for all bags processed are compared
against the EDS status and bag IDs.
12.8.12 Out-Of-Gauge Bag Requirement
12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements (all except Item 4)

D.2.4 Over-Width Bag Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure that the CBIS recognizes Over-Width (OW) baggage and prevents it from entering any EDS. It is
also used to confirm proper routing of near maximum and minimum conveyable width dimension baggage.
This test is to be conducted at each location in the CBIS where OW bag detection is provided.
Procedure:
• Record the measurements at which bags will activate the OW detectors.

• Ensure that this setting is equal to the maximum bag width specification for the EDS in question.
dimensions. Bags used for testing will include those slightly greater and slightly smaller than the maximum width capability of the EDS.
The bag stream will also include bags near the minimum and maximum conveyable width dimensions.
• Record whether the system properly detects OW bags and prevents them from entering the EDS. In addition, record whether any in-gauge
bags are incorrectly detected as OW. At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and bag ID for all bags processed are compared

D.2.5 Over-Length Bag Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure that the CBIS recognizes Over-Length (OL) baggage and prevents it from entering any EDS. It is
also used to confirm proper routing of near maximum and minimum conveyable length dimension baggage.
This test is to be conducted at each location in the CBIS where OL bag detection is provided.
Procedure:
• Record the measurements at which bags will activate the OL detectors.

• Ensure that this setting is equal to or less than the maximum bag length specification for the EDS in question.
dimensions. Bags used for testing will include those slightly greater and slightly smaller than the system’s programmed OL setting. The
bag stream will also include bags near the minimum and maximum conveyable length dimensions.
• Record whether the system properly detects OL bags and prevents them from entering the EDS. In addition, record whether any in-gauge
bags are incorrectly detected as OL. At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and bag ID for all bags processed are compared

D.2.6 Out-of-Gauge/Lost Bag Routing Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to evaluate the proper routing of both in-gauge and OOG bags when their dimension status tracking data is lost
after passing through the bag measuring device.
The routing of lost dimension bags is required to be to a Screening Spur Line and not to the OOG Line. Further, Spur Lines are to be equipped
with an Over-Height protective device at least two queues in front of each EDS to stop OH bags from entering the EDS.
Procedure:
• Introduce a bag that exceeds OOG OH or OW dimensions upstream of the baggage dimensioning equipment.
• After the bag has been processed through the dimensioning equipment and prior to the OOG or first screening line diversion, whichever is
first, the OOG bag will be delayed, causing a loss of dimension status tracking data.
• The procedure will be repeated using a bag that does not exceed OOG dimensions.
D.2.7 Duplicated IATA/RFID Tag Test
Purpose: This test will be performed on CBISs that utilize IATA/Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tag data in the security screening process.
The test will evaluate the CBIS response, including the BHS reporting system, when a duplicated IATA/RFID tag is presented or the same
IATA/RFID tag ID is screened more than once with differing screening decisions. These procedures will be performed once for each upstream
ATR/RFID reader and include an assessment of CBRA hand scanner functionality for bag status/ID acquisition under duplicated tag scenarios.

Duplicated IATA/RFID Procedure 1 (Leading Alarmed Bag):
• Five bags sharing the same duplicated tag data will be introduced to the CBIS with 5- to 10-second spacing and processed through the
same EDS. A reprinted RFID/IATA tag, cut tag, or use of IATA bingo tags are options for creating the tag ID duplication. The IATA
barcode sticker should be affixed to each bag in a location that will provide a high probability for a good read.
• The induction sequence will be Alarmed, Cleared, Alarmed, Alarmed, and Cleared.
• Each non-Clear tracked bag will be handled normally in the CBRA, using BRP to BIS data transfer via BSDs.
• The fourth and fifth bags inducted will be manipulated downstream of the EDS, such that they arrive in the CBRA as Unknown, and are
then hand-scanned to check image/status data.
• When necessary, reinsert the eligible bag types into the Reinsertion subsystem to assess ID handling and reporting.
• The Bag Data Report (or similar) and Critical PEC Tracking Report will be reviewed for each bag to determine what IATA/RFID tracking
information is retained and updated throughout the screening process and confirm that appropriate screening statuses are reported when
the IATA/RFID tag is duplicated.
• Conditions that can result in a test fail rating include if any non-Clear bag misrouting occurs or an incorrect bag screening status causes
improper Level 3 procedures at the CBRA (i.e., non-Clear bag recalled with a “Cleared” status and sent clear). The following conditions
will not be grounds for test failure, but may result in a deficiency finding: 1) if the duplicate IATA/RFID is not detected and prevented from
hand-off to the EDS; 2) incorrectly reported screening statuses; or 3) the wrong SVS image is presented.
Duplicated IATA/RFID Procedure 2 (Leading Cleared Bag):
• Five bags sharing the same duplicated tag data (using a different ID than used in Procedure 1) will be introduced to the CBIS with 5- to
10-second spacing and processed through the same EDS. A reprinted tag, cut tag, or use of IATA bingo tags are options for creating the
IATA ID duplication. The IATA barcode sticker should be affixed to each bag in a location that will provide a high probability for a good
read.
• The induction sequence will be Cleared, Alarmed, Cleared, Alarmed, and Cleared.
• Each non-Clear tracked bag will be handled normally in the CBRA, using BRP to BIS data transfer via BSDs.
• The fourth and fifth bags inducted will be manipulated downstream of the EDS, such that they arrive in the CBRA as Unknown, and are
then hand-scanned to check image/status data.
• The Bag Data Report (or similar) and Critical PEC Tracking Report will be reviewed for each bag to determine what IATA/RFID tracking
information is retained and updated throughout the screening process and confirm that appropriate screening statuses are reported when
the IATA/RFID is duplicated.

• Conditions that can result in a test fail rating include if any non-Clear bag misrouting occurs or an incorrect bag screening status causes
improper Level 3 procedures at the CBRA (i.e., non-Clear bag recalled with a “Cleared” status and sent clear). The following conditions
will not be grounds for test failure, but may result in a deficiency finding: 1) if the duplicate IATA/RFID is not detected and prevented from
hand-off to the EDS; 2) incorrectly reported screening statuses; or 3) the wrong SVS image is presented.
Test Iterations:
• Duplicate IATA/RFID Procedure 1, Leading Alarmed Bag

• Duplicate IATA/RFID Procedure 2, Leading Cleared Bag
Conclusion: At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and ID for all bags processed are compared against the EDS status and bag IDs.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements (Items 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements (Items 1, 3)
12.13 CBIS Reporting Requirements
14.5.7.4 Order of Bag ID Lookup
14.6.2 BSD Statuses and High-Level Processing Procedures

D.2.8 Mixed Bag Line Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to verify the basic operation of the CBIS, specifically to ascertain if BHS tracking can properly handle multiple
bags with differing decisions.
Procedure:
• A minimum of 20 bags (5 Suspect and 15 Clear) are introduced to the EDS from the BHS.
• The Bag IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS, and the final status of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
• Test bag quantities may be adjusted depending on the complexity of the CBIS.
• At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and ID for all test bags processed are compared against the EDS status and bag IDs.


12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements (Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10)
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements (Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8)


D.2.9 PLC versus Upper Level Sort Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to verify that the CBIS can track and screen bags via the PLCs independent of Upper Level Sort Systems.
Procedure:
• Prior to the start of the test, all PLCs controlling the CBIS must be disconnected from the sort controllers.
• A minimum of 20 bags (5 Suspect and 15 Clear) are introduced to the EDS from the BHS.
• The Bag IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS, and the final status of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
• Test bag quantities may be adjusted depending on the complexity of the CBIS. This test is conducted across one Spur Line per CBIS.
Requirements Verified: The performance of the system is judged against the requirements set forth in the following PGDS Sections.
12.7.1.1 Item 6: “CBIS tracking shall in no w ay be controlled or constrained by a sort controller w here the
relation is maintained w ithin the PLC.”
D.2.10 Clear Bag Bypass Test

Purpose: This test is conducted to verify the requirements of Section 7.2.6.1 to ascertain if the BHS has a Clear Bag Bypass feature and if so,
that it is manually controlled and not automatic.
Procedure:
• Part 1: Ensure that the bypass feature is NOT enabled via the operator’s workstation in the BHS control room.
A minimum of 20 bags (5 Suspect and 15 Clear) are introduced to the EDS from the BHS. Before inducting bags, disable any Clear
Lines just past First Chance Diverters.
As bags are approaching the final chance divert, disable the Clear Line conveyor past the divert.
All Bags should proceed down the OSR Line past the first chance divert with Non-Clear bags proceeding to CBRA until the first Clear
Bag approaches the divert. The first Clear Bag must cascade stop and NOT bypass the diverter on the Alarm Line to CBRA.

• Part 2: Ensure that the bypass feature IS enabled via the operator’s workstation in the BHS control room.
A minimum of 20 bags (5 Suspect and 15 Clear) are introduced to the EDS from the BHS.
As bags are approaching the final chance divert, disable the Clear Line conveyor past the divert.
All bags should proceed into CBRA.



7.5.3.1 Programming Logic
D.3 Detailed Testing
Detailed tests will be performed on all EDS spur lines and performed in multiple logical “tracking zones” on spur, mainline, and other lines. For the
purposes of testing, these tracking zones are defined as follows:
• Zone 1: Point of acquisition of tracking to bag handoff to the EDS

• Zone 2: Bag handoff to the EDS and the first-chance diversion point
• Zone 3: Between the first- and second-chance diversion points

• Zone 4: Between the second-chance (or final) diversion point and the CBRA
During detailed testing, test bags are inducted from the point of acquisition of tracking through the EDS to the points of diversion to the Clear or
outbound lines and into the CBRA, the STZ. Preferably, test bags should be inducted from their natural points of origin; deviations from testing in
this final configuration will need to be approved by TSA in advance.
For specific tests, the induction and testing zones may be fewer than what is specified above and are noted as such in the Purpose or Procedure
sections.
In the following sections, several references will be made to bag positioning. The following definitions apply to positioning:
• Head is the leading bag surface in the direction of travel, without regard to proper bag orientation.
• Tail is the trailing bag surface in the direction of travel.
• Sides are surfaces of bag traveling with a vector of 90 degreed opposed to the direction of travel.
Problematic bag alignments include the following:
• Abutted head to tail aligned means that the head of the second bag is touching the tail of first bag and both bags are correctly aligned on
the conveyor.
• Abutted head to tail not aligned means that one side of the first bag is touching a side of the second bag, and both bags are incorrectly
aligned on the conveyor.
• Side-by-side means that the two bags are traveling side by side, and both bags are correctly aligned on the conveyor.
Refer to Figure D.3.1 for illustration purposes.

Figure D.3.1: Problem atic Bag Alignm ents

Common Requirements Verified: The list of verified requirements below is applied to all Section D.3 Tests unless specifically noted.

12.3.2 Tail-to-Head Bag Spacing Requirement (unless specific test manipulations force below minimum
spacing)
14.6 Bag Status
14.6 Bag Inspection Operations
D.3.1 Removed Bag Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure that the BHS handles bags securely when one or more bags are removed from the system.
This test will be run in various sections of the tracking zones from the start of the STZ through the SF Lines, SS Lines, OSR Line and AL Line.

Procedure:
• A series of at least 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) enters the EDS through the BHS.
• The bag IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS and the final disposition of the bags is recorded at the CBRA. One or two
bags are then removed from the baggage stream to simulate missing bags.
• At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and ID for all bags processed are compared against the EDS status and bag IDs.
D.3 See Section D.3 Common Requirements Verified
D.3.2 Delayed Bag Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure that the BHS handles bags securely when one or more bags are delayed outside their tracking
windows.
Procedure:
• The bag IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS and the final disposition of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
• Within each tracking zone from the start of the STZ through the SF Lines, SS Lines, OSR Line and AL Line, two nonconsecutive bags are
held back within the baggage stream to simulate bags that slid outside their tracking windows.
In each test, one bag should be moved so that it does not interfere with the tracking window of any other bag, while the other bag
should be moved so that it does interfere with the tracking window of another bag.
Tracking window interference includes the case where the trailing edge of a leading bag of minimum conveyable length (12”) is
directly abutted against the leading edge of a trailing bag.
• At least one iteration of the Delayed Bag Zone 1 Test will be conducted creating abutted and spacing infringement conditions through the
ATRs. This will include at least three variations to include: both bags with IATA tags, only leading bag with an IATA tag, and only trailing
bag with an IATA tag.


D.3.3 Accelerated Bag Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure that the BHS handles bags securely when one or more bags are accelerated outside their tracking
windows.
Procedure:
• The bag IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS and the final disposition of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
• Within each tracking zone from the start of the STZ through the SF Lines, SS Lines, OSR Line and AL Line, two nonconsecutive bags are
accelerated within the baggage stream to simulate bags that slid outside their tracking windows.
Initiate each manipulation variation by first activating a BHS E-Stop in the tracking zone under test; then accelerate the bag as
described before resetting the E-stop.
In each test, one bag should be moved so that it does not interfere with the tracking window of any other bag, while the other bag
should be moved so that it does interfere with the tracking window of another bag.
Interference includes the case where the leading edge of a trailing bag of minimum conveyable length (12”) is directly abutted against
the trailing edge of a leading bag.


D.3.4 Added Bag Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to ensure that the BHS handles bags securely when one or more bags are added to the system and to verify that
added bags are not misdirected and that the tracking of other bags is not affected.
The Added Bag Test will primarily be applied to locations with greater potential for jam events or an increased vulnerability to human intervention,
in particular EDS entrance conveyors and Fail-Safe bag insertion points.
Procedure:
• Review the system specific Jam Clearing and Jam Bag Handling Policy(ies).
• A series of at least 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) enters the EDS through the BHS. The baggage induction can be staggered to allow
two separate manipulations to occur and permit adequate bag spacing to ensure the added bag spacing distances defined herein can be
accommodated.
• The bags’ IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS, and the final disposition of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
• A jam event will be created by holding a bag over a PE. Alternately, blocking a PE is an option where creating the jam by holding a bag is
not feasible or safe. The bags involved in the jam event will be removed and the jam condition cleared.
• Within the tracking zones described in the purpose statement above, two nonconsecutive bags that were removed from the jam event are
added to the baggage stream to simulate added bags.
One bag should be added such that its leading or trailing edges are no closer than 15 inches to any other bag.
The second bag should be added such that either its leading or trailing edge is between 8 inches and 12 inches from another bag.

D.3.5 Bag Spacing Test
Purpose: This is a two-part test. The first part is conducted to determine if the CBIS delivers bags to EDS units in accordance with the OEM’s
Guidelines and Integration Manuals and PGDS Requirements. The second part is conducted to ensure that the CBIS routes bags securely if
proper bag spacing into the EDS is not maintained.
No waivers will be issued for the Bag Spacing Test or the requirement for bag singulation into EDS units.
Procedure:
• Part 1: This test will be repeated across varying induction points until all SS Lines have been exercised.
A series of at least 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) enters the EDS through the BHS.
The bags’ IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS, and the final disposition of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
Tail-to-Head bag spacing is monitored and recorded at the EDS Entrance.
Bags are inducted from natural points of origin (i.e., Ticket Counters, Curbside Induction, and CBRA Re-Introduction).
Tail-to-Head bag spacing at induction will be maintained at 15 inches or greater except for two sets of two bags.
One set will have Tail-to-Head spacing of between 8 to 10 inches and the second set will be inducted with the tail and head abutted
(zero gap).
Bags will then flow through the system and be directed to one EDS Spur Line per test iteration.
• Part 2: This test will be repeated for each SS Line.

Induct two bags just upstream of the start of STZ. Ensure these bags are close together, but separate at the point of induction such
that final manipulation can occur.
Configure the BHS to send these two bags to a single SS Line.
Just as the leading bag is entering the immediate upstream queue conveyor from the EDS, force the second bag to become abutted
to the first bag such that they enter the EDS together and in direct contact with each other.
• At the conclusion of both Parts of the Procedure, the screening status and ID for all bags processed are compared against the EDS status
and bag IDs. In addition, at the conclusion of Part 1, the Tail-to-Head bag spacing will be compared against the EDS and PGDS required
spacing.

Requirements Verified – Part 1: The performance of the system is judged against the requirements set forth in the following PGDS Sections:

- OEM Bag Spacing Requirements
D.3.6 E-Stop Test
Purpose: This test will be conducted to ensure the ability of the EDS and BHS to activate and recover from E-Stops, and to maintain tracking of
bags during E-Stop conditions. This test is to be conducted for both EDS and BHS E-Stops.
This test is to be conducted for each SS line.
Procedure:
• In the EDS E-Stop Test, a series of at least 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) is sent to the EDS through the BHS.
When bags are in a position such that bags are leaving, entering, and within the EDS, an EDS E-Stop is activated.
The EDS must immediately disable its X-rays and the EDS conveyors should stop operating.
The BHS should recognize the E-Stop and halt any further bags from being sent to the EDS.
• In the BHS E-Stop Test, a series of at least 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) is sent to the EDS through the BHS.
When bags are in a position such that bags are leaving, entering, and within the EDS, a BHS E-Stop is activated.
The EDS should recognize the E-Stop and prevent additional bags from being sent to the BHS.
Further, the system should not allow bags on EDS conveyors to be forced forward onto stopped BHS conveyors. An exception to the
prevention of bags forced onto the BHS exit queue conveyor is permitted for the L3-6X00 EDS series due to known functionality when
bags are present in the EDS scan plane (“B” conveyor) and exit tunnel (“C” conveyor). If observed, this condition will result in a Safety
deficiency, but will not be a basis for issuing a “Fail” test result.
• At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and bag IDs for all bags processed are compared against the EDS status and bag IDs.


D.3.7 Halt/Fail-Safe Test

Purpose: The purpose of this test is to ensure that the CBIS does not pass any non-Clear or unscreened bag to the outbound/sortation system. In
addition, this test verifies that TSA is immediately notified of a Fail-Safe event, allowing an appropriate response.
D.3.8 Fail-Safe Operation for In-Line CBIS
Refer to PGDS Sections 7.2.8, 7.2.8.1 and 7.2.8.2 for Fail-Safe operations and requirements governing In-Line CBIS.
Procedure:
• Part 1: The test is conducted with bags flowing normally through the CBIS in sufficient quantity such that bags are present from the EDS
output through the Clear/Suspect bag diversion points.
At each Post-EDS diversion point between the OSR Lines and Clear Lines force a non-clear bag to lose tracking between the decision
photo eye upstream of the diverter and before the Fail-Safe photo eye on the OSR Line or AL Line by removing it from the system or
preventing it from reaching the Fail-Safe photo eye.
• Part 2: The test is conducted with bags flowing normally through the CBIS in sufficient quantity such that bags are present from the EDS
output through the Clear/Suspect bag diversion points.
At each Post-EDS diversion point between the OSR Lines and Clear Lines add a bag of greater than 12” in length directly abutted to
the trailing edge of another bag prior to the bags leading edge reaching the decision photo eye upstream of the diverter.
The bag must be conveyed to CBRA with a Status of “Length Change”.

D.3.9 Fail-Safe Operation for Mini In-Line CBIS with a Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point
Refer to PGDS Sections 7.2.8, 7.2.8.1 and 7.2.8.3 for Fail-Safe operations and requirements governing Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point
CBIS.
Procedure:
• Introduce a string of ten bags with one bag being a Suspect Bag followed by a Clear Bag.
• Render a late Alarm decision on the Suspect Bag and Clear the Clear Bag, run this test in Show All mode.
• Then force a non-clear bag beyond the last BRP onto the Clear Line.
- Verify that the Alarm/Clear combination w ith late decision does not activate the Halt condition.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for a Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point CBIS
D.3.10 EDS Entrance Jam Recovery Test (Continuous Feed EDS only)
Purpose: This test will be conducted to evaluate the BHS to EDS communications and recovery processes when a bag jam occurs at the
entrance to the EDS.
Procedure:
• Induct a series of 10 test bags (7 Clear, 3 Suspect) for transport to the screening line.

• After several bags have entered the EDS, hold a bag at the BHS PE adjacent to the EDS entrance tunnel until a jam condition is activated
at the associated BHS control station. Alternately, the BHS PE adjacent to the EDS entrance tunnel may be shielded to simulate a bag
jam condition.
• Record the PE Jam Timer (seconds) associated with the blocked PE.
• Remove bags involved in the jam event from the conveyors and reset the Jam Condition per local procedures and per EDS Integration
Manuals (including removing bags from within the EDS if necessary).
• Confirm normal resumption of baggage screening by the EDS and BHS upon reset of the jam condition.
• Induct each bag removed during the jam event per local procedures and far enough upstream of the EDS to not interfere with BHS-to-
EDS handshaking or BHS OOG detection located on the SS Lines.


14.6 Bag Status

D.3.11 EDS Exit Jam Recovery Test (Continuous Feed EDS only)
Purpose: This test will be conducted to evaluate the BHS to EDS communications and recovery processes when a bag jam occurs at the exit of
the EDS.
Procedure:
• Induct a series of 10 test bags (7 Clear, 3 Suspect) for transport to the screening line.
• After several bags have been processed through the EDS, hold a bag at the BHS PE adjacent to the EDS exit tunnel until a jam condition
is activated at the associated BHS control station. Alternately, the BHS PE adjacent to the EDS exit tunnel may be shielded to simulate a
bag jam condition.
• Record the PE Jam Timer (seconds) associated with the blocked PE.
• Remove bags involved in the jam event from the conveyors and reset the Jam condition per local procedures and per EDS Integration
Manuals (including removing bags from within the EDS if necessary).
• Confirm normal resumption of baggage screening by the EDS and BHS upon reset of the jam condition.
• Induct each bag removed during the jam event per local procedures. If local procedures are to induct bags upstream of the EDS, then
induct bags far enough upstream of the EDS to not interfere with BHS to EDS handshaking or BHS OOG detection located on the SS
Lines.




14.6 Bag Status
D.3.12 Decision Expiration Functionality Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to verify the basic operation of the CBIS when multiple non-Clear bags are screened sequentially, leading to OSR
images being queued while awaiting an available PVS.
Note: This test applies only to systems designed with CT-80 series EDS equipment.
Procedure:
• Induct 10 consecutive non-Clear bags through a single EDS, utilizing an individual PVS.
• When each Suspect bag image is displayed on the OSR PVS, allow 80 to 90 percent of the available OSR time to expire prior to issuing a
Clear decision status, using as a guide known EDS decision mode settings and declared BHS and EDS timeout settings. Repeat this
procedure for all subsequent Suspect bags that appear at the OSR PVS.
Confirm that all bags are routed and displayed in accordance with the Level 2 decision issued by the EDS or OSR operator, or that
they are routed to the CBRA if confirmed to be OSR timeout bags.
Record the CBRA arrival status for any bags that timeout awaiting an operator decision while in the EDS image queue and confirm
that the status in use reflects PGDS Chapter 12, Section 9.2.2.3 and 9.2.3.3 Requirements.
Report any instances where EDS Clear decisions are issued and then accepted by the BHS after the bag is beyond the final decision
point. If this condition exists, obtain information on the BHS Timer setting and functionality.
Report any instances where the EDS Unknown status (or any EDS-assigned status) is displayed in the CBRA, with BHS report details
confirming whether the status was EDS-issued.
Report any instances where the Unknown status is used. The Unknown status is only valid if the bag is lost in tracking OR the BHS
does not receive a Level 1 or Level 2 disposition from the EDS, as confirmed through BHS reports.


14.6 Bag Status
D.3.13 Operational Test Kit Functionality Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to evaluate the ability of the CBIS to perform daily and shift-change OTK Functionality Tests efficiently and safely.
The OTK Functionality Test is conducted on each EDS line.
Procedure:
• Continuous Feed EDS

Record the specific steps taken to prepare the BHS for insertion of the OTK Test bag.
Begin to process no fewer than 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect).
While these bags are entering, leaving, and within the EDS, using available EDS and BHS controls, place the systems in OTK Test
mode and record the results (Phase 1).
Conduct no fewer than three OTK Tests and record the results (Phase 2).
Record the steps necessary to process the OTK test bag, including insertion and removal procedures using the BHS and EDS
controls.

Using the EDS and BHS controls, return the system to its normal mode of operation.
Complete the processing of the original 10 bags and record the results (Phase 3).
• Non-continuous Feed EDS

Record the specific steps taken to prepare the BHS for insertion of the OTK Test bag.
Completely process no fewer than 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) in normal screening modes (Phase 1).
Using the EDS and BHS controls, place the system in the OTK Test mode.
Conduct no fewer than three OTK Tests and record the results (Phase 2).
Record the steps necessary to process the OTK test bag, including insertion and removal procedures using the BHS and EDS
controls.
Using the EDS and BHS controls, return the system to its normal mode of operation.
Completely process no fewer than 10 bags (7 Clear and 3 Suspect) with the EDS and BHS configured for normal baggage screening
mode (Phase 3).
Report any non-secure handling of the OTK Test bag or other test bags. Report any faults or system behaviors that require a BHS or EDS restart.
At the conclusion of this test, the screening status and bag ID for all bags processed are compared against the EDS status and bag IDs.
7.2.9.1 OTK Test Requirements

D.3.14 Crossover Test
Purpose: This test is conducted to verify the CBIS crossover capabilities including bag tracking, orientation, and spacing when the crossover
subsystem is engaged causing all bags to be transferred between SF Lines.
Note: The Crossover Test will be conducted unless the crossover functionality must be engaged manually or will engage only under extreme
circumstances that cannot be expected during normal operations.
Procedure:
• A minimum of 40 bags (10 Suspect and 30 Clear) are routed through the EDS units through utilization of a crossover divert.
• The diversion device will be activated by CBIS cascade conditions, fault events, or through an HMI selection simulating such occurrences
prior to the test.
• Bag IDs and EDS decisions are recorded at the EDS PVS, and the final status of the bags is recorded at the CBRA.
• Test bag quantities may be adjusted depending on the complexity of the CBIS.
• At the conclusion of testing, the screening status and ID for all test bags processed are compared against the EDS status and bag IDs.


