Leidos Holdings Sets Sights On Canceled TSA Contract For Airport Security Screening

578 million contract that rival Peraton had won only to have it canceled — and then bid on the new work when a revised procurement hits the streets. As the Washington Business Journal first reported in June, the five-year contract was Herndon-based Peraton’s first big win since its spinout from Harris Corp. TSA confirmed it had spiked the award and had extended Leidos (NYSE: LDOS), the incumbent vendor. "We all travel through airports," Krone added. Leidos filed three protests over the Peraton award before withdrawing them in January. TSA declined to say why Peraton’s contract was terminated. Peraton said in a statement in June that it was "engaged in a constructive dialogue with the TSA regarding the contract." Analysts say pulling the plug on an award that size is pretty unusual.

Passenger screening equipment such as X-ray machines and scanners is used at more than 440 locations in the U.S. TSA. The winning contractor is responsible for radiation surveys and radioactive leak tests; corrective and preventive maintenance; communications; maintenance planning; supply support; tools, test equipment and calibration; parts and parts obsolescence; subcontract agreements; and TSA service response center services. 2.53 billion during the quarter. 2.57 billion a year ago) but Krone highlighted growth in revenue and its book-to-bill ratio from the first quarter to the second. Its book to bill during the quarter was 1.4. Book-to-bill measures how much a company is growing its backlog compared with how much it's drawing down and realizing revenue.

Any number above one means a company is growing future potential revenue faster than it's drawing it down, typically a bullish signal. 4.50 and adjusted EBITDA margins of 10.1 percent to 10.4 percent. Analysts queried Krone on his company’s planned divestiture of its commercial cyber business to France’s Capgemini and whether Leidos had more divestitures in its future. Leidos revealed in June that its 1,500 cyber pros will focus on its core government markets and customers in highly regulated industries such as commercial health care and energy. Capgemini will rebrand the unit and position it to meet growing customer demand in the U.S. A bigger near-term concern is the fiscal 2019 federal budget. 716 billion defense authorization bill indicates. "It’s not a bad summer," Krone said. "I think we're all looking at the fall, the midterm, the legislation and legislative process, and hoping that this goes smoothly, and that we get our bills and we get things passed.

Figure 7. Enlarged VR image of IC. Figure 8. Enlarged VR image of solder joints. Using an optional function of VGSTUDIO MAX (Fig. 9), individual voids can also be visualized, and their volumes, positions, and surface areas can be measured. Figure 9. Analysis of Voids in Solder. As the X-ray CT system is a non-destructive technology, thermal shock tests, vibration tests, and other cycle tests can be performed with the same product and the internal state can be examined in each stage of the test. Furthermore, the number of tests and the number of units of each testing device can be reduced. In addition, as the X-ray CT system is effective in analyzing the destruction process and reducing the number of samples needed and development time, it is also useful for accelerating the work and reducing the cost. The inspeXio SMX-225CT FPD HR allows inspection and analysis of assembled products without the need to disassemble. The feasibility to vary production conditions and compare products prior to and after different types of tests makes it useful in production processes and also in development processes.

From flying cars to sustainable energy sources, visions of tomorrow’s most life-enhancing technologies invariably revolve around more efficient ways to operate. Although some of these solutions lie in a more distant reality, manufacturing’s pioneers have shaped cutting-edge forms of product inspection technology that help processors make significant gains in food safety while enhancing efficiency. These recent strides also have manufacturers focusing on cost in alignment with capability—and niche automation markets, such as machine vision, are expected to grow even more. 438 million in 2017, experiencing an 8.6 percent annual growth. Today’s food manufacturers must inspect every item on their processing line.

Older protocols may have only required checking for proper label adherence, providing a "yes or no" answer. Now, detection solutions deliver more than a just single piece of a complex puzzle. All together, investment in new inspection equipment that can detect multiple types of anomalies with greater precision and speed invites opportunities for cost savings. Firstly, processors stand to reduce the waste that accumulates from defective product. Secondly, they are minimizing the downtime that stems from stoppages and fixes required in the event of a malfunction or missed inconsistent output, maximizing return on investment (ROI). Last, but not least, the company avoids a potential recall and a devastating hit to its brand reputation. Smart design isn’t simply limited to the mechanics of today’s vision inspection equipment.

The Human-Machine Interface (HMI) has also improved to offer more intuitive operator capability. This technology does not require extensive training of a skilled worker, which translates in shorter training and higher productivity. For example, operators with limited training can operate machines and transition to different formulations or packaging formats. Menu options make it easy for operators to select programs, which enable swift changeovers. The value of HMIs is not limited to what you see; it’s also found in the consistency and expediency of data collection and analysis, in many cases able to integrate data from legacy equipment on the same line. Today’s solutions help processors to store and display key performance indicators that are essential to making strides in food safety and meeting increasingly regulations set by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies.