D.4 System-Wide Testing
System-Wide Testing consists of two tests conducted across the entire CBIS, the Full Load Test and the System Throughput Test. Each System
Test is tailored to stress the system in different ways. The Full Load Test measures performance when the system is under heavy load and
conveyors have halted. Once dieback is released, it measures performance under normal non-stressed conditions. The System Throughput Test
measures performance at or near Peak Load conditions.
Common System Test Requirements Verified:

12.3 BHS Capacity

12.4 Screening Throughput Capacity Requirement (System Throughput Test only)
12.6 OSR Decision Time Requirements

12.9.3 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for a Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point CBIS (Mini In-Line
Systems Only)
12.11 Bag Jam Requirements

12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirement
12.13.3 Daily Reporting Requirement
12.13.4 BHS ID Log Report Requirement
14.5 CBRA Functionality (All subsections)
14.6 Workstation Sequence of Operations (All subsections)
D.4.1 Full Load Test

Purpose: This test will be conducted to determine the ability of the system to properly track and handle bags during system-wide conveyor halt
conditions and subsequent system restart.
Conveyable Item Characteristics: The baggage types included in this test will reflect projections in the BDR, BHS Specification, and CBIS-
specific Bag Hygiene policies developed by the ILDT. Conveyable items used for this test will specifically include EDS OOG bags and tubs (Totes)
in projected percentages, as defined in the ILDT documents or as established by the TSA APM. The percentage of Alarm Bags must be 20
percent, or the amount dictated in the BDR.
Induction Location and Pacing: Primary induction locations at the first conveyor of ticket counter and curbside subsystems will be utilized (if
available), with test bags allocated to these locations based on CBIS design documents and ILDT bag load projections. Induction pacing at the
ticket counter inputs will use predetermined intervals and spacing that reflect individual and group check-in baggage loads. Induction intervals and
spacing should be controlled to maintain a low to medium-paced processing rate. Secondary induction points may also be used with bag
quantities corresponding to expected loads.
Level 2 and Level 3 CBIS Interface: Baggage ID and OSR screening decisions are recorded at PVSs (Level 2 inspection) and SVSs (Level 3
inspection) to support test data reconciliation. Operator actions at these locations will be simulated to reflect average baggage processing
durations. The Level 2 Operators will permit 10 to 15 seconds of the bag viewing time to expire before rendering a Cleared or Alarmed status.
Level 2 Operator decisions will not be rendered for one percent of the total bag volume, allowing these bags to “time-out” on the PVS display. The
Level 3 inspection at the CBRA will incorporate CBIS bag handling processes, including an average processing time for Alarmed status bags at
each BIS to simulate bags being inspected.

Induction Quantities:
• For In-Line CBIS, the minimum number of bags to be inducted should be equivalent to 100 bags per EDS.
• For Mini In-Line CBIS, and those with manual removal decision points, the minimum number of bags processed through each EDS line will
be 200 bags. This increase in bags for Mini In-Line Systems is intended to increase the sample size.
Procedure:
• Induct as many Suspect bags (or force Suspect decisions on bags) as needed to completely fill the CBRA upstream through all primary
and secondary decision points.
• Continue to fill the BHS with Mixed Decision Bags until the conveyors stop to either just before the EDS or to the start of tracking. This
condition is defined as “dieback.”
• Once the dieback condition through the screening lines have cleared, resume bag induction at a slow to medium pace. The CBIS should
not re-enter a CBRA initiated dieback state for the remainder of the test.
• The second part of the test after dieback has been released will evaluate the CBIS performance at low to medium baggage processing
rates (10 to 50 percent of design rate). Baggage induction pacing and locations, conveyable item characteristics, and Operator screening
processes at Level 2 and Level 3 inspection interfaces are simulated to establish a baseline of CBIS performance capabilities under non-
peak screening conditions.
D.4.2 System Throughput Test
Purpose: The System Throughput Test will be conducted to demonstrate the ability of the CBIS to operate under conditions at or approaching
peak throughput rates and to evaluate the PGDS Screening Throughput Capacity requirement.
Procedure: The Throughput will be measured at each EDS using the EDS FDRS Reports. In the event of a problem with the reports develops, the
Throughput may be measured using BHS Reports and Timestamps of bags seen at the closest PE upstream of the EDS entrances. Configure the
CBIS to only screen baggage through non-redundant EDS. Staff CBRA sufficiently to prevent any restriction on processing rate. Immediately prior
to starting the test, reset/calibrate EDS in attempt to prevent auto-calibrations from occurring during the test. Preload the ticket counter, curbside,

and interline transfer lines (and any other input lines) selected for the test by disabling the mainlines just upstream of security tracking start via
motor disconnect. Once inputs are filled to the load points, deactivate motor disconnects and commence the test.
• Process bags correctly through the CBIS such that:

Clear bags are sent directly to the outbound sortation system.
Suspect bags are sent directly to the CBRA, and once cleared, are sent to the outbound sortation system.
Faulted, mis-tracked, and error bags are sent to the CBRA.
Induction Location and Pacing: Induct baggage as fast as the system will allow, while not violating system-required minimum bag
spacing.
• Induction Quantities: The minimum number of bags inducted should be equivalent to 100 bags per non-redundant EDS with 95%
throughput less than 600 bph and 200 bags per non-redundant EDS with 95% throughput greater than 600 bph.
• If technically possible, and working with the EDS vendor, configure the CBIS to save all bag images. In this way, when reconciling the test
data, any CBRA anomalies can be more thoroughly investigated by examining the EDS and BHS data logs and all saved images.
• Using available inputs (e.g., ticket counters, curbside, and transfer lines), induct a mix of bags (Suspect/Clear) as fast as the system will
allow while not violating system-required minimum bag spacing. Process a mix of bags (Alarmed/Clear) and for testing purposes, Clear
50% of the Alarmed Bags through OSR. The CBIS must be in its final configuration as a pre-requisite of this test and it cannot be
performed until no construction constraints preventing induction at the normal points of origin remain.
• During the test, personnel will not prevent bag jams from occurring. Only after bag jams occur will personnel clear the jams. The location
of each bag jam will be recorded along with any observations that will help reduce the jam rate.
- System Throughput w ill be evaluated using the rates outlined in the BDR.
D.5 Operational Run-In
Purpose: The Run-In Period will be performed after a minimum of two weeks of normal TSA operations. The two-week cool down period will allow
the team to become familiar with the system and comfortable with the operating procedures. After the ISAT a data analysis plan will be provided to
the ILDT/airport within five days, outlining the data that will need to be collected. Upon completion of the two weeks cool down an initial two week

period of meaningful operational data (BHS and EDS) will be collected and analyzed. If this data is consistent and it is the determination of the
Regional Deployment Coordinator (RDC) and Acceptance Test, the data collection effort will terminate and the Test Summary Report (TSR) will
be drafted. If the data shows anomalies, then another two-week data collection period will be initiated.
The Run-In period may be extended or shortened at TSA direction based on the analysis of the collected data.
12.3 BHS Capacity
12.4 Screening Throughput Capacity Requirement
12.8.4 Round Robin BAM
12.9.3 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for a Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point CBIS (Mini In-Line
Systems Only)
12.11 Bag Jam Requirements



12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirement
12.13.3 Daily Reporting Requirement

12.13.4 BHS ID Log Report Requirement
14.5 CBRA Functionality (All subsections)
14.6 Workstation Sequence of Operations (All subsections)
D.6 Post-Commissioning Requirements
All proposed PLC or computer code changes to the CBIS must be submitted to the TSA using the CBIS change request form as shown in Figure
A.5.2. Overall, the change request process consists of three steps: 1) The BHSC develops the proper documentation, completes the change
request form, and submits it to the TSA; 2) TSA receives, reviews, and provides disposition to the change request; and 3) BHSC implements the
change and supports the verification of successful implementation as tested by the TSA designated entity.
A detailed block diagram outlining the roles of the BHSC and the TSA, as well as the detailed steps required to complete the process, is shown in
Figure D.6.1. It is essential for the continued secure and efficient operation of the CBIS that changes to the system are evaluated, reviewed, and
approved by the TSA before they are implemented. A Configuration Management (CM) process has been established and must be followed
throughout the lifecycle of the CBIS. Related documentation and requirements are found in Appendix A, Section A.8 (Configuration Management
Process).

Figure D.6.1: CBIS Configuration Managem ent Process

APPENDIX E CONTINGENCY PLAN EXAMPLES
APPENDIX E:
CONTINGENCY PLAN EXAMPLES

This appendix provides two examples of Contingency Plans developed for the CBISs at Chicago O’Hare and Myrtle Beach International Airport.
The Contingency Plan is intended to: (1) identify all likely scenarios for system or component failure that may occur during operation of the CBIS,
and (2) describe the protocols and procedures to be followed by BHS control, the airlines, and the Transportation Security Administration when
these scenarios occur. This appendix has been updated based upon lessons learned and new requirements.
Sources: Contingency Plan for Chicago O’Hare United Airlines B-South EDS Project provided by BNP Associates, Inc. (reproduced and
reformatted with permission); Contingency Plan for Myrtle Beach International Airport provided by BNP Associates, Inc. (reproduced and
reformatted with permission).

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems E- 1 August 21, 2020
APPENDIX E-1:
UNITED AIRLINES ORD B-SOUTH EDS PROJECT
CONTINGENCY PLAN
Issued for: TSA 100% Submitted
By: BNP Associates, Inc.
13 August 2010

REVISIONS
Version Description of Version Date Completed
0.1 Initial draft submitted to TSA 08-13-10

CONTENTS
Revisions E.1.4.3 Unavailable EDS Mainlines (EDS3)

Acronyms And Abbreviations Medium/Extended Duration
E.1.1 Introduction E.1.4.3.1 System Response
E.1.1.1 Purpose E.1.4.3.2 Maintenance and Operations Response
E.1.2 BHS Overview E.1.4.4 Clear Bag Mainline Failure Medium/Long Duration
E.1.2.1 CBIS Overview E.1.4.4.1 System Response
E.1.2.2 Screening Methodology Overview E.1.4.4.2 Maintenance and Operations Response
E.1.3 Objectives of the Contingency Plan E.1.4.5 Treatment of Positively Identified Threat Bags By
TSA Staff
E.1.3.1 Contingency Plan Implementation Risk
E.1.4.6 B-South OSR Failure
E.1.3.2 Desired Outcomes
E.1.4.6.1 System Response
E.1.3.3 Potential Impacts
E.1.4.7 Decision Point HSD Failure
E.1.3.4 Recourse Requirements
E.1.4.8 CBRA Equipment Failure
E.1.4 Contingency Plan – CBIS Failures and Resolutions
E.1.4.9 Transfer Input Failure
E.1.4.1 General
E.1.4.10 Out Of Gauge Subsystem Failure or BMA Failure
E.1.4.2 Unavailable EDS Line
E.1.4.11 Power Loss
E.1.4.12 Unplanned Surge in System Demand
E.1.4.2.2 Maintenance Response


AS shall mean Alaska Airlines
BHS shall mean Baggage Handling System
BMA shall mean Baggage Measuring Array
CB shall mean Clear Bag Subsystem
CBIS shall mean Checked Baggage Inspection System
CBRA shall mean Checked Baggage Resolution Area
CCB shall mean Configuration Control Board
CF shall mean Component Folder
CI shall mean Configuration Identification
CM shall mean Configuration Management
CMP shall mean Configuration Management Plan
CR shall mean Change Request
EDS shall mean Explosive Detection System (Computer Tomography)
ER shall mean Engineering Request
ETD shall mean Explosive Trace Detection
FIS shall mean Federal Inspection Service
HSD shall mean High Speed Diverter
LAX shall mean Los Angeles International airport
OSR shall mean On-Screen Resolution
PGDS shall mean Planning Guidelines and Design Standards
SB shall mean Suspect Bag Subsystem
SVS shall mean Secondary Viewing Station
TSA shall mean Transportation Security Administration

E.1 Contingency Plan for United Airlines B-South EDS Project, Chicago O’hare International Airport
E.1.1 Introduction
This site specific version of the Contingency Plan is for the Concourse B-South CBIS located at the Chicago O’Hare International Airport. In
accordance with the TSA Planning Guidelines and Design Standards, V3.0 dated 27 November, 2009 this document outlines a contingency plan
for the procedures and notification requirements applicable for equipment failures, loss of power and unplanned surges in system demand etc. in
the B-South system.
The contingency plan attempts to identify O & M activities for failure mode operations (automatic or manual), documenting and informing relevant
parties of changes to the BHS after system failure that have an impact on the processing baggage. The contingency plan does not address
general mechanical maintenance, where equipment is replaced, as this work is generally assumed to not have any impact on the BHS operation.
The success of any automated Checked Baggage System Inspection System (CBIS), regardless of the redundancies built into a particular system,
rest with the creation of a Contingency Plan (CP) that is agreed upon by key stakeholders, including United Airlines, any second part O&M
Contractors, and the TSA (Local and HQ).
E.1.1.1 Purpose
The following are overview topics for Contingency Plan consideration and “triggers” that would initiate contingency operations in the event of.
• Screening equipment failure

• Conveyance equipment failure
• Loss of utility power
• Unplanned surges in system demand
• Temporary alternative screening locations for baggage
• Removal of threat “Suspect” bags from the CBRA
• Threat evacuation and associated impact on baggage screening
• Airport Operations Emergency Response Plan
• TSA local standard operating procedures
• United Airlines / O’Hare Emergency Incident Response Plan

E.1.2 BHS Overview

E.1.2.1 CBIS Overview
The B-South CBIS layout is based on the design standards and practices detailed in the TSA Planning Guidelines and Design Standards (PGDS)
Version 3.0, as coordinated between the TSA, United Airlines and the BNP Design Team. The proposed design is also consistent with United
Airlines intent to provide a remote screening facility to process all Canadian transfer bags and to provide a secondary EDS system to screen a
configurable percentage of outbound originating baggage.
The 14520 BHS Specification details the complete system, equipment to be provided and the functional description of operation.
The purpose of the reconfiguration of the South EDS area is to facilitate an in-line integrated EDS screening process for “Hot-Bag” and “Cold Bag”
transfers.
The reconfigured IB1 conveyor line will be utilized as a ”Cold-Bag” transfer input to the EDS matrix for screening. A new (EX1)”Expedited Bag”
transfer input will be provided to transport “Hot” transfer bags to the new CBIS area for screening.
The new CBIS mainline (EDS3) shall consist of four (4) integrated L3 6600 EDS devices X9, X10, X11 and X12 for the screening of the transfer
bags. The system design is based off of the N+1 method by which three (3) of the EDS machines are installed to handle the peak baggage
demand of the average day peak month the airport will experience with the fourth EDS device installed as redundancy.
A new scanner array (ATR) shall be installed on the EDS mainline EDS3. Once cleared bags have been merged back onto EDS3, after screening,
the associated ten digit IATA bag tag shall be read by the array and will correlate the bag tag with the associated outbound flight departure
information time in order to determine if it will be treated as a “Cold Bag” or a “Hot Bag”. If it is determined to be a “Cold Bag” then the bag will be
diverted onto the CB9 subsystem for transport into the existing Terminal One outbound BHS for sortation. If it is determined to be a “Hot Bag” then
it will be diverted onto the EX2 subsystem run out conveyor for immediate transport to its associated flight. If the bag is pending a decision or has
been alarmed, it will be transported to the CBRA for Level 3 ETD screening. Cleared “hot bags” will be re-inducted onto the CB7 clear bag line
where they will be read by the CB7 ATR. If the system determines the bag to be “hot” it will be diverted to the CB8 clear bag line which merges
back onto the EX2 run out conveyor.
Any bags that cannot be cleared at Level 1 or Level 2 (OSR) will be transported into the CBRA for further processing (Level 3 ETD screening).
Once the bag has been cleared it will be placed on the CB7 subsystem for transport to the existing Terminal One outbound BHS for sortation.
Any bags that receive an EDS “unknown” status in the CBRA can be re-introduced to the EDS mainline via the RI subsystem according to local
TSA protocols. The CBIS is considered to be tracked from the first ATR location located along TX1A, and at the EDS3-1 conveyor when the IB1
RI1 and EX1 merge together onto the EDS mainline. The tracked subsystems continue through the EX2 decision point, the CB8 decision point
and into the CBRA room. Any modification to the PLC program affecting these areas needs to be approved and coordinated with TSA.

E.1.2.2 Screening Methodology Overview
The 100% In-Line integrated EDS configuration for this project will consist of three (3) Screening Level classifications which are as follows:
Level 1 – EDS screening in the “Automatic” mode:
All originating “in-gauge” checked bags shall be routed to an EDS device for security screening. The EDS device software will automatically scan
each bag. The EDS device will provide a status for the bag “clear” or ‘unclear’ based on the assessment of the images and notify the BHS via the
EDS/BHS interface. “Clear” level 1 “Cold Bags” will be routed to the sortation system using the CB9 subsystem. “Clear” level 1 “Hot Bags” will be
routed to the EX2 runout conveyor for immediate transport to its flight.
Level 2 – On Screen Resolution (OSR) operation:
Baggage that receives a “Unclear” status from the level 1 EDS device will have the suspect image delivered via the security interface network to
the EDS security monitoring area (level 2). The images shall be received and displayed on monitors in the OSR control room. An operator will view
the image in the display for a configurable time duration utilizing Threat Resolution Tools (TRT) to determine if the bag is “Clear” or “Unclear”. If
the operator determines that the bag is suspect or the allocated time period expires (minimum of 45 seconds), and no decision has been rendered,
the image and relevant bag will be given an “Unclear” level 2 status. These bags shall be transported into the CBRA on the SB4 line for review
and appropriate handling.

Level 3 Explosive Trace Detection (ETD) operation:

Bags with “Unclear” level 2 or “Out of Gauge” status will be transported to the CBRA for further inspections and appropriate handling (ETD).
“Clear” Level 2 bags will be placed on the CB7 conveyor subsystem. “Clear” Level 2 “Cold Bags” will be routed to the sortation system using the
CB9 subsystem. “Clear” Level 2 “Hot Bags” (determined by a new ATR located upstream of the CB8 diverter) will be diverted to the CB8
subsystem and routed to the EX2 run out conveyor for immediate transport to its flight.
All “Failed” level 3 bags shall be handled per the local EOD protocol. Full access is provided into the CBRA to allow for any required LEO
explosive robot to maneuver as required to eliminate the potential threat.
E.1.3 Objectives of the Contingency Plan

In the event the CBIS becomes inoperative due to any event which prevents the CBIS from processing baggage in a designed timely manner a
contingency plan developed for that event will be implemented.
This plan, dependent on the critical nature and size of event, would require multiple parties to communicate in a timely and efficient manner. If the
plan is not implemented properly or promptly, and event that already has degraded the system will only become more compounded and take a
longer duration to alleviate.

The Desired outcome of implementing a contingency plan is to screen as many bags as possible in the shortest time possible despite an event in
the system that would be preventing this operation. A contingency plan would remain in place until the system has reverted to its original state and
all the events / faults have been mitigated and corrected.
If an event that creates a sever long term downtime situation occurs, United Airlines would be required to quickly and effectively modify their
operation to ensure all outbound and transfer baggage are still processed in a timely manner. In most B-South extreme duration failure incidents
the baggage inducted onto the MOD1 and MOD2 ticketing counters will be re-routed to the existing basement EDS system. All transfer bags
would be loaded onto alternate input points to route all transfer bags to the existing basement EDS. All bags that normally would be inducted onto
the curbside lines (inputs CS1 and CS2) would need to be manually carted to another active input location that feeds into the existing basement
EDS.
TSA should be have in place a dynamic agent deployment plan to provide any extra staffing inside the CBRA room in the event an unexpected
flood of bags is routed to the CBRA. This could be caused by multiple EDS device faults or in the event the clear bag mainline of the decision point
diverter has an extended duration fault.

The following is a preliminary contingency plan for ORD B-South BHS and will be updated by the BHS Contractor based on their functional
specification and updated throughout the Construction Phase.
E.1.4.1 General
It should be noted that for any failure of a system component in the B-South CBIS or CBRA that is determined to cause an extensive period of
downtime or a severe reduction in throughput capacity, the response team can choose to prevent any bags from being routed to the disabled B-
South system by changing the conveyor direction of the MOD1 and MOD 2 ticket counter conveyors. Any unscreened or suspect stranded bags in
the B-South system will need to be found, unloaded and transported to an appropriate input into the existing Terminal 1 CBIS. Any clear bags
stranded on the clear bag mainline out of the B-South system will need to be recovered and inducted onto a functional input into the sortation
system downstream of the B-South system.

E.1.4.2 Unavailable EDS Line
• The HSD that feeds the affected ED subsystem will automatically be placed in the “divert none” mode by the control system.
• Any bags inside the L3 at the time of the fault will be tracked to the CBRA with an EDS “error” status and manually re-inducted into the
system from the CBRA utilizing the Re-insertion Subsystem (RI1).
• Throughput capacity is still realized utilizing the PGDS N+1 requirement which will allow the system to still process its peak demand
despite the faulted EDS unit.
E.1.4.2.2 Maintenance Response
• In the event an EDS line is unable to process bags (L3 EDS failure, or BHS conveyor failure), the stranded bags upstream of the EDS
device will be manually transferred to the adjacent EDS line (X9, X10, X11, or X12) upstream of the faulted screening device. These bags
will be assigned a BHS Pseudo ID at a photocell on the queue conveyor upstream of the EDS device that will be associated with the
status assigned by the L3 after Level 1 screening.
• Any removal of bags from any TSA supplied equipment (e.g., L3 6600 EDS device) may only be performed by TSA Staff.

E.1.4.3 Unavailable EDS Mainlines (EDS3) Medium/Extended Duration
• In the event the EDS3 mainline feeding the X9 through X12 security shunt lines becomes disabled, the system will alert the Central
Control Room.
• All baggage that is downstream of the failed subsystem will be processed to the clear bag lines or routed to the CBRA room as normal.
E.1.4.3.2 Maintenance and Operations Response
• The UAL O&M group will re-direct the direction of the MOD1 and MOD2 ticketing conveyors to route all outbound baggage to the Terminal
1 CBIS.
• All transfer bags will have to be inducted into the existing Concourse B-C Connector BHS at an existing transfer inputs.
• All bags stranded upstream of the disabled EDS3 mainline will be manually removed and carted to a functioning input point to induct bags
into the Terminal 1 CBIS.

E.1.4.4 Clear Bag Mainline Failure Medium/Long Duration
• System will alert the Terminal 1 Central Control Room.

• All clear bags immediately cleared by the Level 1 EDS will be diverted to the EX2 pier (for long duration failures). This fallback procedure
will only be initiated by UAL O&M within the Terminal 1 Control Room.
• The system will prevent any bags from being routed to the B-South CBIS. All originating bags will be conveyed to the Terminal 1 CBIS.
E.1.4.4.2 Maintenance and Operations Response
• If the failure is a long duration failure Operations will be notified that clear bags will need to be transported from the EX2 expedited hot bag
pier and re-input into the Terminal 1 sortation system through a domestic transfer input.
• All clear bags from the CBRA will be manually carted to an existing domestic transfer input to transport the clear bags to the Terminal 1
sortation system.
• All stranded bags on the clear bag mainline will be manually removed and input onto a domestic transfer input.

E.1.4.5 Treatment of Positively Identified Threat Bags by TSA Staff
• When TSA staff cannot clear an alarmed bag following Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) they shall contact the Airport Manager on
Duty (MOD) as well as the Airports Designated Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) for resolution of the Identified Threat.
• The Designated Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) then assumes full responsibility of the threat bag and his/her standard operating
procedure shall be followed.
• An accessible route has been provided for to allow for any EOD robot access in and out of the CBRA where the threat bag will be located.
E.1.4.6 B-South OSR Failure
• If the B-South OSR stations (MUX failure/fault) become disabled, the remaining bags on the system that are not cleared by the EDS will
be routed to the CBRA for Level 3 processing.
• The system will also prevent the MOD1 ticket conveyor from transporting any additional bags to the B-South CBIS. The conveyor will stop
and change directions to feed the existing Terminal 1 CBIS located between Concourses B and C.

E.1.4.7 Decision Point HSD Failure
• If the decision point HSDs become inoperable (either the EX2 or the CB9 diverter), the diverters will need to be manually opened and
locked in that position during operations. All bags either clear or alarmed will be routed to the CBRA room for reconciliation. Clear bags will
be indicated at the CBRA removal queue conveyors on the BSD (baggage status displays). These bags can immediately be transferred to
the CB7 clear bag line. All suspect, unknown, lost in tracking bags will be handled normally, or per local TSA SOP.
• If the diverter is unable to be locked open, additional UAL staffing will be required to manually remove the stranded bags upstream of the
diverter and load onto an operating conveyor downstream of the diverter. These bags will NOT be reinserted into the system from the
CBRA. The TSA will be aware of the system fault condition and will reconcile the bags in the CBRA.
E.1.4.8CBRA Equipment Failure
• If the BSDs located in the CBRA room become inoperable, all bags will have to be searched manually, or as directed by local ORD TSA
protocol. Additional staff will be required if necessary to process the bags. TSA will need to coordinate with the BHS Control Room to
ensure that originating checked bags be routed to the Terminal 1 CBIS and that any hot or cold transfer bags be input onto another
transfer input to the Terminal 1 CBIS.
E.1.4.9 Transfer Input Failure
• In the event of a failure of IB1 or hot bag EX2 transfer input failure, United will still be able to induct bags on the alternate transfer input
line or if both input lines are disabled, alternate transfer input points are available that route bags to the basement EDS.
E.1.4.10 Out of Gauge Subsystem Failure or BMA Failure
• In the event the BMA (baggage measuring array) becomes faulted for an extended period of time, the system will continue to sort bags to
a security line X9 through X12. The BHS Control Room will be made aware of this event and should provide additional manpower to staff
the entrance of the EDS devices to ensure bags too large to be processed by the Level 1 machines are removed so as not to cause
damage to the machines or create a jam event.
E.1.4.11 Power Loss
• In the event of a system power loss, an Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) will allow the PLCs to retain all tracking data for a minimum of
two (2) hours.
• The UPSs provided for the L3 devices (if purchased) will allow for a controlled shut down of the x-ray gantry and screening computers.

• In the event any power failure results in an extended duration of the non-operable B-South system, TSA and UAL will proceeded in fall
back operations currently in place and initiated by UAL.
E.1.4.12 Unplanned Surge in System Demand
• Surge in system demand is handled by the redundant N+1 L3 6600 EDS device 1. Additionally the system can be metered to only send a
certain percentage of originating baggage to the B-South CBIS, if B-South becomes to overloaded a smaller percentage of bags can be
routed off.
1 The TSA notes that although the redundant EDS machine may make it feasible to handle a larger overall baggage rate, the redundant EDS machines are supplied to support
operational availability.

APPENDIX E-2:
MYRTLE BEACH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MYR)
IN-LINE BAGGAGE SCREENING
CONTINGENCY PLAN
Issued for: TSA 100% Submitted
By: BNP Associates, Inc.
21 September, 2011

REVISIONS
Version Description of Version Date Com pleted
0.1 Initial draft submitted to TSA 11-29-10
1.0 70% design submitted to TSA 05-27-11
2.0 70% design re-submitted to TSA 07-18-11
2.0 100% design submitted to TSA (w ith TSA 70% comments incorporated) 09-21-11

CONTENTS
REVISIONS E.2.4.10.2 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS E.2.4.11 Main Transport Line (TC1 and TC2) Failure
E.2.1 Introduction E.2.4.11.1 Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff
E.2.1.1 Purpose E.2.4.11.2 Procedures for TSA Staff
E.2.2 BHS Overview E.2.4.11.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.2.1 CBIS Overview E.2.4.12 Baggage Measuring Array Failure (TC2-BMA)
E.2.2.2 Screening Methodology Overview E.2.4.12.1 Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff
E.2.3 Objectives of the Contingency Plan E.2.4.12.2 Procedure for TSA Staff
E.2.3.1 Contingency Plan Implementation Risk E.2.4.12.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.3.2 Desired Outcomes E.2.4.13 Out of Gauge Line Failure (OG1)
E.2.3.3 Potential Impacts E.2.4.13.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff
E.2.3.4 Recourse Requirements E.2.4.13.2 Procedure for TSA Staff
E.2.4 Contingency Plan – CBIS Failures and Resolutions E.2.4.13.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.1 General E.2.4.14 EDS Machine, EDS-HSD, EDS Lines Failure or
E.2.4.2 BHS Contingency Plan Matrix Failure Upstream of Level One Decision Point
E.2.4.3 Defining Contingency Operation E.24.14.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff
E.2.4.4 Standard Procedures for BHS O&M Staff E.2.4.14.2 Procedure for TSA Staff
E.2.4.5 Standard Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff E.2.4.14.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.6 EDS Device Failure Notification Procedures E.2.4.15 First Decision Point Vertical Sorter Failure (SS1-VS
through SS3-VS)
E.2.4.7 PLC Failure
E.2.4.15.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff
E.2.4.8 Computer Failure
E.2.4.15.2 Procedure for TSA Staff
E.2.4.9 Ticket Counter Load Belts Failure Prior Fire Doors
(TC1, TC2) E.2.4.15.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.9.1 Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff E.2.4.16 EDS Clear Line Failure (CL1, CL2, CL3) Prior to CL5
E.2.4.9.2 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff E.2.4.16.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff
E.2.4.10 Ticket Counter Failure (TC1, TC2) Downstream of E.2.4.16.2 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
Fire Door E.2.4.17 OSR Decision Line Failure (OSR1, OSR2, OSR3,
E.2.4.10.1 Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff OSR5)

E.2.4.17.2 Procedure for TSA Staff E.2.4.23.2 Procedure for TSA Staff
E.2.4.17.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff E.2.4.23.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.18 Main OSR Decision Line Failure (OSR5) E.2.4.24 Cleared Bag Line Failure (CL5) Post Second
E.2.4.18.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff Decision Point Failure
E.2.4.18.2 Procedure for TSA Staff E.2.4.24.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff
E.2.4.18.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff E.2.4.24.2 Procedure for TSA Staff
E.2.4.19 Second Decision Point Failure (OSR5-VS) E.2.4.24.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.19.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff E.2.4.25 Sortation Line Failure (SL1)
E.2.4.20 CBRA Clear Line Failure (CL6) E.2.4.25.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.20.1 Procedure for Airline Baggage Handling Staff E.2.4.26 ATR Failure
E.2.4.20.3 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff E.2.4.26.2 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.21 OSR Failure E.2.4.27 MU Failure (MU1 or MU2)
E.2.4.22 Alarm Line Failure (AL1) Post OSR Decision E.2.4.27.2 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
E.2.4.22.1 Procedure for TSA Staff E.2.4.28 CBRA Equipment Failure
E.2.4.23 Reinsertion Line Failure (RI1) E.2.4.29 Treatment of Positively Identified Threat Bags by
TSA Staff
E.2.4.30 Power Loss

AL shall mean Alarm Line Subsystem O&M shall mean Operations and Maintenance
AOA shall mean Airport Operations Authority OOG shall mean Out Of Gauge
ATR shall mean Automatic Tag Reader OSR shall mean On-Screen Resolution
BHS shall mean Baggage Handling System PGDS shall mean TSA’s Planning Guidelines and Design
BMA shall mean Baggage Measuring Array Standards
BNP shall mean Baggage Consultant for MYR PLC shall mean Programmable Logic Controller
CBIS shall mean Checked Baggage Inspection System RI shall mean Reinsertion Line
CBRA shall mean Checked Baggage Resolution Area SAC shall mean Sortation Allocation Computer
CD shall mean Claim Device SL shall mean Sortation Line Subsystem
CL shall mean Clear Line Subsystem SS shall mean Security Screening Subsystem
EDS shall mean Explosive Detection System (Computer SVS shall mean Secondary Viewing Station
Tomography) TC shall mean Ticket Counter Subsystem
ETD shall mean Explosive Trace Detection TSA shall mean Transportation Security Administration
HSD shall mean High Speed Diverter TSO shall mean Transportation Security Officer (Baggage
IB shall mean Inbound Baggage System Screener)
MYR shall mean Myrtle Beach Airport Authority VMU shall mean Vertical Merge Unit
MU shall mean Make Up VSU shall mean Vertical Sorter Unit

E.2 Contingency Plan for Myrtle Beach International Airport In-Line Baggage Screening
E.2.1 Introduction
This site specific version of the Contingency Plan is for the new Medium Volume In Line EDS system located at the Myrtle Beach International
Airport. In accordance with the TSA Planning Guidelines and Design Standards, V3.0 dated 27 November, 2009 this document outlines a
contingency plan for the procedures and notification requirements applicable for equipment failures, loss of power and unplanned surges in
system demand etc. in the CBIS.
The contingency plan attempts to identify O & M activities for failure mode operations (automatic or manual), documenting and informing relevant
parties of changes to the BHS after system failure that have an impact on the processing baggage. The contingency plan does not address
general mechanical maintenance, where equipment is replaced, as this work is generally assumed to not have any impact on the BHS operation.
The success of any automated Checked Baggage System Inspection System (CBIS), regardless of the redundancies built into a particular system,
rest with the creation of a Contingency Plan (CP) that is agreed upon by key stakeholders, including MYR, any second part O&M Contractors, and
the TSA (Local and HQ).
E.2.1.1 Purpose
The following are overview topics for Contingency Plan consideration and “triggers” that would initiate contingency operations in the event of.

• Temporary alternative screening locations for baggage
• Removal of threat “Suspect” bags from the CBRA
• Airport Operations emergency Response Plan
• Horry County Airport Emergency Incident Response Plan

E.2.2 BHS Overview

E.2.2.1 CBIS Overview
The Myrtle Beach International Airport CBIS layout is based on the design standards and practices detailed in the TSA Planning Guidelines and
Design Standards (PGDS) Version 3.0, as coordinated between the TSA, AOA and the BNP Design Team. The major objectives of the Integrated
CBIS are to improve passenger circulation, eliminate EDS screening from the ticketing lobby to the make-up area, increase baggage handling
capacities and improve TSA employee work area ergonomics.
The 14520-3 BHS Specification details the complete system, equipment to be provided and the functional description of operation.
The baggage system consists of a check in area where passengers check baggage, a CBIS area where checked baggage is screened, an
outbound make up area where baggage is collected and manually loaded into baggage carts and an inbound area composed of two claim devices
with direct loading of the bags and two additional claims that are feed by two inbound transport line.
Bags enter the system via one of the two ticket counter lines installed east of grid line D, TC1 is located south of grid line 21 and TC2 is located to
the north of Grid line 23. Both ticketing mainlines turn west through and incline up over new ATO offices before turning 90º to the south prior to
entering the CBIS area. A new BMA will be installed both the TC1 and TC2 ticketing mainlines to dimension bags and ensure they are within the
size characteristics allowed by the L3-6600 EDS device. In gauge bags are diverted off of the TC2, and TC1 mainlines to the SS1, SS2 and SS3
security screening lines. Each SS line has eight (8) queuing positions that feed a L3-6600 EDS device. After bags have been processed by the
Level 1 EDS device they are tracked to a Level 1 decision point vertical sorter (SS1-VS, SS2-VS, and SS3-VS) where suspect, lost in tracking, no
decision (also pending decision), and EDS error bags are sorted to an associated OSR line. All OSR lines merge together onto the OSR5 mainline
and transport all bags to a Level 2 decision point vertical sorter (OSR5-VS). All bags cleared by the EDS device at the Level 1 decision will be
diverted by the Level 1 decision point VSU to an associated CL clear bag line. All the CL lines merge together onto the CL5 mainline which routes
bags to the make-up sortation area.
If during transport on the OSR line a clear decision is provided for any pending decision bags, a Level 2 VSU will sort those bags to the CL5 Clear
Line. All other alarmed (suspect), lost in tracking, or EDS error bags will be diverted by the Level 2 decision point VSU to the AL1 Alarm Line
which transports bags to the CBRA for Level 3 inspection or reintroduction into the system via the RI1 line.
All out of gauge bags transition onto the respective OG subsystem (OG1 or OG2) then merge together at a vertical merge onto a single OG3
mainline. These bags merge are routed to the CBRA for Level 3 inspection.
All Level 1 clear bag lines, CL1 through CL3, and the Clear Line from the CBRA, CL6, merge onto the Level 2 Clear Line CL5. CL5 transports bag
to the make-up sortation area where all bags are read by an ATR. Once scanned by the ATR CL5 becomes the SL1 mainline. Bags are tracked
along the sortation mainline SL1 and are diverted to either the MF1 or MF2 subsystem for transport to the appropriate make-up carousel (MU1 &

MU2). All sortation will be done by the BHS PLC and the SAC (sortation allocation computer) sorting bags by carrier codes. Tip chutes are
provided to transition the bags onto the flat plate make-up devices.
The new MYR inbound layout allows all four claim devices to be utilized at once so the inbound operation can handle four inbound flights in
process at the same time. Claims CD2 and CD4 utilize a direct drop procedure where the user airlines will unload bags from their carts directly

onto the moving claim device. Claims CD1 and CD3 are both feed by inbound transport conveyors IB1 and IB3 which feed bags onto the claims
using tip chutes. The inbound transport load belts are located on the west side of the one-way tug drive aisle and incline up over the tug drive aisle
before feeding onto their associated claims.

E.2.2.2 Screening Methodology Overview
The 100% In-Line integrated EDS configuration for this project will consist of three (3) Screening Level classifications which are as follows:
Level 1 – EDS screening:
All originating “in-gauge” checked bags shall be transported into a L3-6600 EDS device for Level 1 screening. Once the bag has been scanned by
the L3, the bag is ejected from the L3 scan tunnel. The L3 PLC must then track the bag through the L3 exit tunnel before the bag triggers the first
photocell downstream of the EDS device where the EDS machines Level 1 decision is handed back. The BHS PLC then tracks the bag with BHS
ID and the EDS decision. If the L3 has assigned the bag a CLEAR decision prior to the Level 1 VSU the BHS will divert the bag up to the
associated clear bag line (CL1 through CL3). If the l3 has assigned the bag a SUSPECT decision the bags image will be transferred to an OSR
operator for Level 2 processing. These bags as they reach the Level 1 decision point will be diverted down to their respective OSR screening line.
Bags that loose tracking or are given and EDS error or unknown status will also be diverted to the OSR screening line.
Level 2 – On Screen Resolution (OSR) operation:
Baggage that receives a SUSPECT decision from the L3 during Level 1 screening will have the suspect image delivered via the NEDS network to
a OSR station. The images shall be received and displayed one of multiple monitors in the OSR room. An operator will view the image in the
display for a configurable time duration utilizing Threat Resolution Tools (TRT) to determine if the bag can be determined CLEAR or SUSPECT. If
the operator determines that the bag is suspect or the allocated time period expires (maximum of 45 seconds), and no decision has been
rendered, the image and relevant bag will be given a SUSPECT Level 2 status. These bags shall be diverted at the Level 2 decision point vertical
sorter to the AL1 Alarm Line and transported to the CBRA for inspection. Bags that are given a CLEAR decision by an OSR operator will be
diverted to the associated Clear Line at the Level 2 decision point vertical sorter.
Level 3 Explosive Trace Detection (ETD) operation:
Lost in tracking bags, EDS unknown or error bags, and valid out of gauge and SUSPECT Level 2 bags will be transported to the CBRA via the AL
line for inspections and appropriate handling (ETD). Cleared Level 3 bags will be placed on the CL6 clear bag line that will transport bags across
the CBIS area and merge onto the CL5 mainline out to the make-up sortation area.
All Level 3 bags that cannot be cleared with ETD shall be handled per the local EOD protocol. Full access is provided into the CBRA to allow for
any required LEO explosive robot to maneuver as required to eliminate/remove the potential threat.

E.2.3 Objectives of the Contingency Plan

In the event the CBIS becomes inoperative due to any event which prevents the CBIS from processing baggage in a designed timely manner a
contingency plan developed for that event will be implemented.
This plan, dependent on the critical nature and size of event, would require multiple parties to communicate in a timely and efficient manner. If the
plan is not implemented properly or promptly, and event that already has degraded the system will only become more compounded and take a
longer duration to alleviate.
The Desired outcome of implementing a contingency plan is to screen as many bags as possible in the shortest time possible despite an event in
the system that would be preventing this operation. A contingency plan would remain in place until the system has reverted to its original state and
all the events / faults have been mitigated and corrected.
If an event that creates a sever long term downtime situation occurs, MYR would be required to quickly and effectively modify their operation to
ensure all outbound and transfer baggage are still processed in a timely manner.
TSA should have in place a dynamic agent deployment plan to provide any extra staffing inside the CBRA room in the event an unexpected flood
of bags is routed to the CBRA. This could be caused by both EDS device faults or in the event the clear bag mainline of the decision point has an
extended duration fault.

The following is a preliminary contingency plan for Myrtle Beach International Airport for the BHS and will be updated by the BHS Contractor
based on their functional specification and updated throughout the Construction Phase.

E.2.4.1 General
While expectations for airline ticketing staff, baggage handling staff, TSA personnel and BHS maintenance staff may be different for each event, it
may be generalized that additional staff will be required for each discipline. In the case of the BHS maintenance group, there is a set of standard
procedures that should be followed for each event. The programmable logic controller (PLC) will incorporate coded control logic to automatically
direct the conveyors to produce many of the necessary changes to the system as defined in the following contingency procedures. It should be
noted that for any failure of a system component in the new CBIS or CBRA that is determined to cause an extensive period of downtime or a
severe reduction in throughput capacity, the response team can choose to prevent any bags from being routed to the disabled CBIS. Any
unscreened or suspect stranded bags in the CBIS will need to be found, unloaded and transported to a CBRA for manually screening. Any clear
bags stranded on the clear bag mainline out of the CBIS will need to be recovered and inducted onto a functional input into the sortation system
downstream of the CBIS.
E.2.4.2 BHS Contingency Plan
Examples of what may “Trigger” a contingency operation are as follows:

• Temporary alternative screening location for baggage
• Removal of threat “Alarmed” bag from CBRA
• Airport Operations Emergency Response Plan
• Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for transportation security incidents
• Airport Emergency/Incident Response Plan
E.2.4.3 Defining Contingency Operation

The following must be taken into consideration before a full need assessment can be made on the best course of action for any failure:

• Peak or non-peak hours of operation

• Critical nature of failed components
• Difficulty in correcting the failure
• Availability of new components to correct failure
• Availability of appropriate personnel to correct or manage the event
• Time needed to correct the failure
E.2.4.4 Standard Procedures for BHS O&M Staff
• Upon fault recognition dispatch appropriate personnel to faulted conveyor or device for inspection and determination of impact.
• If fault can be rectified in less than 20 minutes, institute fix and then return to normal activities.
• If fault will take greater than 20 minutes to repair, affected operations should be informed and contingency operations implemented.
• Baggage Jam Runners (or Third-party Baggage Handling Agency) will manually transfer stranded bags and load them on closest
operational system.
• Maintenance personnel will implement plans to rectify the fault and advise impacted staff of expected time for the conveyor to be operable.
• Once the fault is corrected, maintenance to inform affected staff, through the BHS Control Room, that their operations will return to normal.
E.2.4.5 Standard Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff
• Determine if failed condition on the affected line requires intervention from BHS Maintenance personnel and inform the BHS Control Room
if it does for appropriate action.
• If the rectification is going to take longer than 20 minutes request additional help in moving baggage to a nearby available take away load
conveyor (e.g., Baggage Jam Runners or Third-party Baggage Handling Agency).
• Use small carts to facilitate the moving of bags, if redundant conveyor line is far from the Kiosk.
• Carefully place bags on the conveyor and maintain at least 8 inches intervals between bags.
E.2.4.6 EDS Device Failure Notification Procedures
• The EDS vendor should be contacted for the emergency maintenance and repair of TSA provided equipment.

• TSA equipment includes EDS devices, ETD equipment, NEDS interface, on-screen resolution equipment and passive threat resolution
information.
• Any changes to the EDS device programming by the TSA must be communicated to the BHS Control Room.
• TSA protocols exist for formal documentation of repairs and maintenance of TSA furnished equipment.
• TSA agents shall clear jams within the EDS device when notified by the BHS Control Room per conformance protocols.
E.2.4.7 PLC Failure
A PLC failure may affect a large area resulting in loss of control for many conveyors or even the complete matrix or both. PLC failures are typically
rare and relatively easy to fix and recover from.
The PLC control system has been compartmentalized into 4 distinct areas:
• CBIS
• Upstream of the CBIS
• Downstream of the CBIS
• Inbound
Each master PLC located in the control room maintains a redundant hot back up clone that automatically switch (seamless operation) between the
two when one fails.
The Inbound system is provided with cold back up PLC’s that can be manually switched between the two when one fails.
It should be noted that maintenance procedures must be instituted and maintained that ensure the integrity of the backup system. All program
changes made to a PLC must also be made to its back up PLC.
E.2.4.8 Computer Failure
The computer system servers—those used for sort control, reporting and fault monitoring—are all protected with redundant backup servers. These
redundant servers are called hot backups in that they are constantly observing the activities of their counterpart online server and they can
completely take over the activities of the online server if necessary without any intervention from an operator.
PLC sort control is an additional sort backup.

E.2.4.9 Ticket Counter Load Belts Failure Prior Fire Doors (TC1, TC2)
If the loading take-away belt for ticket counters conveyors become inoperable a conveyor immediately downstream of the faulted conveyor and
before the security door may be used.
E.2.4.9.1 Procedures for Airline Ticketing Staff
• Request additional help for moving bags to next available load point.
• If necessary, especially during peak loading periods, use small cart to facilitate transfer of bags.
• Carefully place bags lengthwise onto the conveyor observer proper bag hygiene.
E.2.4.9.2 Procedures for BHS Maintenance Staff
• Assess fault and time necessary to correct. If more than 20 minutes is needed initiate contingency operations.
• Determine if work can be conducted during airport operational hours as this work involves the public areas.
• If only one ticket counter can be used provide added personnel as required to transport baggage to the operational load belt.
• Follow BHS maintenance standard procedures.
• Coordinate with all parties involved to complete work in a timely and least disruptive manner.


E.2.4.10 Ticket Counter Failure (TC1, TC2) Downstream of Fire Door
This will be treated similar to line failure before the fire doors. Baggage already placed onto these conveyors will need to be removed and placed
on the nearest downstream, operating conveyor before the BMA on either transport line.
• Request additional help for moving bags to the other ticket counter load belts.
• If necessary, especially during peak loading periods, use small cart to facilitate transfer of bags.
• Carefully place bags lengthwise onto the conveyor in intervals at least eight inches apart.
• Assess fault and time necessary to correct; if more than 20 minutes is needed initiate the contingency operations.
• Remove bags stranded on inoperable conveyors and place them before the BMA on operational downstream conveyors or on the other
ticket counter transport line.


E.2.4.11 Main Transport Line (TC1 and TC2) Failure

These two transport lines convey baggage from the ticket counter to the two EDS matrices. The lines together provide a redundant feature and
increased load potential for the expected demand on the system. If one of the lines becomes inoperable carriers using the ticket counter will need
to use the input points for the other ticket counter. This is obviously an undesirable condition that may provide some relief but during peak periods
will require significant coordination between the carriers. It is a high priority that needs to be corrected very quickly.
• Request additional help for ticket agents in moving baggage.

• Use small cart to facilitate transfer of bags to the most convenient working conveyor.
• Carefully place bags lengthwise onto the conveyor in intervals at least eight inches apart.
• Select baggage for flights with departure time greater than one hour for placement later into the system.
E.2.4.11.2 Procedures for TSA Staff
• Additional personnel in the CBRA may be required for a short period of time for possible jams at the entrance of EDS devices or UNK
status bags from the stranded bags placed back in the BHS .
• During peak hours additional staff may be needed due to potential increase in no decision, suspect, incomplete images or jams in the EDS
machines if only one matrix will be used.
• Assess fault and time necessary to correct and if more than 20 minutes is needed initiate contingency operations.
• Manually remove bags left stranded on any of the failed conveyors and load on the nearest and accessible operating conveyor. Bags can
be placed on the ED lines that feed the EDS devices with additional consideration for OOG jams at the entrance of EDS device.
• Ensure the crossover diverter on the faulted line is in “Divert All” mode.


E.2.4.12 Baggage Measuring Array Failure (TC2-BMA)
If the baggage measuring array fails, bags cannot be sized appropriately for the EDS machine. The automatic control of the BHS will recognize the
fault and place the OOG diverter into “Divert all” mode. Bags will be transferred via high speed diverter to the OOG line for reinsertion of “in-
gauge” baggage and Level 3 screening of all OOG bags.
In the event that the baggage measuring array fails, bags shall continue to divert to the EDS shunts. In the event that conveying or screening
equipment failures occur down-line of the OOG diverter, the OOG diverter may be manually set to operate in a “limited operation” mode in which
all baggage is conveyed directly to the CBRA for manual screening. Engaging the “limited operation” mode shall only occur with concurrence from
local TSA..
• Ticket counter agents should take extra care to ensure Out-of-Gauge bags are not placed into the system. Ensure that only bags that will
pass through the EDS machines are placed on the ticket counter lines.
• Move Personnel to the CBRA to assist TSA with increased demand as a result of excess bags with UNK status arriving in the CBRA.
• Use small cart to facilitate transfer of OOG bags to CBRA for Level 3 screening.
• Add staff for increased demand in CBRA to assist with the reinsertion or search of bags with incomplete images during peak hours.
• Add staff to assist with jams at the EDS devices in feed conveyors.
• Assess fault and time necessary to correct; if longer than 20 minutes is needed initiate the contingency operations.
• Ensure that the crossover high speed diverter on the subsystem OG1 is placed into Divert all mode if bag screening demand is low.
• Upon direction from TSA place the OG1 conveyor into “divert none” mode. Simultaneously place the SS1 thru SS3 HSPD’s into “divert all”
mode.
• Provide additional staff to Monitor and assist the TSA in clearing jams at the in feed conveyor of the EDS devices.
• Follow BHS maintenance standard procedures
• Complete work quickly as this fault condition seriously damages the ability to use the automated features of the matrix.