From its origins in detecting foreign materials in products, such as glass, metal and plastic, x-ray technology has come a long way. The inspection equipment has become more sensitive and is able to deliver more breadth of information; from examining the shape and edges of a food product to telling you its density and volume. X-ray technology no longer just detects a foreign piece of material, it provides detailed information about the product. In addition, manufacturers have increased the sensitivity of the detectors. In the past, the power necessary to operate the equipment required cooling during its operation. Now that the power is pointedly less, there is no need for cooling and health risks have also been reduced significantly, while also consuming less energy during usage. Due to the sensitivity of the detectors, there’s an abundance of new information to garner that can help companies build protocols for efficiency into their operations. From vision inspection to X-ray screening equipment and inspection equipment technology, exhibitors at ProFood Tech (March 26-28; McCormick Place, Chicago) will showcase a vast range of automated solutions for food inspection.

Comparatively, 0.0% of ICTS International shares are held by institutional investors. 7.2% of CBIZ shares are held by company insiders. Comparatively, 62.4% of ICTS International shares are held by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that large money managers, endowments and hedge funds believe a company is poised for long-term growth. This table compares CBIZ and ICTS International’s gross revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation. CBIZ has higher revenue and earnings than ICTS International. This table compares CBIZ and ICTS International’s net margins, return on equity and return on assets. CBIZ beats ICTS International on 9 of the 10 factors compared between the two stocks. CBIZ, Inc. provides professional business services that help its clients manage their finances, employees, and insurance needs.

It offers its services through three practice groups: Financial Services, Benefits and Insurance Services, and National Practices. The Financial Services practice group provides accounting, tax, financial advisory, government healthcare consulting, and risk advisory and valuation services. The Benefits and Insurance Services practice group offers group health benefits consulting, property and casualty insurance, retirement plan consulting, and payroll and HR consulting. The National Practices practice group provides managed networking and hardware, and health care consulting services. Through its subsidiaries, the company primarily serves small and midsized businesses, as well as individuals, governmental entities, and not-for-profit enterprises in the United States and parts of Canada. CBIZ, Inc. has approximately 100 offices in the United States. The company was founded in 1987 and is headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio. ICTS International N.V., together with its subsidiaries, provides airport security and other aviation services in the United States, the Netherlands, Germany, and internationally. It operates through Airport Security and Other Aviation Services; and Technology segments.

For decades, airport security officials depended on metal detectors to screen travelers for concealed weapons. The technology was safe and simple but had one glaring flaw: it could not detect non-metal threats, including plastic explosives. In 2009, the infamous underwear bomber almost exploited that flaw to devastating effect. In the aftermath of that near-tragedy, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) moved quickly to update its screening procedures and technologies. By 2010, it had implemented two new types of full-body scanners. One of these, called a millimeter-wave scanner, uses radio waves to search for hidden weapons or devices. These are the full-body scanners you’ll encounter at U.S. —the ones you stand in with your feet apart and your hands above your head—and experts agree they shouldn’t worry you. The second (and far more controversial) of the two is called a "backscatter" X-ray scanner.

You’ll remember this as the machine that produced revealing full-body images of passengers that many found unnecessarily intrusive. Apart from the privacy questions posed by the use of the backscatter technology, some experts also had concerns that those scanners exposed travelers to potentially dangerous amounts of radiation. "We determined that the exposure from those machines was about 10% of what you’d get during a chest X-ray, which is significant," says John Sedat, a professor of biophysics at the University of California, San Francisco. "There was probably some very small cancer risks associated with those X-ray machines," says David Brenner, a professor of radiation biophysics at Columbia University Medical Center.

European authorities almost immediately banned the use of the backscatter X-ray machines, and the TSA followed suit in 2013—though the agency never formally acknowledged that it was dumping the scanners due to health concerns. But with the machines used today, there’s no widespread health reason to opt out. "Scientists can never say that something is 100% safe, but I would say there’s no plausible evidence by which millimeter waves could damage DNA," Brenner says. Maidment has published dozens of studies on radiation exposures and human health, and he’s responsible for ensuring all of Penn Medicine’s medical equipment is safe for patients.

He explains that microwave-emitting devices—from the heating appliance in your kitchen to the smartphone in your pocket—are believed to cause health harms only when they’re powerful enough to cause molecular changes. The radiation emitted by airport millimeter wave scanners don’t come anywhere close to this level. ] to pregnant and potentially pregnant patients and neonates, and I’m convinced they are safe," he says. "It’s beyond my imagination to theorize a significant cancer risk from use of these millimeter wave scanners," he says. In fact, the only criticism any of these experts had about airport scanners had nothing to do with radiation exposure or cancer. "We had something fast and cheap and very accurate in the old metal detectors, and they beeped loudly when they found something," Maidment says. He points out research that concludes it’s very possible for someone to dupe the new scanners and sneak camouflaged guns or explosives past their defenses. But how best to keep passengers safe from airport threats is another story. As far as cancer concerns go, you can feel safe stepping inside airport scanners.