E.2.4.13 Out of Gauge Line Failure (OG1)
The system’s monitoring software will recognize the fault condition. BHS personnel will inform the Airlines ticketing staff of the failure and the
expected duration of the fault.
• Add baggage handling staff to the location of fault to manually remove bags and load back downstream on the first operational conveyor
to be transported to CBRA.
• Ticket counter agents should take extra care to ensure Out-of-Gauge bags are not placed into the system. Ensure that only bags that will
pass through the EDS machines are placed on the ticket counter lines.
• Use small cart to facilitate transfer of OOG bags to CBRA for Level 3 screening.
• Add staff for increased demand in CBRA to assist with the reinsertion or search of bags with incomplete images during peak hours.
• Add staff to assist with jams at the EDS devices in feed conveyors.
• Asses fault and time necessary to correct and if more than 20 minutes is needed initiate contingency operations.
• Determine if the work to repair the fault is more disruptive than the condition itself and if a suitable temporary fix can accommodate TSA
until the end of working day, then work should be conducted during close-of-business hours. All parties should agree upon this solution,
otherwise repair efforts should be conducted in the earnest.
• Manually transport baggage to CBRA for Level 3 screening.


E.2.4.14 EDS Machine, EDS-HSD, EDS Lines Failure or Matrix Failure Upstream of Level One Decision Point
If one of the EDS machines becomes inoperable, the diverter or the conveyor line directly feeding the machine fails; the other operable machines
will be responsible for all security scanning. This is accomplished automatically by monitoring software that shuts down the diverter feeding that
line. This is also true regarding failures occurring on any of the security shunts lines.
In the event that the two lines on the matrix become unavailable, bags already in the system on the affected subsystems will manually be removed
and transported to the CBRA for screening. The stranded bags on the security shunt lines will be manually removed and placed on the working
matrix before the EDS machines. The system’s monitoring software will recognize the fault and place the HSD on the faulted subsystem in “Divert
none” mode. In case that the operational security shunt lines become full the bags will continue to CBRA via the OG line.
• Monitor the system for potential die back.

• Add staff to the CBRA to assist in taking bags to the ETD station or an area secured for build-up of the bags.
• Manually remove any bag stranded in the EDS device and place them on alternate operational EDS line upstream of EDS device.
• In case multiple SS lines are faulted add staff in the CBRA to assist in the screening of excess baggage.
• Contact appropriate EDS service vendor if the EDS machine malfunctions and needs maintenance.

• Ensure that HSD for the failed line is bypassed and placed back into use once the fault is corrected.
• Remove bags stranded on the failed feeding line to the EDS machines and manually place them on the other operable EDS line upstream
of EDS device.
• Carefully monitor the system to ensure that baggage system does not back up and cause cascading shutdowns of the system.


E.2.4.15 First Decision Point Vertical Sorter Failure (SS1-VS through SS3-VS)
This will be treated much the same as for the failed security shunt lines or EDS machine. Crossover lines can be used for load balancing.
• Monitor the system for potential die back.

• Manually remove any bag stranded in the EDS device and no decision bags after the EDS machine and place them onto working EDS
lines before the EDS machines.
• Contact appropriate EDS service vendor if the EDS machine malfunctions and needs maintenance.

• Remove bags stranded on the failed feeding line to the EDS machines and manually place them on the other operable EDS line.
E.2.4.16 EDS Clear Line Failure (CL1, CL2, CL3) Prior to CL5
EDS cleared bag lines face the same considerations as EDS machines and security shunt lines failure. The monitoring software should recognize
the fault and the other operable machines will be responsible for security screening. This is accomplished automatically and the respective line will
be shut down by placing the diverter in divert all. The line will not be used while the condition is in effect, alternative shunt lines will be used
instead and load balancing use of the crossover lines will be employed.
• Manually remove any cleared bags on the faulted conveyors and place them on first downstream operational conveyor on Clear Line or
sortation transport line.

• Request additional staff for transport of cleared bags on operational conveyor on alternate Clear Line or sortation line.

• Assist in moving cleared bags downstream of the fault on operational conveyor on alternate Clear Line or sortation line.


E.2.4.17 OSR Decision Line Failure (OSR1, OSR2, OSR3, OSR5)
Alarm Lines failure face the same considerations as EDS machines and security shunt lines failure. The monitoring software should recognize the
fault and the other operable machines will be responsible for security screening. This is accomplished automatically and the respective line will be
shut down by placing the diverter in divert all. The line will not be used while the condition is in effect and alternative shunt lines will be used
instead and load balancing use of the crossover lines will be employed.
Only the OSR5 line downstream of the OSR line merges create a complete shut down in the event of a failure.
• Move additional personnel to the CBRA for the extra demand on the ETD systems.

• Remove bags stranded on the failed line and place them downstream on the most accessible conveyor that transports bags to CBRA or
carry to CBRA until the last bag is removed from the faulted line.
• Carefully monitor the system to ensure that baggage system does not back up and cause cascading shutdowns of the system. Use load
balancing techniques with the crossover lines if necessary.


E.2.4.18 Main OSR Decision Line Failure (OSR5)
• Move additional personnel to the CBIS/CBRA for unloading bags from the Alarm Line and taking them to the ETD stations.
• Assist O & M and TSA to reposition bags from the failed conveyor to the most accessible functional conveyor downstream of the failed
conveyor. These bags would enter the CBRA with an UNK status.
• Place excess bags in an area secured for build-up of the bags.
• All bags stranded on the inoperable line should be removed and placed in the CBRA.
• Place excess bags in an area secured for build-up of the bags.
• The faulted conveyor should be repaired quickly.


E.2.4.19 Second Decision Point Failure (OSR5-VS)
If the OSR5 vertical sorter fails then all baggage not cleared and with an associated image from an EDS machine will continue to the CBRA for
resolution if the sorter can be locked in the alarm position. This is a temporary fix until BHS maintenance is prepared to fix the sorter that can be
accomplished during the airport’s non-operational hours. Bags cleared at Level 2 will be conveyed to the CBRA where they can be transferred to
CL6 line. TSA will need to provide extra staffing in the CBRA until the sorter is fixed. If the sorter cannot be used, then BHS maintenance or
baggage handling personnel will need to remove bags from the line prior to the sorter and place bags back on the Alarm Line after the sorter.
Tracking will be lost and all related images will not be associated with the bags. A dedicated area will be used for the collection of bags awaiting
resolution.
• Move additional personnel to the CBRA to assist TSA personnel in unloading excess bags from the AL1 Alarm Line and taking them to an
area secured for build-up of the bags.
• Help BHS maintenance staff remove stranded bags from the OSR5 line and place them back onto downstream functional AL1 conveyor.
• If possible and desirable place the vertical sorter in manual mode and lock in the divert-to-alarm-line placement. Perform the repair at a
more convenient time.
• If not, the failed vertical sorter should be placed out of service and quickly repaired. It will be placed back into service once the fault is
corrected.
• All bags stranded on the inoperable line should be removed and placed in the CBRA or on the Alarm Line downstream of the failed
vertical sorter.


E.2.4.20 CBRA Clear Line Failure (CL6)
The system is designed with one cleared bag line originating in the CBRA.
• Move personnel and baggage tub carts to the CBRA to assist TSA staff in moving cleared bags to CL5 line after the level 2 vertical sorter
unit (OSR5-VS).
• Place cleared bags in the CBRA on tub carts and move them to an accessible location on CL5 line after the OSR5-VS.
• Manually remove all stranded cleared bags from the line with the faulted conveyor and place them back on operational belts on clear or
sortation line downstream of the fault or take them to CBRA.


E.2.4.21 OSR Failure
If the ability to use the OSR services fails then all baggage will continue to the CBRA for resolution.
• Move additional personnel to the CBRA.

• Implement procedures for securing service from the EDS/OSR vendor.
E.2.4.22 Alarm Line Failure (AL1) Post OSR Decision
If an AL1 conveyor fails after the last decision point, bags will be manually removed and taken to the ETD stations for resolution. Tracking will be
lost and related images will not be associated with the bags.
• All bags stranded on the inoperable portion of the line should be removed and placed on an operable AL1 conveyor downstream of the
failed conveyor or in the CBRA.
E.2.4.23 Reinsertion Line Failure (RI1)
If RI1 line fails bags will be removed from the last operational conveyor and placed back on the same line downstream of the fault or on either TC
subsystem upstream of the BMA. Quickly correct the fault as this affects the operations in CBRA.
• Move personnel and baggage tub carts to the CBRA to assist TSA staff in moving bags from RI faulted conveyor to the next downstream
operational conveyor.

• Move additional personnel to the CBRA to move bags from the faulted RI conveyor to a working RI conveyor.
• Asses fault and time necessary to correct and if more than 20 minutes needed initiate contingency operations.
• All bags stranded on the inoperable portion of the line should be removed and placed on an operable RI1 conveyor downstream of the
failed conveyor or on either TC line before the BMA.
• Quickly correct point of failure.
E.2.4.24 Cleared Bag Line Failure (CL5) Post Second Decision Point Failure
If a conveyor fails on the CL5 cleared bag line after the OSR decision point then the bags will need to be manually removed from the line and
placed back on it downstream of the failed conveyor. If the line is inoperable for an extended period of time then the Alarm Line AL1 may be used
instead and all OSR cleared bags (if faulted conveyor is upstream of the CL5 conveyor that is the take away for CL1 and CL2) will travel to the
CBRA where they will be noted as cleared and placed on the CL6 line that merges onto sortation line (SL1).
If the take away conveyor on the CL5 line for CL1 and CL2 lines fails then crossover diverter will be placed in “Divert All”, stranded bags cleared at
level 1 on EDS Clear Line (CL1 and CL2) will be removed and placed on operational downstream Clear Line or sortation line and SS1-VS, SS2-
VS and OSR5-VS will be placed in sort-to-Alarm Line (down position) to travel all bags remained in these subsystems regardless of status to
CBRA where the clear bags will be noted as cleared and placed on the CL6 line (that merges onto sortation line SL1).
If the take away conveyor on CL5 line for CL3 conveyor fails then the only alternative for all cleared bags to exit the system is via CL6 thus all
bags will be directed (all VSU’s will be placed in sort-to-Alarm Line, down position) to CBRA where clear bags will be noted as cleared and placed
on the CL6 line (that merges onto sortation line SL1).
• Move additional personnel to the affected conveyors to assist BHS maintenance personnel in unloading bags from the CL5 line upstream
to the fault and placing them back on the line downstream of the fault.

• If bags remain on the Alarm Line and enter the CBRA then baggage handling personnel will need to assist TSA personnel in loading clear
bags onto the CL6 line.
• All bags stranded on the inoperable portion of the line should be removed and placed on an operable CL5 conveyor downstream of the
failed conveyor.
• If line is inoperable for an extended period of time then place OSR vertical sorters in a locked position with all bags staying on the AL1
Alarm Line.


E.2.4.25 Sortation Line Failure (SL1)
The Main Terminal sort area does not include redundant transport lines. This reduces some of the contingency possibilities when line and
component failures occur. However sortation line starting and continuing very close to where the make up units are located bags can be unloaded
from the faulted conveyor and either manually sorted and loaded into tugs if the faulted conveyor is before the make up feed line 1 diverter (MF1-
DV) or placed back on the line, downstream of the fault, feeding the default make up 2.
• Move personnel and baggage tub carts to the affected conveyors to assist BHS maintenance personnel in unloading bags from the SL1
line upstream to the fault and either placing them back on the line downstream of the fault or carrying them directly to tugs.
• Move additional personnel to the CBRA especially during peak hours due to possible high number of die backs on the BHS .
• Asses fault and time necessary to correct.

• Manually remove all cleared bags from the line with the faulted conveyor and place them back on operational belts downstream of the
fault and in case that the last conveyor on the line is faulted bags will be placed directly on the make up unit.
• Quickly correct point of failure.
E.2.4.26 ATR Failure
This is a potential disruption of some significance due to lack of mainline redundancy. The MU2 will be considered the primary default for this
contingency. This make up does not use a diverter, thus avoids potential missed diverts, subsequently all bags reach this point.
• Move personnel and baggage tub carts to designated default MU2.

• Ensure the diverter for MU1 is placed in “Pass All” mode.

• Monitor capacity level at the MU in use.
• Ensure conveyor traffic flows without jams and other fault conditions.
E.2.4.27 MU Failure (MU1 or MU2)
The Terminal sort area does not include redundant transport lines for each make up. In case that one MU device failed the other one will be used.
This will demand coordination between the affected carriers.
• Move personnel and baggage tub carts to the MU in use to assist with the increased volume of bags.

• Monitor capacity level at the MU in use.


E.2.4.28 CBRA Equipment Failure

• Alarmed bags entering the CBRA will need to be manually searched without direction if all HMI fails. If trace detection fails then all bags
will need to be manually searched.
• Contact appropriate sources/vendors for repairing failed devices.
E.2.4.29 Treatment of Positively Identified Threat Bags by TSA Staff
When TSA staff cannot clear an alarmed bag following Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) they shall contact the Airport Manager on Duty
(MOD) as well as the Airports Designated Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) for resolution of the Identified Threat. Bags identified in the CBRA as a
threat would require an immediate evacuation by staff. The Designated Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) then assumes full responsibility of the
threat bag and his/her standard operating procedure shall be followed.
An accessible route has been provided to allow for any EOD robot access in and out of the CBRA where the threat bag will be located.
E.2.4.30 Power Loss
In the event of a system power loss, an Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) will allow the PLCs to retain all tracking data for a minimum of two (2)
hours.
The UPSs provided for the EDS devices will allow for a controlled shut down of the x-ray gantry and screening computers.
In the event that any power failure results in an extended duration of the non-operable BHS TSA and MYR will proceed in fall back operations.

APPENDIX F RISK BASED SECURITY
APPENDIX F:
RISK BASED SECURITY IMPACTS FOR THE

ELECTRONIC BAGGAGE SCREENING PROGRAM
As of the date of this version of the PGDS, EBSP does not anticipate any impacts from RBS on CBIS designs or on the specifications contained in
the PGDS that are not already taken into account in this version of the PGDS. The key requirements for RBS according to EBSP's current plans
are having ATRs upstream of the EDS units, as detailed in Section 12.7.1.1, and having all infrastructure in place to support STIP for all screening
equipment, as detailed in Section 16.8.

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems F-1 August 21, 2020
APPENDIX G REFERENCES
APPENDIX G:
REFERENCES

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems G-1 August 21, 2020
The PGDS was developed with reference to several documents and models previously developed by the US government and its contractors, as
well as other standards organizations as discussed below:
G.1 Transportation Security Administration
• Recommended Security Guidelines for Airport Planning, Design and Construction, Revised May 2011
This revised document was issued by TSA in May 2011 and presents recommendations for incorporating sound security considerations
into the planning, design, construction, and modification of security-related airport facilities and airport terminal buildings. It consolidates
information developed through the participation of TSA and other government and aviation industry professionals. The Recommended
Security Guidelines document is intended to help users ensure that security considerations and requirements are a component of the
planning and design of airport infrastructure, facilities and operational elements. Intended users include aviation user-agencies (airport
operators, aircraft operators and airport tenants), airport planners and consultants, designers, architects, and engineers engaged in
renovation and new airport facility planning, design or construction projects.
• Integrated Deployment Model
As part of the BSIS, TSA also developed the Integrated Deployment Model, which is an economic model based on a life-cycle cost
approach to screening system selection. The model is used to conduct a top-down evaluation of various schematic concepts of EDS
screening systems, based on the methodologies outlined in this document. These schematic concepts take into account high-level spatial
constraints at airport terminals and are optimally sized according to the estimated checked baggage demand. The concepts were then
evaluated on the basis of the life-cycle costs of developing, maintaining, and replacing the EDS screening systems. Though schematic in
nature, these concepts may serve as a useful starting point for any airport or airline that plans to implement a checked baggage screening
system and would be made available upon request.
The Integrated Deployment Model is a working model that will be continuously updated as new technologies are developed and
performance characteristics are updated.
• Advanced Surveillance Program (ASP), TSA Baseline Video Surveillance Operational Requirements, Checked Baggage (draft)
• Check ed Baggage Inspection System Interface Requirements Document (IRD) for BHS and In-Line Screening Device (ISD)
• Electronic Baggage Screening Program Policy – TSA Funding of Checked Baggage Inspection System Project Costs: Beta.SAM.gov
• SSI Best Practices Guide for Non-DHS Employees and Contractors: TSA.gov SSI webpage.
Checked Baggage Program Contacts and Resources
• Guidance and FAQs on the funding and application processes can be found on TSA’s EBSP webpage.

• Requests for CBIS changes: submit to TSA ATSA Branch at BASEteam@tsa.dhs.gov

• To obtain the most up to date information on qualified EDS, e-mail PGDS@tsa.dhs.gov.
G.2 Other Federal Agencies
• Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure and the United States Department of Homeland Security, Configuring and Managing
Remote Access for Industrial Control Systems, April 2011,
• Customs and Border Protection, Advance Passenger Information System (APIS), Consolidated User Guide (CUG)
• Department of Defense Design Criteria Standard: Human Engineering MIL-STD-1472G
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-40 Rev. 3 Jul 2013 Guide to Enterprise Patch
Management Technologies http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-40r3
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-41 Rev. 1 Sep 2009 Guidelines on Firewalls and
Firewall Policy http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-41r1
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-61 Rev. 2 Aug 2012 Computer Security Incident
Handling Guide http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-61r2
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-82 Rev.2 May 2015 Guide to Industrial Control Systems
(ICS) Security http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-82r2
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-84 Sep 2006 Guide to Test, Training, and Exercise
Programs for IT Plans and Capabilities http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-84
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-98 Apr 2007 Guidelines for Securing Radio Frequency
Identification (RFID) Systems http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-98
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-100 Oct 2006 Information Security Handbook: A Guide
for Managers http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-100
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-115 Sep 2008 Technical Guide to Information Security
Testing and Assessment http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-115
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-153 Feb 2012 Guidelines for Securing Wireless Local
Area Network s (WLANs) http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-153
• National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Special Publication SP 800-167 Oct 2015 Guide to Application Whitelisting
http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-167

• United States Department of Homeland Security. (2009). Recommended Practice: Improving Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity
with Defense-In-Depth Strategies.
• United States Department of Homeland Security and Centre for the Protection Of National Infrastructure. (2011). Configuring & Managing
Remote Access For Industrial Control Systems.
• United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety & Health Administration Computer Workstations eTool, available at
www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/computerworkstations/index.html
• U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Standards 29 CFR 1910
G.3 Industry Guidance Documents
• American National Standards Institute, ANSI/ISA-62443-1-1 (99.01.01)-2007 - Security for Industrial Automation and Control Systems Part
1-1: Terminology, Concepts, and Models
• American National Standards Institute, ANSI/ISA-62443-2-1 (99.02.01)-2009 - Security for Industrial Automation and Control Systems:
Establishing an Industrial Automation and Control Systems Security Program
• American National Standards Institute, ANSI/ISA-TR62443-2-3-2015 - Security for industrial automation and control systems Part 2-3:
Patch management in the IACS environment
• American National Standards Institute, ANSI/ISA-62443-3-3 (99.03.03)-2013 - Security for industrial automation and control systems Part
3-3: System security requirements and security levels
• American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 62.1-2016 Ventilation for Acceptable
Indoor Air Quality.
• Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) International, Recommended Practice No. 10S-90, Cost Engineering
Terminology, copyright 2004.
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard ISO 11064-1: 1999, Design of Control Centers. Part 1: Principles for the
design of control centres
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard ISO 11064-2: 1999, Design of Control Centers. Part 2: Principles for the
arrangement of control suites
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard ISO 11064-3: 1999, Design of Control Centers. Part 3: Control room layout
• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC TS 62443-1-1:2009 Industrial communication networks -
Network and system security - Part 1-1: Terminology, concepts and models

• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC 62443-2-1:2010 Industrial communication network s -
Network and system security - Part 2-1: Establishing an industrial automation and control system security program
• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC TR 62443-2-3:2015 Security for industrial automation and
control systems - Part 2-3: Patch management in the IACS environment
• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC 62443-2-4:2015 Security for industrial automation and
control systems - Part 2-4: Security program requirements for IACS service providers
• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC PAS 62443-3:2008 Security for industrial process
measurement and control - Network and system security
• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC TR 62443-3-1:2009 Industrial communication network s -
Network and system security - Part 3-1: Security technologies for industrial automation and control systems
• International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission, IEC 62443-3-3:2013 Industrial communication networks -
Network and system security - Part 3-3: System security requirements and security levels
• National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70, National Electrical Code and NFPA 101, Life Safety Code
G.4 Additional Cybersecurity Resources
National Institute of Standards and Technology Information Technology Laboratory's (ITL) two security divisions - Computer Security
Division (CSD) and Applied Cybersecurity Division (ACD) – can be retrieved from: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/index.html.
American National Standards Institute, International Society of Automation and International Electro Commission
The 62443 series publications can be obtained from one of the following:
• https://www.ansi.org/
• http://www.iec.ch/
• https://www.isa.org/
Department of Homeland Security Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team
The Department of Homeland Security Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team (ICS-CERT) works to reduce risks within
and across all critical infrastructure sectors by partnering with law enforcement agencies and the intelligence community and coordinating efforts
among Federal, state, local, and tribal governments and control systems owners, operators, and vendors. Additionally, ICS-CERT collaborates
with international and private sector Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs) to share control systems-related security incidents and
mitigation measures. The ICS-CERT provides many cybersecurity publications and resources. Publications can be viewed at:

• https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/Recommended-Practices
• https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/Standards-and-References
The ICS-CERT main page can be accessed at:
• https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/

APPENDIX H REQUIREMENTS TABLE
APPENDIX H:
REQUIREMENTS LISTS

for Checked Baggage Inspection Systems H-1 August 21, 2020
APPLICABILITY REQUIREMENTS
Current Version
Designs for new CBISs shall comply with the requirements set forth in this version of the PGDS.
Prior Versions
Any project sponsor that has received formal confirmation from TSA of the receipt of the complete 30% Detailed Design Package for a CBIS project
prior to the publication date of this version of the PGDS shall continue to be governed by the PGDS version in effect at the time of such confirmation.
Furthermore, projects that have passed the 30% Detailed Design phase—including those systems currently under construction or in operation—
with TSA approval shall be held to the design standards specified by that approval (either under the previous PGDS versions or prior standards in
place before the publication of Version 1.0 of the PGDS).
CHAPTER 3: CBIS TYPES AND EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 CBIS Overview: New CBIS designs shall not include legacy units.
3.1 CBIS Overview: The Project Sponsor shall coordinate with the TSA Project Coordinator for any needed SSI and to make a final determination
on the conveyable bag dimensions.
3.2.1 In-Line CBIS: Throughput values used during design for system sizing shall be based on a site-specific bag sizes, which may differ from the
assumed 28” average bag size used in Table 3.1.
3.3.2 Stand-Alone EDS: Stand-alone EDS layout designs shall ensure TSA personnel do not handle baggage more than 8 feet from the entrance
or exit of the baggage screening location footprint (as validated by the local FSD) for the purposes of picking up a bag for screening or returning a
screened bag to the aircraft operator.
3.3.2 Stand-Alone EDS: Silent duress alarms shall be installed at all stand-alone EDS Checked Baggage screening areas located in the public
space.
3.4.1 Primary Screening: Silent duress alarms shall be installed at all ETD primary screening systems located in the public space.
3.5.1 Individual Carrier Systems: The Project Sponsor shall coordinate with TSA and OEMs to ensure the EDS-Carrier configuration is approved
and an approval letter is obtained from the TSA program office prior to the 100% design phase.
3.5.1 Individual Carrier Systems: The average ICS carrier size shall be no larger than two standard deviations above the airport-specific average
bag length, plus additional carrier length beyond maximum bag loading size required for operation specified by the ICS manufacturers (typically
6”).
3.5.1 Individual Carrier Systems: ICS throughput shall be calculated based upon the carrier size and the EDS manufacturer’s minimum spacing
requirements.

4.2.2 Integrated Local Design Team: The ILDT shall assess all implications of an exemption from any requirements set forth in the PGDS due to
local constraints and include full documentation supporting the request.
4.2.3 Project Sponsor: If an ILDT is not formed, the Project Sponsor shall assume the responsibilities of the ILDT as defined in Section 4.2.2.
4.3 Project Phases: All projects shall follow the phasing listed in below in sequence: (see text for additional details)
• Pre-Design Phase
• Schematic Design Phase
• Detailed Design Phase
• Construction Phase
• Testing and Commissioning Phase
• Project Closeout Phase
4.3 Project Phases: Using the GFI request form found in Appendix A, the ILDT shall request airport-specific GFI from TSA, if available.
4.3 Project Phases: During the entirety of the design phase:
• All formulas and calculations for figures shall be submitted.
• All PGDS or other TSA-provided rates and numbers shall be used in all submittals unless a RFV is submitted to and approved by TSA.
• All rates and numbers supplied in submittals shall be accompanied by all the supporting numbers and calculations.
4.4 Design-Build Projects: Sponsors of projects anticipated for completion through a design-build contract, regardless of the design percentage
at which the design-build contract is expected to be awarded, shall provide all documentation outlined in the PGDS.
4.4 Design-Build Projects: Documentation shall be provided in accordance with a schedule coordinated by the Project Sponsor and TSA to
ensure applicability of the intended system to the guidelines and standards presented in the PGDS.
4.4 Design-Build Projects: Additionally, shop drawings and 70% progress drawings shall be provided for CBISs being constructed through
design-build contracts to demonstrate that the system being constructed conforms to the design reviewed and approved by TSA.
4.5 Design Review Process: The Project Sponsor shall provide a written response to each TSA comment on the form and in the space provided.
4.6 Submittals Formatting: All submittals shall be made electronically in print-ready PDF and shall include the following:
• The title of the design shall be located on the front page and in the footer section, and shall state the applicable PGDS version at the time.
• Each design package shall begin with a table of contents.
• All chapters/submittals shall be indexed electronically within the file.
• A table of contents listing headings and page numbers shall be included in the front of each submittal.
• Each chapter shall be identified with an electronic PDF bookmark.
• PDF file size shall not exceed 20 MB for any submittal items.

4.7.2 TSA Funding, Use of TSA-Approved Equipment: When TSA funds the design and construction of a CBIS project, the project sponsor
shall design their CBIS for incorporation of TSA-qualified EDS and ETD units.
CHAPTER 5: PRE-DESIGN PHASE REQUIREMENTS

5.3 Pre-design Phase Deliverables: The Pre-Design package shall include the deliverables described below: (see text for details)
• Alternatives Analysis Report
5.5.1 Categorize the Airport into Screening Zones: All airlines (including charter airlines) operating in each screening zone shall be identified.
5.5.2 Determine Current Checked Baggage Demand: If available, FDRS data provided by TSA shall be used to determine the 85th percentile
peak 10-minute demand for each screening zone. If GFI is not available, the FSA methodology shall be used to derive the ADPM peak 10-minute
demand for each screening zone.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: For each screening zone, the total number of monthly originating bags and international recheck
bags for all airlines in that zone shall be obtained and the peak month identified.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: For each screening zone, the total number of daily originating and international recheck bags for
all airlines in that zone during the peak month shall be calculated, and a mathematical average shall be derived.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: Once the ADPM for each zone has been determined, that day’s flight schedule for each
screening zone shall be provided in MS Excel format. To identify outbound baggage demand, flight schedules shall only contain information on
departing flights from the subject airport. Flight schedules shall specify for each flight: destination, flight departure time, flight number, published
carrier, operator, aircraft type, and number of seats.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: To derive international recheck baggage demand, the arrival schedule of international flights
whose passengers will be connecting to domestic flights shall be provided.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: The percentage of passengers arriving on international flights and connecting to domestic flights
shall be used to derive international recheck baggage demand.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: The estimated number of originating passengers shall be calculated by multiplying the number
of seats by the load factor and by the percentage of originating passengers assumptions for the ADPM.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: The estimated number of connecting passengers from international to domestic flights shall be
calculated by multiplying the number of arriving seats by the load factor and by the percentage of connecting passengers assumptions for the
ADPM.
5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: The estimated number of originating checked bags shall be calculated by multiplying the
estimated number of originating passengers by the number of checked bags per passenger assumptions for the ADPM.

5.5.2.2 Flight Schedule Analysis Methodology: The estimated number of international recheck bags shall be calculated by multiplying the
estimated number of connecting passengers from international to domestic flights by the number of international recheck bags per passenger
assumptions for the ADPM
5.5.3 Project Future Baggage Demand: If, for any reason, local airport and airline staff and their consultants believe that the TAF or the Master
Plan forecasts do not properly represent expected growth at the airport, the revised forecast and a detailed explanation of the reasons that the
FAA-approved forecast is not acceptable shall be provided to TSA for approval.
5.5.3 Project Future Baggage Demand: Baggage demands shall be projected to the specific Design Year before they can be used to determine
screening equipment requirements. The design year for equipment requirements shall be five years after the initial DBU for a given baggage
screening system (i.e., DBU+5 years).
5.6 Baggage Screening Equipment Requirements Determination: In determining EDS equipment requirements, the surged adjusted 10 minute
demand of the design day in the design year (DBU+5) shall be used. OSR station and BIS requirements shall be based on the capacity of the EDS
equipment.
5.6 Baggage Screening Equipment Requirements Determination: The EDS equipment requirements shall be listed in 1-year increments in the
Basis of Design Report, from DBU through DBU+5 years.
5.6 Baggage Screening Equipment Requirements Determination: The EDS equipment requirements for 10 additional years past DBU+5 years
shall be listed in 1-year increments in a separate chart in the Basis of Design Report, from DBU+6 through DBU+15 years to support long-term
planning.
5.6 Baggage Screening Equipment Requirements Determination: Equipment requirements shall be revalidated 12 months prior to equipment
delivery. If EDS equipment type changes, the construction start date is delayed, or if the construction schedule causes delays more than 12
months beyond the expected DBU, then a revalidation of EDS and CBRA requirements shall be submitted.
5.6.2 EDS Equipment Requirements: The number of EDS units required shall be calculated as follows:
where:
NEDS = Number of EDS units
Adjusted Peak 10-Minute Demand = Peak 10-minute demand that will be screened by EDS units
Throughput EDS = Number of EDS screened bags per hour using the formula provided
Surge Factor is derived from an assumed Poisson arrival process distribution using the formula provided
5.6.2 EDS Equipment Requirements: The EDS throughput rates shall be calculated using the following formula:

5.6.2 EDS Equipment Requirements: The following formula shall be used to calculate each zone-specific surge factor:
5.6.3 EDS Equipment Redundancy: Redundant equipment shall only be provided when no lower-cost redundancies are possible.
5.6.4 OSR Station Requirements: The number of OSR stations to be actually installed shall be derived based on the total non-redundant EDS
capacity. The size of the OSR Room in terms of space allocation shall be based on the number of OSR stations derived based on the total EDS
capacity including redundant units.
5.6.4 OSR Station Requirements: The number of OSR stations (NOSR) required shall be calculated as follows:
where
NEDS x Throughput EDS = Total EDS capacity (throughput) for all non-redundant EDS units connected to the remote OSR system
FAEDS = EDS false alarm rate for the EDS equipment selected
Throughput OSR = 3600 / Screening Processing TimeOSR
5.6.5 Baggage Inspection Station Requirements: The number of BISs to be installed shall be derived based on the total non-redundant EDS
capacity. The size of the CBRA in terms of space allocation shall be based on the number of BISs derived based on the total EDS capacity.
5.6.5 Baggage Inspection Station Requirements: The number of BISs (NBIS) required shall be calculated as follows:
where calculations account for differences between domestic and international rates (see text for additional sub-variable details)
5.6.6 ETD Machine Requirements: The number of ETD machines required shall be calculated as follows:
5.7.1 Alternatives Development: When developing the Alternatives Analysis report as stated in the requirements for Pre-Design Phase in
Chapter 4, planners shall follow the requirements listed in Sections 5.2, 5.6, and Chapter 11.
5.7.1 Alternatives Development: Spatially and operationally feasible alternatives shall be evaluated on the basis of a 20-year life cycle cost
analysis detailed in Chapter 11 for implementing, maintaining, and replacing the screening system.
5.7.1.4 Alternatives Equipment Requirements Estimation: For each alternative proposed, planners shall determine the CBIS type (e.g., in-line,
mini In-line, stand-alone) and number of units required for each screening zone.

5.7.1.5 Alternatives Concept Definition: The ultimate terminal or airport capacity shall be the upper limit for demand estimates for the purposes
of CBIS design.
5.7.2.3 Selecting the Preferred Alternative: Alternatives shall be evaluated on the basis of the present value of total life cycle costs, defined as
the present value of the annual sum of capital, O&M, and staffing costs.
5.7.2.3 Selecting the Preferred Alternative: For the purposes of estimating the present value of these costs, planners shall use the 20-year Real
Interest Rate on Treasury Notes and Bonds of Specified Maturities found in the latest version of the Office of Management and Budget Circular
No. A-94, Appendix C, as the real discount rate.
5.7.2.3 Selecting the Preferred Alternative: Once the costs of all concept-level alternatives have been developed to include the full present
value life cycle costs, alternatives shall be ranked based on present value life cycle costs and the lowest-cost alternative that meets all other
requirements shall be selected as the preferred alternative.
CHAPTER 6: SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE REQUIREMENTS

6.3 Schematic Design Phase Deliverables: The Schematic Design package shall include the Basis of Design Report, which shall add the
following elements to the Alternatives Analysis Report described in the Pre-Design phase: (see text for details)
• Detailed program requirements, including planning and modeling assumptions and results, a conceptual system overview , and a system evaluation of the
preferred alternative. Planners shall make specific reference to TSA-specified CBIS design performance requirements and current commissioning
requirements outlined in Chapter 12 and Appendix D and also make specific reference to the equipment that TSA has identified to perform the screening
function.
• Indication of of preferred equipment type and quantity
• High-level flow -based modeling assumptions and results
• Preliminary concept plans for the existing BHS, as w ell as the planned configuration of the in-line CBIS
• Phasing and constructability technical memoranda documenting project-specific issues for each discipline, including CBIS design and architectural, structural,
mechanical, plumbing, electrical, and communications considerations
• ROM estimate of probable construction and O&M costs based on the BDR documentation
• Environmental compatibility assessment betw een environmental conditions that w ill exist in designed CBIS and environmental requirements of EDS units
6.3 Schematic Design Phase Deliverables: At the Schematic Design Phase, high-level flow-based modeling shall be used to determine
maximum baggage time in system by calculating the shortest and longest times a bag will travel through the system as measured from the natural
points of bag induction through an EDS, into and out of the CBRA and for the shortest and longest time for OOG bag travel from natural induction
into and out of the CBRA. The paths used for the high-level flow-based modeling calculations shall also be submitted to TSA on plan view
drawings.
6.3 Schematic Design Phase Deliverables: The approved Basis of Design Report shall be the basis upon which subsequent design is
developed.

CHAPTER 7: DETAILED DESIGN PHASE REQUIREMENTS
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: The 30% design package shall include the following documents, which shall be delivered both in the native
format (Word, Excel, AutoCAD, etc.) and as a PDF file (hard copies are not required): (see text for details)
• Preliminary plans for all disciplines
• Cross sections
• Concept of operations, including compatibility between legacy BHS and new CBIS equipment
• Baggage and data flow charts
• Table of Contents for CBIS
• Screening equipment installation guidelines, including HVAC requirements
• Outline of reporting capabilities
• National Environmental Policy Act form completion
• 30% Current Working Estimate and LCCA
• Preliminary phasing plan and schedule, including a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and
components labeled, if known
• List of EDS equipment that will be decommissioned
• Written response to TSA comments using TSA comment form
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: [The 30% design package] Preliminary plans for all disciplines include:
• Plan views of outlined conveyors and rights of ways, mechanical elements, UPS and power pole locations , EDS locations and CBRA
areas
• EDS unit removal route with locations of quick disconnect conveyors as well as all other O&M-related access
• Inclines and declines
• Conveyor delineations, especially near the EDS units and in the CBRA
• Conveyor identification (ID) labels
• Elevations of significant areas (floor and wall penetrations, steep gradients, congested areas)
• Top of Bed approximate elevations
• Approximate MCP locations
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: [The 30% design package] CBRA plans shall include:
• Elevations
• EDS pedestals if needed
• Operational description and design prints indicating how the “no lift” policy is to be met

• BRPs and insertion positions in relation to workstations and TSO movement space
• CONOPS and layout for OS and OOG bags
• Shrouding materials
• Flooring material
• Lighting design
• Noise reduction design
• Minimum environmental conditions
• Printers
• Bag Inspection Stations (Level 3 alarm resolution stations)
• Footprints for proper installation of stairs and ladders
• ETD locations and mounting options
• Bag Viewing Stations, Remote Resolution Station, FDRS locations
• Enlarged single-sheet plan view of CBRA
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: [The 30% design package includes] Concept of Operations including discussion of how the overall CBIS is
intended to work with emphasis on a detailed concept of operations discussion of the CBRA and an emphasis on legacy BHS (if applicable); this
shall include a description of compatibility between legacy BHS and new CBIS, contrasting baggage rates and controls methodology as well as the
results of time-in-system analyses through simulation studies for time-in-system and time-in-CBRA standards as detailed in Section 12.5.
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: [The 30% design package includes] Screening Equipment Installation Guidelines documenting the satisfactory
accommodation of the selected screening equipment in compliance with the manufacturer’s site-installation guide, including EDS ancillary
equipment and their respective spaces. HVAC requirements (EDS, CBRA OSR, IT closets, etc.) associated with those spaces shall be confirmed
at this phase.
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: [The 30% design package includes] Preliminary phasing plan and schedule:
• Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA BRPs) at
each construction phase; each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and
• Brief description of the state of the system represented in each phase drawing, including:
(e.g., which induct points, which screening lines, is CBRA temporary or final configuration, etc.)
• Schedule showing when each phase is anticipated amongst other major activities impacting the system state by the BHSC and EDS OEM
(e.g., high level of demolition and construction, networking and integration work, etc.)
7.2.2 30% Design Deliverables: [The 30% design package includes] Conveyor manifest showing conveyor identifiers, approximate conveyor
lengths and approximate conveyor speeds

7.2.4 Dynamic Modeling: If dynamic modeling is used, the modeling provider shall submit to the Project Sponsor and the TSA Project
Coordinator all programming parameters that may be used to adjust the model including but not limited to:
• Bag distribution methodology
• Belt speeds
• Merge windows
• Spacer/bag gap timers
• Jam timer
• Space programmed between bags for diverting
• Bag spacing at vertical sortation units
• All statistical distributions used
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: The 70% design package shall include the following documents: (see text for details)
• 70% design drawings for all disciplines
• Cross sections showing the vertical dimensions of the CBIS
• Refinements to the Description of Operations
• Refinements to Bag Time in System calculations based on high-level flow-based modeling calculations using the preferred CBIS
• Refinements to description of operations
• 70% specifications
• Draft site-specific configuration management plan
• Stakeholder notification documentation including responses to comments concerning OSR and CBRA for TSA review
• 70% Current Working Estimate and updated LCCA
• Updated list of EDS equipment that will be decommissioned
• Written response to TSA comments using TSA comment form
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes] 70% design drawings for all disciplines including:
• Mechanical drawings, including:
Motor and drive package locations
Catwalks, platforms, ladders, and stairways
Dimensions of points of intersection
Realistic elevations and Top of Bed identifiers, including areas of interest
Pertinent details (maintenance areas around EDS units, CBRA spatial dimensions, egresses for TSA personnel, stairways intended
for TSA personnel, EDS unit removal paths, etc.) that refer to the general concerns of the TSA prior to the BHS engineering occurring
post bid

Notable interference issues
• Demolition requirements
• Electrical
Control station locations
E-stop zones in the CBRA and adjacent to the EDS units (drawings which reflect areas and activating stations)
Device locations (photo eyes, shaft encoders, audio and visual alarms)
Intended locations and sizes of MCPs
• EDS unit removal route and all other O&M-related access
• Control room location (if applicable)
• Demolition and phasing plans
• Any refinements to CBRA plans
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes] Refinements to the Description of Operations including refinements to the
discussion of how the system is intended to work with emphasis on the CBRA and legacy BHS (if applicable); this shall include updates to the
description of compatibility between legacy BHS and new CBIS, contrasting baggage rates and controls methodology. Any differences between
proposed CBRA operations and Chapter 14 requirements shall be documented and submitted on an RFV.
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes] Preliminary Contingency Plan describing contingency operations in the
event of:
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes] 70% specifications with specific reference to the responsibility of the BHS
contractor to meet TSA-specified CBIS design performance requirements and current CBIS commissioning requirements for final TSA approval as
well as documentation on the reporting capabilities for which the CBIS is designed and related operational procedures (e.g., jam clear
procedures); refer to Chapter 12 for design standards and for detailed information on design performance requirements, and Appendix D for
commissioning requirements. BHS specification shall also include detailed requirements for the Baggage Inspection Stations.
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes]: Draft Site-Specific Configuration Management Plan including
documentation of the screening system boundaries, delineated areas of responsibility among TSA, the Project Sponsor, and the airlines (if they
are not the Project Sponsor), and procedures for documenting and informing relevant parties of modifications to the CBIS after submission of
documentation to the TSA. The Configuration Management Plan shall follow the outline [provided in text].
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes]: Refined phasing plan and schedule including:
• Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA BRPs) at
each construction phase; each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and

• Brief description of the state of the system represented in each phase drawing, including:
• Schedule showing when each phase is anticipated amongst other major activities impacting the system state by the BHSC and EDS OEM
(i.e., high level of demolition and construction, networking and integration work, etc.)
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes]: Conveyor manifest, including:
• Motor sizing
• Total amperage requirements
• Conveyor speeds (refined)
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: BHS specification shall also include detailed requirements for the Baggage Inspection Stations.
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: The Configuration Management Plan shall follow the outline below: (see text for details)
7.3.2 70% Design Deliverables: [The 70% design package includes] Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS
components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA BRPs) at each construction phase; each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled
with a construction phase number with conveyors and components labeled if known
7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables: The 100% design package shall include the following documents: (see text for details)
• Bid documents
• Final Basis of Design Report including a plan view PDF drawing of the entire system from baggage infeed to make up device
• Final description of operations
• Contingency Plans
• Project specifications with specific reference to the responsibility of the BHS contractor to meet TSA-specified CBIS design performance
requirements and current commissioning requirements for final TSA approval, including functional specifications of the system
• Final site-specific configuration management plan
• National Environmental Policy Act form confirmation
• Final 100% Current Working Estimate and updated LCCA
• Updated list of EDS equipment by make, model, and serial number that will be decommissioned after the proposed in-line system is
operational
• Updated conveyor manifest

7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables: [The 100% design package includes] Bid Documents, including:
• Cover sheet with noted stakeholders, project locale, title, dates, revision block
• Drawing index
• Legend sheet
• Mechanical
Conveyor manifest sheets
Plan views, including catwalk, stairs, and egress
Elevation views
Project specific/standard details
Phasing drawings
Demolition requirements
• Electrical
Control stations/devices/MCP locations
E-stop zones, with relevant control station
• Demolition and phasing plans
• EDS unit removal route as well as all other O&M-related access
• CBRA plans
7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables: [The 100% design package includes] Final Description of Operations including the final discussion of how the
system is intended to work with emphasis on the CBRA and legacy BHS (if applicable) including final updates to the description of compatibility
between legacy BHS and new CBIS, contrasting baggage rates and controls methodology. Any differences between proposed CBRA operations
and current version of Chapter 14 requirements shall be documented and submitted on an RFV.
7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables: [The 100% design package includes] Contingency Plans including diagrammatic depictions of baggage
screening contingencies, as well as other screening methods and mitigation measures. A consolidated document shall be provided to TSA
describing the conditions that would trigger mitigation measures and protocols for operation plus a directory of all project stakeholders with direct
responsibilities for operation of the CBIS.
7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables: [The 100% design package includes] Final Site-Specific Configuration Management Plan including any updates
on documentation of the boundaries of the screening system, delineated areas of responsibility among TSA, the Project Sponsor, and the airlines
(if they are not the Project Sponsor), and procedures for documenting and informing relevant parties of modifications to the CBIS after submission
of documentation to the TSA.
7.4.2 100% Design Deliverables: [The 100% design package includes] Final phasing plan and schedule: (see text for additional details)
• Plan view drawing package showing conveyor layout and BHS/EDS components of the CBIS (i.e., ATRs, BMAs, EDS, CBRA, BRPs) at
each construction phase. Each drawing shall have a title box clearly labeled with a construction phase number with conveyors and
components labeled if known. A brief description of the state of the system represented in each phase drawing, including:
The major functional changes of the CBIS in each phase (e.g., what components are removed or replaced, what major additions are

• A schedule showing when each phase is anticipated amongst other major activities impacting the system state by the BHSC and EDS
7.5.1 Contingency Planning Process: The Project Sponsor shall include contingency plans for extraordinary circumstances when baggage
demand exceeds CBIS capacity, whether as the result of the failure of CBIS (EDS or BHS) components or peak baggage flow that exceeds the
maximum capacity of the CBIS, and for instances where alarm bags at the CBRA are defined as suspect bags (i.e., they cannot be cleared using
directed search with ETD) and would need to be placed in the threat containment unit for further inspection by law enforcement (typically a bomb
disposal squad).
7.5.1 Contingency Planning Process: The Project Sponsor, CBIS design teams, and other stakeholders, such as airports, airlines, TSA FSD,
TSA Headquarters, and all other relevant Federal, state, and local authorities, shall mutually develop a set of agreeable mitigation measures within
a comprehensive contingency plan during the design process.
7.5.3.2 Out-of-Gauge Diverter – Bypass to ETD: Engaging the “limited operation” mode shall only occur with concurrence from local TSA.
CHAPTER 8: CONSTRUCTION PHASE REQUIREMENTS

8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: The following requirements shall be adhered to during the Construction
Phase, regardless of project type (design-bid-build versus design-build): (requirements listed separately)
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: To ensure TSA’s complete understanding and acceptance of the
projected system performance, any changes or amendments to the approved 100% design, including contract document addenda, change
requests and RFIs, that affect the functionality of the CBIS shall be presented for approval to TSA. Any variation from the 100% approved design
will not be funded without prior TSA approval of the changes.
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: Construction schedules shall include at a minimum key milestones for
project completion such as: (see text for details)
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: TSA Deployment, through its contractor, distributes the uncompleted Pre-
ISAT Project Portfolio Checklist to the Project Sponsor at no less than 120 days before the planned start of ISAT testing, and the project sponsor
shall provide Acceptance Testing this completed checklist and the site documentation it defines no less than 90 days before the planned start of
ISAT testing.
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: The Project Sponsor shall submit an updated Construction Schedule to
TSA stakeholders at a minimum of every 30 days after construction award. Most projects conduct a weekly meeting to review project status and
shall invite a TSA Deployment representative.
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: The project sponsor shall request an update of the availability of
equipment and equipment upgrades.

8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: At a minimum, the following ISAT durations shall be used as initial inputs
to the construction schedule with the type of ISAT test being conducted (single-phase or multi-phase): (see text for details)
8.2 Project Sponsor and ILDT Construction Phase Responsibilities: The Project Sponsor shall consult with the TSA Project Coordinator and
their TSA Acceptance Testing representative no later than 90 days prior to ISAT to refine projected commissioning durations.
8.2.1 Construction Phase Deliverables: The Construction Phase deliverables shall include the following documents: (see text for details)
• Any changes or amendments to the approved 100% design including contract document addenda, change requests and RFIs
• Courtesy copies of shop and installation drawings to ensure the original intent of the design as reviewed up to and including the 100%
design review submittal process
• Cybersecurity plan
• Cybersecurity incident handling plan
8.2.1 Construction Phase Deliverables: [Construction Phase deliverables include] Cybersecurity plan. The plan shall be specific to the CBIS and
shall include the following sections, where applicable (not all sections apply to all systems, e.g., not all systems have remote access capabilities):
• System architecture drawings.
• User and account management controls.
• Remote access policy and procedures.
• Access log retention policy and procedures.
• External network connections and access controls.
• Disaster recovery plans and procedures.
8.2.3 Meetings: Regular meetings shall be conducted with the Project Sponsor/ILDT and TSA to monitor system construction.
8.3 Post-ISAT System Change Implementation and Test Data: A descriptive summary narrative of the procedures and protocols in place to
implement, test, and document changes made to the CBIS post-ISAT shall include at a minimum the items listed in this section.
8.3.1 CBIS Change Requests: TSA’s CCR form shall be used for all pre- and post-ISAT change requests. All requests for changes shall be
submitted to TSA ATSA Branch at BASETeam@tsa.dhs.gov.
8.3.1 CBIS Change Requests: When any change to the CBIS is required during the TRR, a change request shall be submitted to and approved
by TSA’s Site Integration (SI) contractor prior to implementation.
8.3.1 CBIS Change Requests: When any change to the CBIS is required post-TRN, between the Test Readiness Review and the completion of
ISAT, a change request shall be submitted to and approved by TSA’s Acceptance Testing contractor prior to implementation.
8.3.1 CBIS Change Requests: When any change to the CBIS is required post-ISAT, a change request shall be submitted to and approved by
TSA ATSA Branch prior to implementation.

8.3.2 Change Request Log: A log of each change made to the CBIS post-ISAT shall be maintained. This log shall be included in the change
request submittal for TSA approval. The log shall include the following data at a minimum:
• Name of persons implementing the change
Reason for the change (i.e., problem being resolved)
Expected resolution
• Identification / location of the change
Name of device (e.g., PLC-1, HM1-1, SC-1, etc.)
Name of program / subprogram
Location in the program / subprogram (e.g., rung 1, line 1, etc.)
• Test methodology
Description of test
Expected results
8.3.3 TSA Approval: The proposed change shall be implemented for testing and live operations if and only if approved by the TSA. The testing
results shall be submitted to the TSA within five business days upon the completion of testing.
8.3.4 Testing Procedures: Testing procedures shall be developed and followed during any BHS testing on the CBIS post-ISAT. At a minimum,
the procedures shall include:
• Available times for testing
• Contingency plan
• Documentation
Definition of testing process
Software download / upload
Hardware modification / restoration
• Wiring modification / restoration
• Notification to all stakeholders
Testing Period
Live Operations
8.3.5 Test Results: Empirical data shall be recorded during testing. A summary of the data shall be provided explaining how the collected data
met (or did not meet) the expected results.
8.4.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training: CBIS use and logistics training, distinct from maintenance training, shall be provided by the Project
Sponsor to TSA for mechanical, electrical, and computer functions required to properly operate the staffed portions of the system including, but not
be limited to:
• Any BHS-provided equipment in the CBRA

• Bag induction and handling procedures
• Any BHS-provided equipment in the OSRA
• BHS control interface provided to conduct the IQT procedures
• CBIS orientation and layout
• CBIS fail-safe procedures and layout
• System safety
• Bag jam and fault clearing procedures
• BHS reporting system
8.4.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training: The BHSC shall provide training on how to access and download BHS reports as well as SSI training for
any BHS reports classified as SSI; training must comply with Federal Government SSI guidelines. SSI Best Practices and Quick Reference Guides
for more information on SSI handling, sharing, and destroying procedures can be found on the TSA.gov site at
https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/sensitive-security-information.
8.4.1 CBIS Use and Logistics Training: All operators or individuals with access to either viewing or printing reports shall have completed SSI
procedures training prior to operation. The training sessions shall be conducted prior to the operational startup of the respective BHS.
8.4.1.1 Training Deliverables: Training materials and documentation to be presented shall be submitted to TSA for review 60 days prior to the
first scheduled training session.
CHAPTER 9: TESTING AND COMMISSIONING PHASE REQUIREMENTS

9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: All IATA tags for all phases of BHS testing, Pre-ISAT, TRR, and ISAT shall be provided by the airport or
airline tenant.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: These [pre-ISAT] tests shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth in Appendix D.
The project sponsor shall provide a TRR Readiness confirmation letter to TSA DLD prior to the start of TRR Testing. This letter shall be
accompanied by written documentation of successful demonstration and acceptance of Pre-ISAT Test results. The project sponsor shall also
provide copies of all unlocked PLC code to DLD prior to ISAT testing.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: From the TRR forward, the Project Sponsor shall ensure that change management processes are
stringently adhered to. Sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 detail the conditions under which variance and change requests shall be initiated. In addition to
the process outlined in Appendix D, a benchmarked copy of the PLC program controlling CBIS components (from induction points to the cleared
bag sortation ATR) shall be submitted at the following points:
• Post-ISAT
• Post-Operational Run-In
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: PLC code representing the CBIS under test shall be provided to TSA's Acceptance Testing Contractor
at ISAT, and PLC code representing the post-operational run-in state shall be provided to TSA’s Acceptance Testing Contractor during on-site

observations for the run-in period or be submitted remotely upon successful completion of the run-in period if observations are not made.
Passwords for any and all portions of “locked” PLC code shall be provided along with the code.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: If the CBIS fails the TRR, subsequent testing shall be conducted at intervals of no less than 14 calendar
days.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: A combined pre-ISAT/TRR shall be conducted with the ISAT scheduled separately when there are
multiple EDS, multiple changes to the in-feed or out-feed, or changes to the OSR or CBRA subsystem.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: Logistical and labor support shall include at minimum:
• Operational EDS Network Printers to print EDS images
• Operational BHS network printers to print BHS reports
• Baggage handlers to assist in bag induction
• Tugs and carts to move test bags to test locations
• Fork lift support for TSA-owned Unit Load Devices that transport test bags
• Bag tags for test bags
• Secure storage space for test bags
• SIDA badging support for TSA contractor test team
• SIDA escort support
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: If the CBIS fails the ISAT conducted by TSA, subsequent testing shall be conducted at intervals of no
less than 30 calendar days.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: The Run-In Period shall consist of an initial 14-day period to collect operational data (BHS and EDS) to
support a thorough analysis that accurately depicts the system performance.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: During the Run-In period, the Project Sponsor or its designees shall submit weekly data reports in
electronic format, preferably in PDF or native CSV file format to the TSA Acceptance Testing Contractor. These reports shall include all BHS
reports required by PGDS Section 12.13 (CBIS Reporting Requirements) as well as select EDS reports.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: Upon notification from TSA APM that a Post-ISAT Audit has been directed, the authority with
jurisdiction at the airport (along with local TSA) shall submit to the TSA Acceptance Testing Contractor and the TSA ATSA Branch, the immediate
past 30 days of BHS and EDS reports in electronic format, preferably in native CSV or PDF format. These reports shall include all BHS reports
required by PGDS Section 12.13 (CBIS Reporting Requirements) as well as select EDS Reports.
9.2 Testing and Commissioning Phase: Any CBIS components not in final configuration, or any situation requiring phased commissioning (see
also the ILDT Section 4.2.2 and Project Sponsor Responsibility Section 4.2.3 above), shall be submitted to TSA for approval using the Request for
PGDS Variance Template found in Appendix A, Section A.7 prior to the start of TRR testing.
9.3 Testing and Commissioning Phase Deliverables: The Testing and Commissioning Phase deliverables shall include the following:

CHAPTER 10: PROJECT CLOSEOUT PHASE REQUIREMENTS

10.2 Project Closeout Phase Deliverables: The Project Closeout Phase deliverables shall include the following:
• As-built CBIS documentation submittal
• The PLC program shall be submitted to TSA in accordance with Chapter 9.
• PLC and software disaster recovery procedures shall be submitted to TSA, including software recovery applications.
10.2 Project Closeout Phase Deliverables: As-built CBIS documentation shall be submitted to TSA, in both CAD and PDF file format, as follows:
• Final Description of Operations
• A complete set of BHS as-built mechanical and electrical drawings, including: (see text for details)
10.3.1 Electronic File Naming Convention: The electronic file names shall conform to the following convention: (see text for details)
ABC_XXXX_LOCATION_MMDDYYYY_TYPE_DESCRIPTION.EXT
10.3.2 Submittal Format: The submittal data described in this section shall be submitted to the TSA as follows:
• 30-Day Post DBU Submission: Within 30 days following DBU, the initial submittal, as defined in Section Chapter 9, shall be made.
• Submission Procedure: Submission of all data shall be coordinated with the FSD or designee. All data shall be submitted via electronic
files – paper copies will not be accepted.
10.3.2.1 Summary: A descriptive summary narrative of the submittal shall be included in Microsoft Word and PDF format. Refer to Section
10.3.2.1 for the electronic file naming convention. This summary shall include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Airport name and area of the airport included in the submittal such as terminal, matrix, node, etc.
• Description of the included area including:
Number and type of EDS units
Type and quantity of infeed conveyor systems such as ticket counter sub-systems, curbside sub-systems, mainlines, etc.
Type and quantity of outfeed conveyor systems such as mainlines to sort piers, make-up units, etc.
• Description of the conveyors / sub-systems and their controller equipment. At a minimum, the following information shall be provided:
List of each PLC and the conveyors / sub-systems it controls
List of each MCP and the conveyors / sub-systems it controls
• Contact information for:
Airport director, engineering manager or other primary contact point responsible for this CBIS
Airlines primary contact for this CBIS
Operation and maintenance contractor (if applicable) primary point of contact
Point of contact responsible for follow-up submittals
10.3.2.2 Index: An index of the documents included in the submittal shall be included. This index shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel and PDF
format. The index shall include, at a minimum, the title of each file, the file date and the electronic file name.

10.3.3 Control System Architecture Drawing: A control system architecture drawing shall be summated for each CBIS. This drawing shall be
submitted in DXF and PDF format. All high and low level networks shall be included. Detail shall be down to the motor control panel or PLC
chassis level for high-level networks. Detail shall be down to the PEC or control devices for low level networks. Configuration information such as
node numbers and IP addresses shall be included.
10.3.4 PLC Code and Associated Configuration Information: The low level, or PLC control, submission shall include the following at a
minimum.
PLC Program: A copy of the PLC program shall be submitted in its native format for all PLCs included as a part of the CBIS. In the event multiple
levels of PLCs are utilized all programs are to be included. This shall include any redundant PLCs that may exist. All software keys and or
passwords shall be provided if programs are protected and or locked in some way.
• Network Configuration: A copy of all network configuration files shall be submitted in its native format. This shall include any redundant
networks that may exist.
• VFD Configuration: A copy of the configuration of each VFD (including any firmware information) in the CBIS shall be submitted in its
native format. The configuration submittal shall include all parameters including unchanged or default settings.
• Communication and Other Controllers: A copy of the configuration and code for all other devices as a part of the control system shall be
submitted in its native format. An example of these devices might be co-processors or multi-vendor interfaces.
• Firmware Configuration: A spreadsheet listing all control devices and their associated firmware levels, where firmware is used, shall be
submitted. This spreadsheet shall be submitted as both a Microsoft Excel document and as a PDF file. All devices which have firmware
shall be included. Examples of these devices are PLC chassis, PLCs, I/O modules, Network modules, Communication modules and
VFDs.
10.3.5 HMI Configuration: A copy of all HMI configurations shall be submitted in their native format.
10.3.5 HMI Configuration: Soft copies of these programs shall also be proved including any portion which is required to operate the system.
10.3.6 High-level Computer Configuration: A descriptive narrative of the high-level computer equipment of the CBIS shall be submitted in
Microsoft Word and PDF format. Included in the narrative shall be a description of each computer and the function/task of the computer. Any data
exchange between any computers or PLCs that control or affects bag decisions shall be included. In addition, the narrative shall describe the
results of any computer failure and the ability of the CBIS to continue screening baggage.
10.3.7 Programming and Configuration Software: A spreadsheet listing all programming and configuration software with the revision level used
shall be submitted. This spreadsheet shall be submitted as both a Microsoft Excel document and as a PDF file.
10.3.8 CBIS/ISAT Benchmark Data: A descriptive summary narrative of the system status at time of submittal shall be included in Microsoft Word
and PDF format. This summary shall include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Scan time for each PLC, average and maximum
• Memory utilization for each PLC
• Network utilization for each network, high and low level networks. Where deterministic networks with set update times are used provide all
settings and times.

10.3.9 Change Summary Log: A log of all changes made to the CBIS post-ISAT shall be maintained. The log shall be an itemized list of all the
implemented and pending changes to date. This log shall be included in all submittals after its creation. The log shall include the following data at
a minimum:
• Name of Change
• Status of change (i.e., in testing, operational, pending, etc.)
• Date of TSA approval
• Date of live operational use
CHAPTER 11: LIFE CYCLE COST ESTIMATING REQUIREMENTS

11.1 Life Cycle Cost Estimating Overview: To establish the lowest-cost alternative, planners shall calculate the life cycle costs of developing,
maintaining, and replacing the CBIS.
11.2.1 Life Cycle Cost Analysis Period: To provide a standardized period for assessing life cycle costs, a 20-year total timeframe shall be
assumed based on an EBSP Acquisition Decision Memorandum to fully capture the upfront capital costs, as well as recurring costs for staffing,
O&M, and life cycle replacements.
11.2.4 Real Dollar Cost: Real values are used to provide a consistent comparison of costs over time and shall be used to estimate all costs
considered in the life cycle analysis.
11.3.5 Required Building and BHS Infrastructure Modification Costs: Planners shall develop a detailed, bottom-up cost estimate for facility
modification and infrastructure costs for all alternatives being considered.
11.3.5 Required Building and BHS Infrastructure Modification Costs: Facility modification costs shall be adjusted to account for regional
differences in construction costs based on the latest RS Means Construction Cost Data Indexes published by Reed Construction Data or by other
industry-standard cost adjustment practices.
11.5.3 Incremental BHS Maintenance Costs: For the purposes of the life cycle cost analysis of screening alternatives, planners shall only
consider the incremental cost of BHS maintenance which is calculated by subtracting the existing maintenance cost of the current BHS (with or
without a CBIS) from the total estimated maintenance cost of the new BHS with the proposed CBIS.
11.5.3 Incremental BHS Maintenance Costs: The overall annual cost of O&M for the full CBIS shall be estimated at 10% of the initial overall cost
of the system.
11.5.4 Incremental BHS Operating Costs: Planners shall compare utility costs for the BHS on an incremental basis. To calculate the incremental
BHS operating costs, planners shall subtract the existing operating cost of the current BHS (with or without a CBIS) from the total estimated
operating cost of the new BHS with the proposed CBIS.

11.6.1 TSA Personnel Costs: Planners shall request staffing cost estimates for the screening alternatives under consideration upon submittal of
the Preliminary Alternatives Analysis Report.
11.6.2 Incremental Costs for Baggage Porters and Other Airport/Airline Staff: Any increase or decrease in costs for baggage porters or other
airport/airline staff shall be included in the life cycle cost analysis. Planners shall include only incremental costs for baggage porters or other
airport/airline staff.
11.7 Current Working Estimate Submissions: Airport sponsors requesting funding support from TSA shall provide a detailed cost estimate
summary as included in Figure 11-1 at each phase of design.
11.7.2 Cost Estimate Pricing Substantiation: All CWE pricing shall be effective as of the date of the submittal. The BOE documentation should
clearly indicate that the estimate is reflective of current market conditions.
11.7.2 Cost Estimate Pricing Substantiation: Estimates submitted for funding request purposes shall be accompanied by a market analysis
specific to the airport location and timeframe during which proposed improvements will be implemented.
11.7.3 Allocable Costs: The Project Sponsor shall include both allowable/allocable and non-allowable/allocable costs in the appropriate CWE
column.
11.8 Basis of Estimate Document: Estimates submitted for funding request purposes shall include a BOE document which includes, at a
minimum, the following elements:
• Purpose
• Executive summary
• Project scope description
• Methodology used to prepare the estimate
Work breakdown structure
Tools and data sources
Major cost components: labor, equipment, and material
Subcontractor and prime contractor markups and fees
Allowances
Other factors
Schedule requirements
Assumptions, exclusions, and exemptions
Areas of risks
11.8.2 Executive Summary: The Executive Summary shall provide a brief (no more than one page) overview of the project for which the
independent cost estimate, cost estimate validation, or cost to complete report is being prepared. The Executive Summary section shall include,
not necessarily in this order, discussions of:
• Where the project sponsor is in the bid and construction contract award process, if applicable
• Whether construction has already begun and, if so, how much of the construction has been completed, if applicable

• If the airport sponsor has awarded the construction contract, the type of construction contract instrument (firm fixed price, time and
materials, design-build, etc.), if applicable
• Name of the general contractor and BHS contractor, if available
• Name and telephone number of the airport representative that provided the cost information
• Brief statement of the design level the estimate was based on and statement as to whether the CWE is authored by a single entity or is a
reconciliation of two or more estimates
• Statement of the escalation that has been used, based on a project schedule and a summary of the CWE at a high level to show BHS
costs, other construction-related costs, and soft costs
• Discussion of any known areas of risk
• Total estimated cost
• Statement regarding whether the airport sponsor’s estimate is reflective of current market conditions. This statement should address:
Description of current bidding climate relative to number of bidders responding to requests for proposals
Use of Davis Bacon Act wage rates, where applicable
List of current construction projects, including project name, type, approximate construction value, and schedule
Use of union versus nonunion labor
Narrative of labor availability
Narrative of material and equipment availability
Review of typical contracting methods used in location
• Statement of the currency (i.e., age) of the airport sponsor estimates. Estimates for projects constantly change. In order to maximize use
of limited funding cost estimates for projects must be current and validated for funding to be approved.
11.8.4.1 Work Breakdown Structure: A generic description of the estimate format and relationships of detailed cost items to their hierarchy shall
be presented.
11.8.4.2 Tools and Data Sources: The BOE shall indicate the primary estimating methodology used in preparing the cost estimate, including that
used for cost resources, historical data, and estimating tools and documents.
11.8.4.3 Major Cost Components: Labor, Equipment, Material: Sources for labor, equipment and material cost elements used in preparing the
estimate shall be described, thereby further demonstrating the estimator’s level of effort and knowledge of the project requirements.
11.8.4.5 Allowances: Allowances used in the estimate and the reason they were used shall be clearly stated.
11.8.4.8 Assumptions, Exclusions, and Exemptions: The BOE shall include three separate and distinct bulleted listings that concisely identify
the assumptions, exclusions, and exemptions used in developing the estimate.
11.10 Estimate Trending: Any changes to scope or design shall be identified, documented, and submitted to the TSA Project Coordinator for
approval prior to initiation of the next design phase.

12.3 BHS Capacity: For new systems, no component of the CBIS shall constrain the maximum qualified capacity of each EDS unit. For
recapitalization projects, the existing capacity of the CBIS shall not be reduced.
12.3 BHS Capacity: Legacy baggage handling systems shall not affect the performance of the CBIS.
12.3 BHS Capacity: The Project Sponsor shall ensure compliance with the EDS OEM’s site planning and installation guidelines.
12.3.1 Mainline Requirements: Mainlines shall be capable of delivering bags to the EDS units to equal the capacity of the total non-redundant
EDS units. Prior to entering the STZ, the BHS shall regulate baggage flow to not exceed the capacity of the non-redundant EDS machines.
Mainlines taking bags away from the EDS unit shall be capable of transporting bags equal to or greater than the capacity of the non-redundant
EDS units.
12.3.2 Tail-to-Head Bag Spacing Requirements: For slider bed conveyors, the space between bags as measured from the trailing edge of
leading bag to the leading edge of the trailing bag, or “tail-to-head spacing” shall be no less than 12 inches prior to entering the EDS unit.
• Bag Spacing shall be measured on the queue conveyor immediately upstream of the EDS machine and shall be adjustable.
• Adjustments to bag spacing shall be done via the main BHS Operator interface (HMI) in the BHS control room. Adjustment is not allowed
on remote HMIs.
• Adjustments to bag spacing are allowed only at TSA’s request and through use of the CCR process.
• Adjustment ranges will be fixed with a minimum of 12 inches and a maximum of 36 inches.
• BHS Bag Spacing reporting shall:
Maintain spacing data for last 100 bags
Omit spacing greater than 36 inches when creating averages
Maintain a column in the “Bag Spacing Report” that shows bag spacing/averages
Trigger an event record when spacing is changed that will include time,date of change, and new spacing setting
12.3.2 Tail-to-Head Bag Spacing Requirements: The speed of the queue belt immediately before and after the EDS unit (as bags transition into
and out of the EDS) shall comply with the EDS Integration manual. For ICS, the space between carriers shall be as determined by the EDS
manufacturer and their ability to clearly delineate between carriers.
12.4 Screening Throughput Capacity Requirement: The actual screening throughput capacity of the CBIS as tested in accordance with the
information presented in Appendix D shall meet or exceed the EDS throughput rate listed in the 100% approved BDR. If the average bag length
used in the BDR differs from the average bag length of the ISAT test bag set, the tested throughput capacity will be adjusted from the BDR rate to
be based on the ISAT test bag set average length. If this rate is greater than the maximum screening capacity of CBRA, the tested capacity of the
CBIS shall not exceed the CBRA capacity.
12.6.1 Bag Travel Time Requirements, In-Line Systems: For in-line systems, the CBIS shall allow a minimum of 45 seconds of BTT without
holding bags.
12.6.2 Bag Travel Time Requirements, Mini In-Line Systems: For mini in-line systems, the minimum BTT shall be 60 seconds.

12.6.2 Bag Travel Time Requirements, Mini In-Line Systems: For mini in-line systems, the minimum design OVT shall be 25 seconds for each
alarm bag, for up to 3 consecutives alarm bags.
12.7.1 CBIS Positive Bag Tracking Requirements: The CBIS shall be capable of maintaining positive bag tracking in the STZ during events
(e.g., diebacks, merging, decision point transitions, etc.) that are typical of situations which may occur in baggage handling systems.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The BHS shall assign a unique tracking ID (BHS Pseudo ID) to each bag once the bag enters the STZ within
the CBIS for the purposes of positive bag tracking.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The CBIS shall incorporate an ATR upstream of the EDS matrix.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: ATR read rates shall be no less than 98% for laser arrays and 99% for RFID applications for valid reads for that
system during controlled testing.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: All systems utilizing an ATR shall maintain a relation between the BHS tracking ID and the 10-digit IATA bag
tag ID for all bags that are successfully read.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The BHS Pseudo ID shall be used as the Primary ID passed from the BHS to the EDS. In all systems where an
ATR is present, the 10-digit IATA bag tag data shall also be passed from the BHS to the EDS.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The BHS Pseudo ID and, if available, the 10-digit IATA bag tag data shall be transferred between BHS and
EDS equipment as defined by each EDS manufacturer’s interface requirements document or integration guide. If the EDS does not accept both a
BHS Pseudo ID and a 10-digit IATA bag tag ID, then the 10-digit IATA bag tag ID shall be transferred to the EDS as the primary tracking ID.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The upstream IATA tracking accuracy shall be calculated and reported in the CBIS Executive Summary Report,
Figure A.4 1 by summing the quantity of the 10-digit IATA bag tags that are successfully handed off to the EDS units, REDS, with the quantity of 10-
digit IATA bag tags that are seen by the photo eye just past the OOG divert location, ROOG @ PE, all divided by the quantity of 10-digit IATA bag tags
that are successfully read by the ATR and supplied to the BHS, R. This value shall be displayed as a percentage and shall be at least 97%.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The IATA Handoff Accuracy shall be calculated by dividing the total number of 10 digit IATA bag tags sent back
at the exit of the EDS machine by the total EDS volume. This measurement shall be displayed in the CBIS Performance report.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The BHS OEM shall ensure EDS Bag ID overlap does not occur between any EDS unit within any matrix.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: BHS Pseudo IDs and EDS Pseudo IDs shall not overlap with IATA requirements for bag tag IDs or repeat
themselves within 24 hours (i.e., unique BHS/EDS IDs are required for a duration of 24 hours).
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The OOG tracking accuracy (absolute) shall be calculated by dividing the quantity of successfully tracked OOG
bags just after the OOG divert location by the total OOG bags detected at the BMA. This value shall be displayed as a percentage in the CBIS
Executive Summary Report and shall be at least 97%.
12.7.1.1 Pre-EDS Requirements: The Invalid OOG Arrival percentage shall be measured just after the OOG divert location and calculated by
subtracting the known OOG bags, ROOG @ PE + RNR, OOG @ PE, from the total quantity of bags at the same location, all divided by the total
quantity of bags at the same location. This value shall be displayed as a percentage in the Daily CBIS Summary Report.

12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: When the EDS passes a decision to the BHS, the BHS shall retain this status throughout the tracking process
for each bag and never override the EDS decision.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: If a decision is not received from the EDS, the BHS shall assign a Communication Error status for tracking.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: At no time shall the system swap or transfer BHS tracking IDs on or between bags, nor swap or transfer
security screening decisions on or between bags.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: Invalid arrivals at CBRA shall be monitored and logged via the BHS reporting system.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: During controlled testing, EDS Error and Timeout arrivals are excluded from the CBRA Arrival Rate
calculation. During live operations, EDS Error and Timeout arrivals are included in the Invalid CBRA Arrival Rate calculation and shall be separately
tracked, as any of these arrivals represent a system deficiency.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: The Invalid CBRA Arrival rate allowed for controlled testing and live operations shall not exceed 3% in a CBRA
designed with a BRL, and not exceed 2% in a CBRA designed without a BRL.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: In the event of a BHS or EDS emergency stop (e-stop) activation, the system shall:
• Maintain tracking of all bags screened by the EDS and
• Maintain the security status of all bags that have been screened by the EDS and
• Maintain the security decision transmitted from the EDS to the BHS prior to or after activation of either a BHS or EDS e stop.
12.7.1.2 Post-EDS Requirements: The EDS shall recover from the e-stop condition in accordance with published criteria from the EDS vendor
and the BHS shall recover per established e-stop recovery procedures defined in the BHS specifications and in accordance with the OEM’s
integration guidelines.
12.7.1.3 CBIS Detection Requirements: The CBIS shall be capable of detecting when any bag infringes on the tracking window of any other bag
as long as the bags are at or above the minimum conveyance size and the bag is not on top of, underneath, or directly beside another bag:
12.7.1.3 CBIS Detection Requirements: The CBIS shall be capable of detecting when a bag has been delayed or accelerated in accordance with
Appendix D, Section D.3.2 and D.3.3. Delaying or accelerating a bag beyond the configured tracking tolerance shall result in application of one of
the following solutions:
• Upstream of EDS (single bag): The CBIS shall reacquire the bag and continue tracking.
• Downstream of EDS (single bag): If the bag has already been screened and traveled downstream of the EDS, any security status
assigned to the bag will no longer be considered valid and the bag shall be routed to the CBRA. For ICS, if the identification of the carrier
can be reacquired prior to the last divert point and the status of the bag is clear, the carrier can be rerouted to the sortation area.
• Downstream of EDS (multiple bags): If multiple bags are involved and tracking windows have been infringed upon, then the CBIS shall be
capable of detecting this condition and route all bags involved to the CBRA. For ICS, if the identification of the carrier can be reacquired
prior to the last divert point and the status of the bag is clear, the carrier can be rerouted to the sortation area.
12.7.1.3 CBIS Detection Requirements: The CBIS shall be capable of detecting when a bag has been added within the tracking zone as long as
that bag is added anywhere other than on top of, underneath, or directly beside another bag.

• Upstream of EDS (single bag): The CBIS shall acquire the bag and continue tracking.
• Downstream of EDS (single bag): If the addition occurs downstream of the EDS and only the added bag itself is affected (added bag does
not infringe on the tracking window of another bag), then the added bag shall be routed to the CBRA.
12.8.1 CBIS Conveyor Subsystem Nomenclature: The following nomenclatures shall be used by CBIS designers:
• Mainline Feeds: SF (Security Feed)
• Shunt: SS (Security Shunt)
• Out-of-Gauge: OOG
• OSR Line: OSR
• Clear Line: CL
• Alarm Line: AL
• Re-Insert Line: RL
• Oversize: OS
• Crossovers: XO
12.8.3 Divert and Merge Requirements: Bags exiting each EDS unit shall be separated by their clear or non-clear screening status prior to
merging onto the post-EDS mainline or OSR line. ICS carriers shall be separated by their clear or non-clear status at the first opportunity but may
travel on the OSR line.
12.8.3 Divert and Merge Requirements: After clear and non-clear bags have been separated, they shall not be commingled.
12.8.3 Divert and Merge: Only clear bags shall be diverted at horizontal diverters; non-clear bags shall pass through. At vertical diverters, clear
bags shall divert up and non-clear bags shall divert down.
12.8.1 CBIS Conveyor Subsystem Nomenclature: The following requirements apply to diverters in the security tracking zone downstream of the
EDS units:
• For systems with two decision point diverters, at the first decision point diverter, if the system is unable to divert a clear bag, the bag shall
bypass the diverter on the Alarm Line.
• For systems with two decision point diverters, at the second chance diverter, if the system is unable to divert a clear bag, the bag shall
cascade stop and NOT bypass the diverter on the Alarm Line.
• For systems with a single decision point diverter, if the system is unable to divert a clear bag, the bag shall cascade stop and NOT bypass
the diverter on the Alarm Line.
• The CBIS bypass feature shall be enabled and disabled via an operator’s workstation in the BHS control room. Bypass features that send
non-clear bags to the outbound system shall not be allowed.
12.8.4 Baggage Allocation Methodology: BAM refers to the logic used to distribute bags between the EDS units. All new CBIS designs shall
incorporate a round-robin BAM, in which bags are routed singularly and consecutively to each available SS line. Deviations from round-robin BAM
shall be submitted through an RFV for review and approval by TSA.

12.8.6 Recirculation Loop Requirement: The automatic recirculation of bags shall not be designed, either pre-EDS screening or post-EDS
screening, except for connected reinsertion lines in the CBRA as shown in Section 12.8.7.
12.8.7 Reinsertion Line Requirement: Non-cleared bags shall only be reinserted upstream of the STZ.
12.8.8 Draft Curtain Requirement: All PECs shall be clear of obstructions including draft curtains.
12.8.9 Stack Light Requirements: Stack lights used at decision points in the CBIS shall adhere to the following color designations:
• Green = Cleared
• Red = Alarm
• Blue = Fail-safe
• White = All others (Unknown, EDS Errored, Pending, etc.)
12.8.12 Out-of-Gauge Bag Conveyance: The CBIS shall transport OOG bags directly to the CBRA. OOG bags shall be diverted upstream of the
EDS lines. To minimize bags on the OOG line, bags that do not have dimension information or that may have been lost in tracking after the BMA
shall be transported to an EDS shunt, not the OOG line. Additionally, an over-height protective device shall be installed two queues in front of each
EDS unit, e.g., an over-height photo eye, light curtain, headache bar or other similar device to ensure over height bags are stopped prior to the
EDS unit.
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements: In the event of a fail-safe activation, the default path for any non-clear bag shall be to a
secure location. Non-clear bags shall never be sent to an airside location.
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements: Fail-safe activations shall not exceed 0.5% of bag volume for each system test in controlled
testing as measured by dividing the number of fail-safe activations at all Decision Diversion Points by Total Bags Inducted.
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements: Fail-safe activations shall not exceed 0.5% of bag volume during the Daily Peak Hour and
24-Hour Calendar Day as measured by dividing the number of fail-safe activations at all Decision Points by Total Bags Inducted using the Daily
CBIS Summary Report defined in Appendix A, Section A.4.
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements: The sidewalls of all conveyors or portions of conveyors associated with the fail-safe zone
shall be clearly marked or identified to support appropriate bag removal.
12.9.1 Fail-Safe Operation General Requirements: Fail-safe alarms shall be distinct from all other types of system event alarms.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: Bag length shall be measured at a photo eye no more than two queue conveyors
upstream of the EDS unit. This measurement shall be established as the bag’s baseline length. The use of a dual belt speed conveyor shall not
negatively affect this measurement in any way.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: Bags shall be tracked though each diverter downstream of the EDS units prior to
the CBRA. A single bag failing to track from the decision photo eye upstream of the diverter to the fail-safe photo eye on the Alarm Line
downstream of the diverter shall activate a fail-safe condition.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: Upon activation of a fail-safe:

• The appropriate number of conveyors on the clear bag line, as calculated in Item 4 below, shall stop; and,
• Activate audible and visible fail-safe alarms in locationss designated by TSA.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: The length of clear bag line conveyors to stop shall be calculated as follows:
1. Measure the amount of time (T) for a bag to travel from the tracking/decision point photo eye before the diverter to the fail-safe photo eye
after the diverter.
2. Calculate the distance (D) a bag travels on the clear line in the time established in step #1 above (T), and then add five additional feet.
This distance (D+5) is the portion of the Clear Line identified as the fail-safe zone.
3. All conveyors in the fail-safe zone must be stopped during a fail-safe event.
4. To account for unique project requirements, additional conveyors may be identified and stopped as a part of the fail-safe zone. However,
under no circumstances shall fewer conveyors be identified and stopped as the fail-safe zone.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: For systems with more than one diverter between the EDS units and the CBRA,
during a fail-safe activation at the first chance diverter, clear bags shall pass the diverter on the Alarm Line to be diverted at the second chance
diverter.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: For systems with a single diverter, during a fail-safe activation at this diverter, clear
bags shall not pass the diverter and shall cascade stop upstream of the diverter.
12.9.2 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for In-Line CBIS: Bag length shall be re-measured at the decision photo eye (or photo eye on
upstream adjacent conveyor) immediately upstream of the diverter. This measurement shall be compared to the bag’s baseline length. Any bag
that has increased in length by 12 inches or more at the decision photo eye (or photo eye on upstream adjacent conveyor) upstream of the
diverter shall be conveyed to the CBRA with a status of “Length Change”.
12.9.3 Fail-Safe Operation Requirements for a Manually Operated In-Line Decision Point CBIS: In case of a fail-safe event, the BHS shall
identify non-clear bags and perform one of the following actions:
• Recognize the condition as a non-clear bag on the Clear Line; or,
• Maintain a halt condition on the Clear Line beyond the manually operated in-line decision point except when a clear bag has been
successfully transported through the in-line decision point (i.e., bag information for any non-clear bags has been cleared and a clear bag is
either approaching the in-line point or a bag has been processed manually at the CBRA and is reinserted at the reinsertion point through
the use of local BHS controls); and,
• Activate audible and visible fail-safe alarms.
12.10 Operational Test Kit: Specific OTK Test controls shall be built into the CBIS in coordination with the EDS and BHS vendors and their
integration documentation. The OTK testing controls shall be appropriately located to control the OTK Test with minimal walking between the
controls, OTK load point and OTK unload point, and between adjacent units so that two units can be tested from one location. The conveyors
between the OTK load and unload points shall be straight with a maximum angle of 0 degrees.
12.10 Operational Test Kit: These [OTK Test] controls shall enable an operator to:

• Stop the normal flow of bags into the EDS without losing track of bags already in the system.
• Allow the OTK bag to be placed safely and properly onto the EDS entrance conveyor or immediately adjacent conveyor. The sideguard
height at this interface point shall not exceed 4 inches and have no protrusions or sharp edges. For safety purposes, the conveyor belt
immediately upstream of the OTK load point shall stop when OTK Mode is activated to prevent a pinch point.
• Restart the EDS entrance conveyor to feed the OTK bag into the EDS.
• Stop the OTK bag on the EDS exit conveyor or immediately adjacent conveyor to allow removal of the IQT bag. The sideguard height at
this removal point shall not exceed 4 inches and have no protrusions or shape edges.
• Allow for repeat of OTK Tests as necessary.
• Return the system to normal screening operation.
12.10 Operational Test Kit: All of the OTK processes shall be supported without requiring a shutdown and restart of the CBIS from a MCP or
other location. The OTK control station shall consist of a keyless, selector type switch or HMI graphics to enable the OTK test mode. The OTK test
activation signal shall be annunciated in the BHS control room.
12.11 Bag Jam Rate: The bag jam rate is calculated by dividing the number of jam events (hard and missing) from the ATRs of the SF line
through all EDS shunt lines to the entrance of the EDS by the total bags inducted. The Jam Rate shall be less than 1%.
12.11 Bag Jam Rate: During controlled testing, the bag jam rate for each system test shall be less than 1% of inducted bag volume is calculated
by dividing the number of jam events (hard and missing) from the ATRs of the SF line through all EDS shunts to the entrance of the EDS by the
total bags inducted during the test.
12.11 Bag Jam Rate: During live bag operations, the bag jam rate shall be less than 1% of bag volume during the Daily Peak Hour and 24-hour
Calendar Day as measured using the Daily CBIS Summary Report defined in Appendix A, Section A.4.
12.12.1 Service Access: A minimum service area shall be provided of 3 feet around all four sides of the equipment along with a minimum vertical
clearance of 9 feet for the EDS.
12.12.2 Maintainability Requirements, Environment: The Project Sponsor shall ensure that all operating environmental and maintenance
requirements as set in the OEM’s integration guidelines are met.
12.12.2 Maintainability Requirements, Environment: Designers shall not use wet-type fire protection sprinkler systems above or in close
proximity to the EDS machines. Other pre-action or dry sprinkler systems shall be used to minimize any uneccesary damage to the EDS.
12.12.2 Maintainability Requirements, Environment: Designers shall use the EDS PGDS Maintainability Standards Exhibit (Environment
Checklist) displayed in Figure 12 5 to ensure that the required environmental standards described in this section are met.
12.12.3 Storage and Spare Parts Access: Secure storage space shall be provided for spare parts and tools. This space should be approximately
150 square feet per CBIS and shall be located close to the EDS unit.
12.12.4 EDS Replacement: The Project Sponsor shall include access routes for EDS equipment replacement in the CBIS design.
12.12.5 Quick Disconnect Standard: CBIS designers shall identify the appropriate number of conveyor components in the Detailed Design
phase immediately before and after the EDS unit that will be readily removable using commonly available hand or power tools. Designers shall

also identify the methodology for removal of any ancillary equipment before or after the EDS units to allow for easy access to the EDS units for
maintenance, removal or replacement.
12.12.6 EDS UPS and Power Requirements: CBIS designers shall coordinate the EDS UPS unit locations and requirements during the early
design phases.
12.13.1 Reporting Frequency Requirement: The CBIS reporting system shall be capable of providing data in real time (±1 minute) and in hourly,
daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annual, and manually entered time periods.
12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements: The CBIS reporting system shall be capable of providing detailed data by Bag ID number and EDS unit
and will be provided by the BHS Vendor.
12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements: At a minimum, the reporting system shall be capable of providing the following features in reports:
• Bag Data
Bag Tag number (with ATR/RFID installed)
Time stamped at BMA
BHS tracking ID number for each bag (shared by BHS and EDS unit)
Bag type (OS, OOG, in-gauge)
Time stamped when bag enters the EDS unit or time stamped when OOG bags are diverted to OOG Line
SSI - Level 1 screening status
SSI - Level 2 screening status
• Critical Tracking PEC: Immediately upstream and downstream of each EDS, prior to and after each tracked divert point, and at the last
tracked PEC entering the CBRA, the BHS shall report the following for each activation of the PEC:
Bag ID
SSI - Bag screening status
• BHS Faults
Fault type (NOTE: A "fault" is defined as a “cause” such as lost in track, motor overload, PEC failure, encoder failure)
Fault location
Fault time
Fault time cleared
Total fault time
• BHS Events
Event type (NOTE: An "event" is defined as the “effect” of a fault, such as re-establish tracking, fail-safe, or jams, or the “effect” of
human interaction on the system, such as via HMI or control station, e.g., pushing an e stop or OTK activation)
Event location

Event time
Total event time
• EDS Statistics (if data to support these statistics is available from the EDS OEM being installed)
SSI – Number of bags alarmed by specific EDS unit
SSI – Number of bags cleared by specific EDS unit
EDS unit faults (if known)
Start time of fault
End time of fault
• ATR Performance
ATR Name
ATR Description (i.e., Tracking or Sortation)
Total number of bags seen
Total number of tags read
Number of problem tag reads (this can be provided as a single total count or ideally as a set of constituent counts plus a total count
and should be representative of the number of unreadable/missing tags, number of invalid tag reads, number of conflict/multi-tag
reads, etc.)
Number of associated tag reads (i.e., the number of 10-digit IATA bag tag IDs read and associated with the bag’s BHS tracking ID)
Total number of 10-digit IATA bag tags that are read at the ATR and passed to the EDS
Total number of 10-digit IATA bag tags sent back at the EDS exit
Upstream IATA Tracking Accuracy
IATA Handoff Accuracy
• BMA Statistics
Total number of bags through the BMA
Total number of OS bags
Total number of OOG bags
OOG (absolute) tracking accuracy
• System Baggage Volumes
By input conveyors (ticket counter conveyors, curbside conveyors, oversize conveyors)
By screening area (including EDS unit and CBRA)

• CBRA Statistics – CBRA statistics shall be presented and considered SSI.
Cleared
o Cleared (CLR)
o PRE-Clear (P-CLR)
o SEL-Clear (S-CLR)
- A larmed
o Alarmed (ALM)
o PRE-Alarmed (P-ALM)
o SEL-Alarmed (S-ALM)
o No Decision
o Purged
o Queue Time Out (Q-TimeOut)
o Operator Time Out (O-TimeOut)
Lost in Tracking
o Mistracked
o Bag Length Tracking
o Following Lost Bag
o Too Close
o Security Re-route
Unscreened
o OS
o OOG
o OOG (absolute) Tracking Accuracy
Reinsert Line
o Reinserted bags
• PEC Tracking Statistics
Total number of bags seen at each PEC
Total number of purged bags at each PEC
Total number of missing bags at each PEC
Total number of unknown bags at each PEC
Total number of “hard” jams at each PEC
Total number of missing bag jams at each PEC
• BPT Statistics – see Section 14.5.5
Total number of bags seen

Average processing time for each bag
By BIS position
12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements: The reporting system shall provide BHS Reports which should be within 5% difference or accuracy
compared to the EDS Counts per screening line.
12.13.2 Reporting Detail Requirements: For MITs and ICS systems, all CBRA reports shall be generated based on bag status upon arrival at
the inspection station location.
12.13.3 Daily Reporting Requirements: At a minimum, the following daily reports in the format shown in Appendix A, Section A.4 shall be
available to the local TSA representative via auto-download and auto-transmittal capabilities to a specified existing email address or secure
storage location:Daily CBIS Summary Report (Figure A.4 1)
• Daily CBIS Summary Report – Peak Hour
• Daily CBIS Bag Volume Report (Figure A.4 2)
• CBIS Executive Summary Report (Figure A.4 3) – SSI
• CBRA Executive Summary Report (Figure A.4 4) – SSI
• PEC Tracking Reports for all PECs within a tracking zone (Figure A.4 5)
• BPT Summary Report (Figure A.4 6)
• CBRA Bag Report (Figure A.4 7)
• CBIS Hourly Throughput Report (Figure A.4 8) – SSI
• CBIS Bag Spacing Report (Figure A.4 9)
• CBIS Performance Report (Figure A.4 10) – SSI
12.13.4 BHS ID Log Report Requirements: A report of the last 1000 BHS IDs shall be provided as defined below:
• The BHS_ID_LOG shall be considered a FIFO. The FIFO shall capture the last 1,000 Pseudo IDs, associated decisions and a flag
indicating whether the bag has been processed by a TSO (including re-inserted for screening) for each EDS.
• This data shall consist of three elements:
Pseudo_ID
Decision
Processed
• The report shall be provided in both a PDF format and an importable CSV file.
12.13.5 BHS Reporting During Maintenance: BHS Reporting capabilities shall be designed such that logging of photo eye activity (i.e., total,
missing, unknown, etc.) is disabled on conveyors not running or operating in a manual override mode. The BHS shall only log PE activity when
conveyors are running in a fully automated mode.

CHAPTER 13: ON-SCREEN RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS REQUIREMENTS
13.1 OSR Overview: National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70, National Electrical Code and NFPA 101, Life Safety Code or similar
standards adopted by the authority having jurisdiction, shall be used, as appropriate, in the design of OSRAs.
13.3.2 Entrances and Exits: Door widths and access to space shall comply with applicable building codes and the American with Disabilities Act.
13.3.6 Vertical Space Provision: Wheelchair access shall be provided by ramps, which require additional floor space, or wheelchair lifts.
13.3.6 Vertical Space Provision: Where changes of floor level are introduced in conjunction with entrances or exits, proper physical aids such as
guardrails, handrails, anti-slip surfaces, and appropriate signage, when indicated, shall be provided to minimize potential workplace hazards.
13.3.7 Windows: The ratio of luminances for task areas that are frequently viewed in sequence (for example, screen, document and windows)
shall be lower than 10:1 as referenced in Mil-STD-1472G 5.2.1.3.8.
13.3.7 Windows: Displays shall be free from glare.
13.3.7 Windows: When windows are included in OSRAs, the following shall be taken into account:
• Workstations shall not be facing windows.
• Windows shall not be located behind the OSR monitors.
• Windows located on the left or right side of a workstation shall have a minimum distance of 9 feet to that workstation.
• Windows shall be included in meeting and relaxation areas and offer an alternative visual environment to that of the OSRA.
13.3.8 OSR Noise Abatement: The OSRA shall be provided in an environment that minimizes noise as much as possible. Because of the likely
proximity to the BHS bag room, the walls and ceiling of the CBRA require adequate acoustical insulation so that the background noise levels shall
not exceed 65 dBA as measured at the natural TSO sitting points at each screening station using a time-weighted average over an 8-hour shift.
13.3.9 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning: The OSRA shall be a climate-controlled space. Temperature and humidity control shall be
supplied commensurate with the locale. A separate temperature control thermostat shall be provided for the OSRA.
13.3.9 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning: If forced-air ventilation is provided, fresh outside air shall be delivered to the OSRA at rates
specified by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 62.1-2016 Ventilation for
Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. The OSRA shall be under positive pressure relative to ambient BHS areas to minimize the migration of
contaminants (e.g., products of combustion from tugs and vehicles, as well as outside dirt, dust, and debris) from entering into the OSRA.
13.4.3 OSR Room Layout: OSR Rooms shall include:
• Workstations
• Supervisor/CI workstations
• Separation between the OSR room and the BHS control room; the two cannot be one in the same
• A BHS monitor screen in the OSR room that only shows the CBIS area as related to TSA operations

• A centralized location for remote stop/start devices in order to minimize delays in re-setting EDS in faulted conditions (NOTE: Not
available with L-3 equipment)
• A direct line of communication from the airport operator to the OSR room and to the CBRA as well as a direct line of communication
between the OSRA and CBRA with a visual indicator in addition to an audio indicator
• The lighting in the area shall include dimmers to allow for better screen viewing
• Equipment racks
• Storage both on and off the workstation
• Notice board
• Where counters are used for the receipt or collection of documents, these often need to be near entrances or easily accessible from
certain operating positions and should accommodate organizational bins and file cabinets
• Clear Line of sight to enable supervision of the entrances/exit points
• Access to electrical panel boxes (including disconnecting means)
• Access to first aid equipment, emergency equipment and emergency exits
• Primary workstations shall be shielded from windows present in non-operational areas of the OSR room
• Shared off-workstation displays
• Desks
• Printer stands, photocopying machines and other office equipment, as necessary.
13.4.3 OSR Room Layout: A secondary passive CBIS display shall be added to provide real-time performance metrics identical to that required in
Section 14.3.3. The display shall be installed on the supervisor’s desk. The exact location shall be coordinated between TSA and the ILDT during
the project submittal phase.
13.4.4 Workstation Arrangements and Ergonomic Considerations: Where confidential information is presented on display monitors, it shall
not be possible to see this information from the public viewing areas.
13.4.4.1 Floor Plan Arrangements: Workstation arrangements shall take into account operations under normal and abnormal modes of system
operation. For example, fallback arrangements for information transmission by paper or other non-electronic means.
13.4.4.1 Floor Plan Arrangements: Luminance shall be measured at the center of the monitor, and found to be in the range of 300 to 500 lux.
13.4.4.2 Control Workstations: A Supervisor/CI workstation shall include communications infrastructure for telephone and TSA network access.
13.4.4.4 Specific Ergonomic Considerations: Monitors
• Height: top of monitor shall be at or slightly below eye level
• Size: 20-23-in. monitor shall be sufficient
• Distance: shall be 20-40-in. from the eye to the front surface of the monitor
• Position: shall be directly in front of you, so your head, neck and torso face forward when viewing the screen. Monitors should not be
farther than 35 degrees to the left or right
• Glare: shall be positioned away from windows

13.4.4.4 Specific Ergonomic Considerations: Desks
• Height: shall be adjustable between 20-in. and 28-in.
• Clearance: shall be 15-in. for knees and 24-in. for feet, width at least 20-in.
• Glare: desktops shall have a matte finish, avoid glass tops
13.4.4.4 Specific Ergonomic Considerations: Chairs
• Height: shall be fully adjustable with a minimum range of 16-in.
• Backrest: shall be at least 15 in. high and 12-in. wide, and should recline 15 degrees from vertical
• Seat Size: seat pan length shall be 15-in. to 17-in. and depth adjustable
• Chair Base and Rotation: shall be 5-legged base; 360 degrees unrestricted rotation
• Armrests: shall be removable, distance between them shall be at least 16-in. and adjustable
13.4.5 Off-Workstation Shared Visual Displays: The layout of the OSRA shall ensure that all off-workstation shared visual displays necessary
for the TSO operator task are visible from all relevant workstations (see Section 13.4.3).
13.4.5.1 Horizontal and Vertical Viewing Distances: Necessary information presented on shared overview visual displays shall be visible by
personnel, with applicable 5th to 95th percentile body dimensions of the TSO operator population, from their normal working positions.
13.4.5.1 Horizontal and Vertical Viewing Distances: Operational information presented on the lowest part of an off-workstation shared visual
display shall be visible to a 5th percentile, seated, non-upright TSO operator.
13.4.5.1 Horizontal and Vertical Viewing Distances: He is the design-eye-position, measured from the floor to the outer corner of the eye; 5th
percentile shall be applied
13.4.6 Personnel Circulation and Custodial Services Access: All aspects of OSRA layout shall take into account the requirements for
maintenance and custodial services access as stated in Mil Standard 1472G Section 5.9.
13.4.7 Personnel Circulation: Planning for the circulation of personnel throughout the OSRA shall include the following:
• Adequate general circulation, such that OSRA operations are not interrupted by either visual or auditory distraction.
• Adequate circulation areas where shift changeover is protracted and two shifts are present in the OSRA at the same time.
• Orderly evacuation of the area via easily identifiable routes of egress in the event of an emergency, such as a fire alarm.
• OSRA circulation routes arranged to avoid cross-circulation.
• Restricted ceiling heights, where present, be indicated using ceiling-mounted warning.
13.4.8 Custodial Services Access: Inadvertent activation of any safety-critical controls shall not be possible during cleaning tasks.
13.5 Verification and Validation of OSRA Layout: In all cases, local, state, and Federal regulations regarding design and construction shall
supersede the recommendations included in this section.

CHAPTER 14: CHECKED BAGGAGE RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS REQUIREMENTS
14.1 CBRA Overview: Deviations from Chapter 14 requirements shall be submitted through an RFV for review and approval by TSA.
14.2 CBRA Layout: The CBRA layout shall be designed to optimize TSO utilization, avoid bag lifting, and reduce equipment costs. The CBRA
layout shall be centralized and incorporate the following:
• Single AL
• Connected to the end of the AL, a RL with no side guard to ease bag placement during manual reinsertion
• Transport of OOG bags via the AL and leave via the CL
• Transport of OS bags via a dedicated conveyor line
14.2 CBRA Layout: For smaller configurations, the optimal layout shall include a straight AL and a parallel CL. For larger configurations, the
optimal layout shall include a “U” shape AL.
14.3 Baggage Inspection Stations: BIS designs shall include a flat work surface for the TSO to place the bag and remove any objects inside the
bag as needed. The work surface shall be made of a non-porous material that can withstand isopropyl alcohol decontamination. The BIS work
surface shall be 30” W x 60” L and be placed at 30” high above the finished floor.
14.3 Baggage Inspection Stations: The BIS design shall be capable of processing bags year-round in an environment with a temperature range
of 50-100°F and a humidity of 30-70%. The baggage to be screened may weight up to 125lbs. The BIS shall provide a 36” W x 60” L workspace in
front of the working surface for the TSO to move freely. In addition, the BIS shall allow maintenance access to all components and shall
accommodate all the CBRA ancillary equipment listed in Section 14.3.1.
14.3 Baggage Inspection Stations: Kick panels shall be installed at all locations where a bag is opened along the AL and CL.
14.3 Baggage Inspection Stations: The BIS shall provide a storage system for these tools to increase TSO efficiency, prevent theft, and avoid
leaving tools inside passenger luggage after the inspection. The tool storage system shall be:
• Organized for easy inventory checks at the end of each shift by the TSM
• Visually trackable for quick inventory checks after each bag inspection by the TSO
The storage system shall allow quicker access to primary and secondary tools as these are the most used, while the special tools may require
more time to obtain since they are only used occasionally.
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: The BIS shall include all the supports needed to mount the ancillary equipment listed in this section. (see text
for details)
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: One BSD shall be installed per BIS. The BSD shall be color and touch capable with an 8” to 12” diagonal
display size. The bezel of the BSD shall not exceed 1” in any direction and shall be located near the BRP at a 45-degree angle. The BSD
mounting solution shall be adjustable in X, Y, Z dimensions without the use of tools.

14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: The SVS monitors, keyboard and mouse shall be located towards the middle of the BIS and shall be adjustable
in X, Y, Z dimensions without the use of tools. The SVS CPU shall be located in a lockable compartment where it will not interfere with the
screening process.
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: The scan gun shall include a shock absorbing protector (i.e., rubber or similar) and be located near the adjacent
BRP on a retractable reel. Scan guns shall be corded with stationary mounting solutions.
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: The CBRA design shall provide means to place and share an ETD between two adjacent BISs.
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: The Emergency Stop (E-stop) shall stop all conveyors in a contiguous line when pressed during an emergency.
Each BIS shall have an accessible E-stop. . A single start push button per E-stop zone shall be installed to ensure the system can only be started
(reset) from one location within the zone after an E-stop has been activated.
14.3.1 BIS Ancillary Equipment: The BIS shall provide a place to locate the UPS.
14.3.2 Baggage Removal Point: The BRP shall be 48” L and 32” H (floor to the conveyor bed). The PE location and programing of the BRP shall
ensure that arriving bags are centered (with respect to the width of the conveyor) and stop next to the corresponding BIS. In addition, the photo
eye reflector cover shall be of a slim design no more than 1” H that allows bags to be slid over it.
14.3.2 Baggage Removal Point: The queue conveyors situated between the BRPs are termed “Intermediate Queues” and shall be a minimum of
48” L and 32” inches in height. Intermediate queues shall be installed in the space between BIS pairs adjacent to the circulation space for the
TSOs.
14.3.3 CBRA BHS Displays: The CBRA shall be equipped with a display of additional BHS information that is useful for the TSA to effectively
respond to system issues or bag surges. This information shall be visually available as follows:
• BHS Status Display – A visual representation of the conveyor belt design shall be included that uses industry-wide standard color codes to
communicate real-time equipment status.
• BHS CBIS Remote Reporting Workstation – A remote thin client BHS workstation shall be provided to TSA in OSR/CBRA at supervisors
desk depending on system size and TSA needs.
• The BHS Remote Reporting Workstation display of all reports shall include an optional setting that refreshes the information on the display
at a selected interval so that the report can be left open on the display and show current operational data.
14.3.3 CBRA BHS Displays: The exact configuration of CBRA BHS displays shall be coordinated between TSA and the ILDT during the project
submittal phase.
14.5 CBRA Functionality: The following horizontal dimensions shall be maintained in the CBRA:
The work space at the workstation and visual acuity ranges for off-station displays shall conform to the following ISO standards:
• 11064-01:2000 Ergonomic design of control centres – Part 1: Principles for the design of control centres
• 11064-02:2000 Ergonomic design of control centres – Part 2: Principles for the arrangement of control suites
• 11064-03:1999 Ergonomic design of control centres – Part 3: Control room layout

14.5 CBRA Functionality: Designers shall verify with local authorities that routes of egress within and external to the CBRA comply with
applicable life safety codes. Additionally, sufficient clearance for utilization of bomb disposal robots shall also be taken into account.
14.5 CBRA Functionality: The CBRA shall be programmed to automatically apply two different queuing methods—the normal alarm line queuing
method and the alternate alarm line queuing method—based on three queuing prioritization levels.
14.5 CBRA Functionality: BISs shall be enabled in upstream sequence only beginning with the furthest downstream station enabled and
available station. The BHS shall inhibit an upstream station from being enabled if downstream BISs are enabled and available for operations.
14.5.2 Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method: During normal operations, bags arriving on the AL shall be assigned to the BIS that has been
available for the longest period of time. If there are no available BISs, the bags shall queue and hold on the BRP prior to the most-upstream
enabled BIS. If there are no enabled BISs, the bags shall queue at the second most downstream BRP.
14.5.2 Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method: The queuing prioritization levels shall be as follows:
1. Disabled BRPs, starting from the most downstream
2. Storage space outside of CBRA
3. Intermediate queues starting from the most upstream
14.5.2 Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method: When the CBRA becomes overwhelmed and the queuing prioritization level 3 reaches capacity,
the system shall switch to an AQM where the system starts advancing all additional bags arriving in the CBRA one conveyor at a time.
14.5.2 Alternate Alarm Line Queuing Method: The BRPs affected by AQM shall return to normal operations when the condition is lifted (i.e., a
clear conveyor path to the RL is reestablished).
14.5.3 Baggage Removal Point : After a bag has been removed from a BRP and an action button has been selected on the BSD (the
chronological order is irrelevant, but both conditions must be met), the system controls shall have an adjustable lag timer for the BRP belt to
resume operations (i.e. advance other bags). The default value shall be three seconds.
14.5.4 Scan Guns: The scan guns shall be connected to the BSD so data is passed from the BHS to the SVS via a predefined communication
port.
14.5.5 Baggage Process Timer: The BHS shall use a BPT to record every bag processing time at each BIS using the arrival of a bag at the BRP
as the start signal for the timer. BPT information is considered SSI and requires SSI training to access. The BHS shall also use a BST to record
the bag screening time at each BIS using the SEARCH button on the BSD as the start signal for the timer. Both BPT and BST use the CLEARED
button for the stop signal and are recorded in the CBRA Bag Process report.
14.5.6 Reinsert Line: Under normal mode, the RL conveyor shall automatically start when a reinserted bag is detected on the upstream queue
conveyor and the bag is automatically transferred onto the RL for rescreening.
14.5.6 Reinsert Line: Bags eligible for either automatic or manual reinsertion shall be assigned a new unique BHS tracking ID prior to rescreening.
14.5.6 Reinsert Line: A control station shall be provided to operate the RL conveyor and allow for the manual placement of a bag under the AQM
mode. AQM only allows manual reinsertion. At the manual reinsert points, located in optimal layouts shown in Figure 14 1 and Figure 14 2, the

design shall incorporate a control station with the functionality of “Insert Bag” which will stop the conveyor and queue bags upstream to allow a
bag to be manually placed on the conveyor (manual reinsert process). After the bag is placed on the conveyor, pressing a “dispatch” button shall
send the bag downstream tracked with a status of “REINSERTED”. Reinserted bags shall not stop at enabled BRPs and will be advanced directly
to the RL line.
14.5.7 Serial Communication Requirements: Projects based on this version of the PGDS shall include provisions for these requirements to be
incorporated during the project or as defined by the EDS Integration Documentation at the time of installation.
14.5.7.1 Communication Port Parameters: The SVS serial communications port shall be configured for two-way communications send and
receive, with the following parameters:
• Baud Rate – 9600
• Data Bit – 8
• Parity – 0
• Stop Bits – 1
14.5.7.2 Communication Data Format: Data formatting between the BSD and SVS shall comply with the American Standard Code Information
Interchange (ASCII) standards.
14.5.7.2 Communication Data Format: For any instance where either no BHS Pseudo ID or IATA ID is available from the BHS to the SVS or
SVS to the BHS, the 10 digits shall be populated with “?” marks (where a “?” is equivalent to an ASCII 63).
14.5.7.5 SVS to BSD Heartbeat:¨When the BHS detects the heartbeat from the SVS, the BSD shall automatically be enabled and the active
screen will be “Waiting For Bag”. This data will be a toggle between two separate ASCII values and shall be as follows every two seconds:
Data format is <<STX,HB,ETX>> where
• , (44)
• HB = Toggles between H (72) and h (104)
• , (44)
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: The BSD Interface comprises different elements and specific visual characteristics that shall be replicated on every
design. The visual design shall include:
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: Font style: The font shall be a web-safe sans-serif typeface such as Arial, Verdana, or Calibri.
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: All Capital Letters: Bag statuses, UICs, and operator messages shall be displayed in all capital letters.
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: The elements to screen size ratio shall be maintained regardless of the display size.
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: All colors used throughout the displays shall follow the colors in Table 14 2. (see text for details)
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: The BSD structure shall include the following key elements illustrated in Figure 14 11: (elements listed separately)

14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: [BSD element] Station ID: Numbering convention in the form of “STATION –XX”, which correlates to the BIS
number in which it is mounted.
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: [BSD element] Bag Information Fields:
• Bag Status: Disposition of the bag as indicated by designator and color listed in Section 14.6.2
• RBS Level: The EDS algorithm used to screen the bag (This is a placeholder for now. No additional information is available).
• IATA ID or RFID: If an ATR is being used upstream of the EDS units, the IATA number shall be populated here. If an RFID system is
being used, the RFID ID shall be displayed.
• PSEUDO ID: The generated pseudo ID (either by the BHS or the EDS) shall be shown.
• EDS ID: EDS screening line and EDS serial number used to process the current bag in the format of SS8 (G500)
• Unique Identifier Cell (UIC): Used to identify when any of the following scenarios occur:
Duplicate IATA
Timeout
Communication Error
Length Change
• Others may be added with an approved RFV
• Found at PE: PE ID that correlates to the location where bags that have been lost in tracking were “found”.
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: [BSD element] Operator Message Area: Used to display any messages for the operator.
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design: [BSD element] Primary Buttons: These represent the primary action typically taken by the operator. These also
work as a trigger for the Bag Auto ID Transfer functionality when needed, as referenced in TSA’s Integration Requirements Document (IRD).
14.6.1 BSD Screens Design:¨[BSD element] Secondary Action Buttons: These provide an optional action for the operator under certain
circumstances.
14.6.2 BSD Statuses and High-Level Processing Procedures: Baggage that arrives in the CBRA shall be limited to the following five statuses
with their corresponding designator codes, color, and RBS level.
• Cleared (Green) – Bags that received a clear status from the EDS or OSR.
• Alarmed (Red) – Bags that generate an automatic alarm on an EDS unit and were viewed but not cleared by the Level 2 OSR Operator.
• Out of Gauge (Orange) – Bags that do not fit into EDS units.
• EDS Errored (Yellow) – Bags that received an error status from the EDS.
• Unknown (Blue) – Bags that have become lost in tracking between the exit of the EDS and the BRP or forced unknown for security
reasons.
14.6.3 Station Disabled and Waiting for Bag Screens: After the BHS startup procedures are completed, the BSD shall remain DISABLED until
an operator presses the ENABLE button shown in Figure 14 12 or logs on to the SVS with two-way communication.
14.6.5 Unique Identifiers Cell: There are four messages that may be displayed in the UIC: Comm Error, Length Change, Timeout, and Duplicate
IATA; these shall be displayed as shown in Figure 14 19.

14.6.5 Unique Identifiers Cell: When a positively tracked bag arrives in CBRA with a Duplicate IATA message in the UIC, the system shall
process the bag according to the bag status.
14.6.7 Bag Waiting Alerts: In an attempt to mitigate unnecessary dieback in the CBRA, a flashing visual alarm shall alert operators to a condition
where manual intervention is required.
14.6.7 Bag Waiting Alerts: The following conditions shall trigger the Bag Waiting Alert on the BSD:
• If the BIS is available and a bag requiring manual intervention (i.e., pressing a button) is queued at the adjacent BRP, a bag waiting timer
shall start.
• If the bag is left unattended for 15 seconds the BSD shall display a flashing BAG WAITING TOO LONG message in red until an action is
taken on the bag as shown in the example in Figure 14 24. This applies to all bag type screens.
• If the bag is left unattended for 45 seconds the bag shall advance to an available downstream BRP.
• After the 45 seconds time has expired the BHS shall lock out the search bag button for 3 second before the bag departs to the next
available Downstream BIS.
14.7.1 Bag Storage Capacity: The CBIS design shall be capable of storing the proper quantity of bags needed to avoid system diebacks. The
following equations shall be used to determine the bag storage needed to meet this requirement:
14.7.1 Bag Storage Capacity: When analyzing the bag storage capacity needed for a particular design, the ILDT shall consider the third and
fourth column from Table 14 3. (Bag Storage Capacity Needed for Domestic is 3 minutes per bag and International is 4minutes per bag.)
14.7.1 Bag Storage Capacity: The bag storage capacity shall be achieved using a combination of queues, inch and store conveyor belts, or other
cost-effective means between the OSR 2nd/last chance divert point and the entrance to the CBRA as well as BRPs and Intermediate Queues
within CBRA.
14.7.2 Architectural Features: The CBRA shall be fully enclosed with segregating partitions extending to the structural deck to allow for the
security and comfort of the TSOs.
14.7.2 Architectural Features: The CBRA shall be provided with finished horizontal and vertical surfaces as follows:
• Flooring shall be composed of a safety/anti-fatigue material configured for a continuous installation under all TSO work and movement
areas with a service-life of no less than seven years.
• Walls shall have durable, impervious surfaces, such as painted masonry, plastic laminate or drywall that is taped, bedded, and textured
with epoxy or enamel paint.

• Ceilings shall include the use of painted suspended drywall, or suspended, lay-in acoustical tile at a minimum height of 9 feet. An
acceptable design can include exposed structure with no ceiling. See Section 14.7.8 below for noise abatement recommendations.
• Access shall be provided with at least one set of double doors (or a rollup door) for access for equipment movement into and out of the
area.
14.7.2 Architectural Features: Designers shall consult with local authorities to determine the proper protocols and routing for the removal of
threat bags from the CBRA including a designated exit path for TSOs when a threat is discovered, as well as adequate access to the CBRA room
for local authorities with threat containment units.
14.7.3 CBRA Physical Space Requirements: The space requirements for the staging room for OS bags shall be based on the individual airport
handling of OS bags.
14.7.3 CBRA Physical Space Requirements: In addition, space shall to be allocated for the storing of hazardous materials outside of the CBRA.
The space requirement shall be based on the historical frequency of these materials and the frequency to which the airport collects them.
14.7.3 CBRA Physical Space Requirements: The only equipment installed in the CBRA shall be directly required for the operations in that
space, e.g., SVSs, BISs, and BSDs. No other equipment such as motor control panels, UPSs for EDS equipment, IT racks or any other equipment
not directly related to CBRA operations shall be installed in the CBRA.
14.7.4 Lighting: Luminance shall be measured at the surface of the BIS and found to be in the range of 500 to 750 lux. In other areas of the
CBRA, the luminance shall not fall below 300 lux.
14.7.4 Lighting: Color corrected and full spectrum lighting lamps shall be used and fluorescent lights are preferred.
14.7.5 Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning: The CBRA shall be a climate-controlled space. Temperature and humidity control shall be
supplied commensurate with the locale. A separate temperature control thermostat shall be provided for the CBRA.
14.7.5 Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning: If forced-air ventilation is provided, fresh outside air shall be delivered to the CBRA at rates
specified by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 62.1-2016 Ventilation for
Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. The CBRA shall be under positive pressure relative to ambient BHS areas to minimize the migration of
contaminants (e.g., products of combustion from tugs and vehicles, as well as outside dirt, dust, and debris) from entering into the CBRA.
14.7.6 Power and Communications: Power shall be provided to the CBRA to support TSA- and airport operator-provided equipment. The Project
Sponsor shall coordinate the final requirements based on the actual equipment list and layout, but as a minimum:
• Two quad receptacles (120V/20A) shall be provided for each BIS to support screening operations and ancillary equipment.
• One duplex outlet shall be provided on the side of the back wall between the two BISs for access by cleaning personnel.
• Convenience outlets shall be provided on the perimeter walls as required by local codes.
14.7.6 Power and Communications: A wall-mounted telephone shall be provided for use by TSOs, with access to the airport communication
network, and for placing outside calls.
14.7.6 Power and Communications: The network cabling shall be provided to support the BHS, EDS, and TSA workstations.

14.7.6 Power and Communications: All cabling and associated outlets shall be installed in a location where they cannot to be damaged by BISs
or cause a safety hazard.
14.7.7 Connectivity to TSA Network: The connection of the CBRA ETD equipment to the TSA Network (TSANet) shall be provided via a “Dual
Drop” consisting of 2 RJ45 Cat5e/Cat6 connections terminated at a wall or floor box.
14.7.7 Connectivity to TSA Network: In addition, the following requirements shall be met:
• All core drilling shall support a minimum of 4 “Dual Drops”
• All new fiber installations shall be single in conflict with 7.2.13.3-mode, 6-strand bundles enclosed in innerduct
• All cabinet installations require 2 110v 20A service
• All cabinet installations shall meet the local seismic rating requirements and can be floor/bracket mounted
14.7.8 CBRA Noise Abatement: The CBRA shall have adequate acoustical insulation so that the background noise levels do not exceed 70dBA
as measured at the natural TSO standing points at each screening station using a time-weighted average over an 8-hour shift.
14.7.9 Ergonomic Design Dimesions: Peripheral equipment stations shall have sturdy and durable mounting systems that are adjustable to
allow TSOs to function from a standing position with good posture in accordance with DOT/FAA/CT-03-05, Human Factors Design Standard for
Acquisition of Commercial Off-the-Shelf, Non-developmental, and Developmental Systems to accommodate the 95th percentile male and 5th
percentile female.
14.7.10 Conveyor System Crossovers and Catwalks: CBRA conveyor system crossovers shall consist of up and down treaded stairs, a full
railing system, and a toe-boarded catwalk.
14.7.11 Conveyor Belt End Points on Alarm Line: End points of in-bound conveyor belts shall have a photo eye installed across the conveyor
belt to stop baggage from falling off the end. Termination photo eyes shall be located sufficiently upstream to prevent baggage straps from
becoming entangled in the conveyor belt at the end point.
14.7.12 Design for Safety: The AL conveyor belt surfaces shall be smooth or semi-smooth to facilitate easier baggage retrieval.
14.7.12 Design for Safety: All motor drives and associated tracking devices shall not be intrusive to the screening workspace. The design shall
use motor drives mounted on the opposite side of the inbound and outbound lines from screening personnel or, if this is not feasible, the designers
shall ensure that all hazardous moving parts (e.g., drive shafts, roller spindles, bearings, bearing components etc.) are guarded and free from
sharp or pointed edges to prevent accidental contact.
14.7.12 Design for Safety: End caps shall be installed on conveyor shaft bearing assemblies within TSO-occupied spaces to avoid operational
hazards. End caps shall be attached to conveyor shaft bearing assemblies via mounting hardware. Press fit end caps or caps retained by tabs
shall not be used.
14.7.12 Design for Safety: Any moving part located in any area of the CBRA where TSOs are required to perform their duties shall be shielded to
avoid injury.

14.7.12 Design for Safety: All aspects of the CBRA layout shall take into account the requirements for maintenance and custodial services
access as stated in Mil Standard 1472G Section 5.9.
CHAPTER 16: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

16.1 Cybersecurity Demonstration: At TSA’s request, cybersecurity measures shall be demonstrated to TSA.
16.2 Cybersecurity Requirement Assumptions: The CBIS and CBIS control system shall have appropriate cybersecurity measures to ensure
the system:
• Does not allow unauthorized access to any portion of the CBIS networks, controls systems or components
• Does not allow unauthorized access to data or unauthorized data extraction from the control system, inclusive of both SSI and non-SSI
data
• Employs appropriate equipment and systems to isolate networks
• Has appropriate updates and patches applied throughout its lifecycle to ensure ongoing security
16.2.1 User Accounts: Individual user accounts shall be employed and the use of generic or multi-user accounts shall be prohibited. User
accounts shall be terminated within 24 hours for those no longer requiring access. User accounts shall be audited on a monthly basis to ensure
only required accounts are active. These requirements shall apply to remote access users as well.
16.2.2 Incident Handling: The ILDT shall prepare an incident handling plan to deal with cybersecurity related attacks.
16.3 Firewalls: Network firewalls to control the flow of network traffic shall be employed. The firewalls shall restrict connectivity to and from
internal and external networks to those with a need-to-know.
16.4 Remote Access: At a minimum, the system shall be secured as noted in Configuring and Managing Remote Access for Industrial Control
Systems, April 2011, Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure and the United States Department of Homeland Security.
16.4.1 Remote Access Logs: Remote access activities shall be logged and reviewed to ensure all access is by authorized personnel. At TSA’s
request, access logs shall be submitted to TSA within seven calendar days.
16.4.2 External Connections: Remote access shall be enabled only when required.
16.5 Software Maintenance and Updates: Appropriate software maintenance and patch management programs shall be employed to maintain
the system security.
16.6 Network Segregation: The following networks shall be segregated, or “air-gapped” from all other networks:
• EDS image networks. Neither the BHS nor any other airport network shall be connected to the network used by the EDS for transmission
of images e.g. the Morpho MUX or L3 NEDS.
• TSA data network. Neither the BHS nor any other airport network shall be connected to the TSA data network unless specifically directed
and authorized by TSA.

Wireless networks, whether part of the CBIS or its control system, shall adhere to the guidelines as noted in NIST Special Publication SP 800-153
Feb 2012 Guidelines for Securing Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs).
16.8.3 Specific STIP Design Requirements: The following STIP requirements shall be met:
• All ETDs and stand-alone EDSs shall have one “dual telecommunications outlet”.
• When a multiplex server is present, connectivity to TSANet shall terminate at the multiplex server cabinet, therefore connectivity to
TSANet for each EDS is not required.
• All core drilling shall support a minimum of four “modular jacks”.
• All new fiber installations shall be multimode fibers, either multimode fiber, either 50/125 or 62.5/125 micron fibers r 50/125 or 62.5/125
micron fibers, 6-strand bundles enclosed in inner duct.
• All cabinet installations shall have 2 110v 20A service.
• All cabinet installations shall meet the local seismic rating requirements and can be floor/bracket mounted.
• All newly installed and existing data jacks and associated patch panels shall comply with TSA’s approved scheme [see TSA Structured
Cabling System Guidelines dated July 2012].
• Completed Data Capture Sheet and cable certification paperwork shall be provided to TSA prior to established ISAT date.
• All IT cabinet installations shall include a temperature and humidity gauge for monitoring purposes. HVAC requirements in IT cabinet
spaces shall comply with all applicable OEM documentation.


PGDS - V7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PGDS - V7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PGDS - V7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards for

Checked Baggage Inspection Systems

TSA approved this document on October 6, 2020.

1.0 October 10, 2007 First published version

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

COMPLIANCE LANGUAGE DEFINITIONS

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

DELAYED OPENING OF CBIS

INDUSTRY COLLABORATION AND COMMENTS

The comment form can be found at the Beta.SAM.gov website.

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

COMPLIANCE LANGUAGE DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................................... II

INDUSTRY COLLABORATION AND COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... III

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS..............................................................................................................................................XXIV

SECTION I : CBIS CONCEPTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 3 : CBIS TYPES AND EQUIPMENT................................................................................................................................... 3-1

SECTION II: CBIS PROJECTS.......................................................................................................................................................... 3-1

CHAPTER 4 : PROJECT PLANNING AND INITIATION........................................................................................................................ 4-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 5 : PRE-DESIGN PHASE.................................................................................................................................................. 5-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 7 : DETAILED DESIGN PHASE......................................................................................................................................... 7-1

CHAPTER 8 : CONSTRUCTION PHASE............................................................................................................................................ 8-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 9 : TESTING AND COMMISSIONING PHASE..................................................................................................................... 9-1

CHAPTER 10 : PROJECT CLOSEOUT PHASE ................................................................................................................................ 10-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 12 : CBIS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS............................................................................................................................... 12-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 13 : ON-SCREEN RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS ..................................................................................... 13-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 14 : CHECKED BAGGAGE RESOLUTION AREA PLANNING STANDARDS........................................................................ 14-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

CHAPTER 15 : CBIS OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE BEST PRACTICES ...................................................................................... 15-1

CHAPTER 16 : INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY ............................................................................................................... 16-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

APPENDIX B : GENERIC EXAMPLES OF CHECKED BAGGAGE INSPECTION SYSTEMS ................................................................... B-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

APPENDIX C : BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT CASE STUDY............................................................................................................... C-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

APPENDIX D : COMMISSIONING AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................ D-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

APPENDIX E : CONTINGENCY PLAN EXAMPLES ............................................................................................................................E-1

APPENDIX G : REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................................ G-1

APPENDIX H : REQUIREMENTS TABLES....................................................................................................................................... H-1

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Table C.3.1: Initial Evaluation of Alternatives, Terminal 1 ...................................................................................................................... C-7

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Figure A.3.1: Detailed EDS/BHS/CBRA Data Flow – No ATR ................................................................................................................ A-8

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Version 7.0

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS