Can you believe it? It’s that time of year again where turkeys head for the hills and people head for the airports. It’s the busiest travel time of the year and a time when people who rarely fly, or have never flown, take to the skies, so we wanted to provide some clarification and tips for those who might come to the blog looking for some information.Here’s some guidance related to the most common questions we’ve been hearing lately. Please remember that each time our officers have to search a bag or a person, the line slows down.
The 4-1-1 on 3-1-1 (Liquids, Gels & Aerosols): Let me start by saying this. If you’re checking a bag, make it easy on yourself and just put your liquids in your checked luggage. That way, you don’t have to worry about 3-1-1. I know that suggestion doesn’t work for everybody. Some liquids are essential and some of you understandably would not like to pay to check your luggage. If you’d rather take liquids in your carry-on, please continue reading…
3-1-1 is the name for our liquid policy. You can read here for more details, but here is the gist of 3-1-1… Each passenger is allowed to take one clear quart-sized sealable bag and fill it with as many liquids in 3.4 oz or less sized containers that will fit, while still being able to seal the bag. Basically, don’t stuff it to the point where it won’t close.
Make sure you take the bag out of your carry-on prior to sending it through the X-ray, or our officers may have to search your bag.
If you have liquids, aerosols, or gels that are used for medical purposes, they do not need to adhere to our 3-1-1 policies and do not have to be placed in a bag. You may be asked to go through a TSA Family Lane (see below) so we can expedite the screening process. The liquids, gels and aerosols will need to be removed from your bags.
Answers to common questions: Stick deodorant is not limited to 3.4 oz or less, but gel or spray deodorant is. Also, any liquid makeup such as eyeliner should be placed in the baggie. That goes for perfume as well. Powder makeup is fine.
Family Lanes: Frequent flyers hate it when they’re in line behind a family, and guess what… families hate it when the frequent flyer is behind them tapping their foot and sighing. That’s why we created Family Lanes. They’re designed to let families take their time and ask questions without feeling rushed by the experienced frequent flyers who can zip through a checkpoint in no time. Also, as stated earlier, anybody carrying medically necessary liquids, aerosols and gels in excess of 3.4 oz may be directed to a Family Lane.
Foods: Pies are permitted, but they are subject to additional screening if our officers see any anomalies. (Additional screening of pies does not include our officers tasting the pie, no matter what they tell you…) Cakes, bread, donuts, turkeys, etc. are all permitted. If it’s a live turkey, you might want to have a word with the airline. Here is a list of items that should be placed in your checked bags or shipped: cranberry sauce, creamy dips and spreads (cheeses, peanut butter, etc.), gift baskets with food items (salsa, jams and salad dressings), gravy (mmm gravy), jams, jellies, maple syrup, oils and vinegars, sauces, soups, wine, liquor and beer.
Gifts: Wrapped gifts may need to be unwrapped. If there’s something in the gift that needs to be inspected, we have to open it. Our officers try their best not to mangle the gift wrap, but it’s not a guarantee and it also slows down the line for everybody else when we have to do this. It is suggested that you wrap the presents when you arrive at your destination. You also have the option of shipping the items as well.
Snow Globes: We are not in cahoots with the Heat Miser, but snow globes are not permitted in your carry-on luggage. They are sealed containers full of liquid that would have to be opened and destroyed to test. We’re not in the business of busting snow globes, so we suggest you place them in your checked baggage or mail them ahead of time
ID & Boarding Pass Checking & Secure Flight: As you approach a TSA checkpoint, you will see an officer checking IDs and boarding passes. Please have your acceptable ID and boarding pass out and ready to present to our officer. If your ID is in a plastic sheath or other type of holder, it will need to be removed so our officers can properly inspect your IDs. By having your ID and boarding pass out and ready, you’ll help move the line along faster. The several seconds it takes to get your ID and boarding pass out might not seem like much time, but it really adds up when you’ve got people in line behind you.
Also, folks have had questions about the Secure Flight program and whether the name on your ticket has to match the name on your ID. The Secure Flight watch-list matching process occurs before a passenger even gets to the airport so if you get a boarding pass, the Secure Flight watch-list matching process is done. In other words, you are clear once you get that pass.
If you have lost or forgotten your ID, you will still be permitted to fly as long as you help us verify you are who you say you are by answering a few questions for us.
Inconsistencies: You may notice your screening experience at one airport doesn’t match the experience of another airport. We realize this happens, and some of it is intentional. While it can be a little confusing for our passengers, it also makes things unpredictable for those who might wish to do us harm. Our officers also can use their discretion in different scenarios that allows them to use common sense and not abide by a checklist mentality that can be studied and defeated by those who wish to do us harm.
Shoes on Belt: We recommend you place your shoes on the X-ray belt as opposed to placing them in a bin. Why? It keeps the bins from getting too cluttered and allows our officers to get a better look at items to ensure prohibited items do not get on the plane. It also speeds things up when they get a better view and don't have to stop the X-ray belt for searches.
-----------------------------------
The best piece of advice I could give a traveler is to arrive early if you have the time. No matter what happens, (aside from a flight being cancelled) if you get to the airport early, you should be fine. Worst case scenario is you’ll have some time to kill while you wait on your flight.
For any pilgrims who might be flying, be sure not to bring your muskets through the checkpoint and clothing with large buckles is discouraged as it will most likely alarm the walk through metal detector.
Is this all a bit too much to remember? Print out this handy dandy checklist (PDF) so you don’t forget anything.For a complete rundown, check out our “What to Know before You Go” blog post. It has everything broken down by category.
Also, we’re going to be Tweeting a TSA Holiday Travel Tip every day, so follow us on Twitter @tsablogteam for travel tips, blog post announcements, and other useful information.
Q9V9RGW2Z9N2
Thanks,Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
139 comments:
Tell the PR department to knock off the puppy posts every Friday afternoon. We are not that easily swayed.
Still waiting on a post about the new currency rules.
Still waiting on a post about the Management Directive to stick to your main mission and stop playing at being local cops in search of a crime.
What about ice?
Where is this rule codified?
Why does TSA assume any liquid below 3.4 ounces is safe but that any liquid over 3.4 ounces is dangerous explosive?
Why does TSA toss these dangerous explosives into open containers in the middle of airports?
Why does TSA dispose of these dangerous explosives as if they were exactly what is indicated by their labels?
Why does TSA treat a bottle of Pepsi like soda when it's time to dispose of it, but as a dangerous explosive when it transits the checkpoint?
How does TSA screen the liquids sold past its checkpoints?
Does TSA test a random sampling if confiscated liquids to determine how many liquid explosives people are attempting to bring through checkpoints?
Why can't TSA point to a single piece of independent, peer-reviewed research to support its liquid policies?
Why does TSA continue to post inaccurate signage about the liquids policies in airports?
What are the rules regarding frozen liquids, Bob?
It's funny, almost as if ten commenters think every blog post should be specifically directed at them, and their questions only, every day, every post. Hey guys - this blog probably gets tens of thousands of readers and is directed in a general fashion towards that audience. The information posted was both accurate, and a helpful reminder to those who don't travel often.
"Snow Globes: We are not in cahoots with the Heat Miser, but snow globes are not permitted in your carry-on luggage. They are sealed containers full of liquid that would have to be opened and destroyed to test. We’re not in the business of busting snow globes, so we suggest you place them in your checked baggage or mail them ahead of time"
-------------------------------
You're not in the business of busting snow globes, but you are in the business of confiscating them and throwing them out in the case that some poor, misinformed traveler didn't realize the grave threat posed by their gift. Thanks for another day in which you have further eroded our civil liberties while providing a minimal level of actual security!
Scott G. Lewis said...
The information posted was both accurate, and a helpful reminder to those who don't travel often.
November 20, 2009 11:11 PM
........................
Was the article accurate?
Then why does TSA post this on the TSA.GOV website?
With certain exceptions for prescription and over-the-counter medicines, baby formula, breast milk, and juice, and other essential liquids, gels, and aerosols, the following rules apply to all liquids, gels, and aerosols you want to carry through a security checkpoint.
All liquids, gels and aerosols must be in three-ounce or smaller containers. Larger containers that are half-full or toothpaste tubes rolled up are not allowed. Each container must be three ounces or smaller.
All liquids, gels and aerosols must be placed in a single, quart-size, zip-top, clear plastic bag. Gallon size bags or bags that are not zip-top such as fold-over sandwich bags are not allowed. Each traveler can use only one, quart-size, zip-top, clear plastic bag.
Each traveler must remove their quart-sized plastic, zip-top bag from their carry-on and place it in a bin or on the conveyor belt for X-ray screening. X-raying separately will allow TSA security officers to more easily examine the declared items.
Or how about the misinformation that ice can be taken through the checkpoint but when looking at what TSA has provided the public it is clearly not true and in fact as written only for special needs persons?
To ensure the health and welfare of certain air travelers, in the absence of suspicious activity or items, greater than 3 ounces of the following liquids, gels and aerosols are permitted through the security checkpoint in reasonable quantities for the duration of your itinerary (all exceptions must be presented to the security officer in front of the checkpoint):
Baby formula, breast milk, and juice if a baby or small child is traveling;
All prescription and over-the-counter medications (liquids, gels, and aerosols) including KY jelly, eye drops, and saline solution for medical purposes;
Liquids including water, juice, or liquid nutrition or gels for passengers with a disability or medical condition;
Life-support and life-sustaining liquids such as bone marrow, blood products, and transplant organs;
Items used to augment the body for medical or cosmetic reasons such as mastectomy products, prosthetic breasts, bras or shells containing gels, saline solution, or other liquids; and,
Frozen gels/liquids are permitted if required to cool medical and infant/child exemptions. Ice is permitted as long as there is no melted liquid present.
You may see the same people posting often because TSA is not being truthful to the public.
I will continue asking questions of my government until answers are provided. If your unhappy with that then just skip over what I and others who offend you write.
Anon Said
You're not in the business of busting snow globes, but you are in the business of confiscating them and throwing them out in the case that some poor, misinformed traveler didn't realize the grave threat posed by their gift. Thanks for another day in which you have further eroded our civil liberties while providing a minimal level of actual security!
November 21, 2009 3:17 AM
-----------------------------------
How is this eroding your civil liberties. This is a heads up so you don't lose something. You can't carry it on so check it in. Is it an erosion of your civil liberties when the sign in front of the store says "NO SHOES NO SHIRT NO SERVICE". No it's not, it's a warning ahead of time to keep you from being inconvienced. This complaint over the loss of constitutional rights is really starting to get boring. If this was the case where are all of the law suits won by the people whose rights were violated. As much as the media likes to hit TSA were are these hundreds of news stories. There aren't any just small stories of isolated cases that are handeled by TSA and the individuals involved disciplined. And before anyone asks you do not have the right to know what kind of actions are taken. That subject has already been discussed. File a suit if you feel you are right and let the courts decide. But stop bringing it up without a legal ruling specifically saying your constitutional rights are being violated.
Use this forum to try to find ways to keep you safe without all of the inconvience.
I am going to be traveling with a large amount of cash during Thanksgiving. What is the TSA's current policy I understand it has changed but I can't find anything on the TSA website.
It also speeds things up when they get a better view and don't have to stop the X-ray belt for searches.
I'm not sure what the national policy is but in my airport regardless of the image whether it be shoes or a shirt we must stop on every image.
Now if you send out a little e-mail to all the FSD's maybe that would speed the process up.
throwing them out in the case that some poor, misinformed traveler didn't realize the grave threat posed by their gift.
This probably won't help you or most of the other people reading this but you do have an option of putting you're bag in checked luggage. I mean sure you may have to pay upwards of $25 but if I was the parent there bringing something home to my kids I'd probably check it.
"Inconsistencies: You may notice your screening experience at one airport doesn’t match the experience of another airport. We realize this happens, and some of it is intentional. While it can be a little confusing for our passengers, it also makes things unpredictable for those who might wish to do us harm. Our officers also can use their discretion in different scenarios that allows them to use common sense and not abide by a checklist mentality that can be studied and defeated by those who wish to do us harm."
You continue to explain away your lac of interest in training your staff as being on purpose. No front line TSOs yet know about the change on ice policy you have announced here but refused to update the web page for=, for example.
Annonymous said:You're not in the business of busting snow globes, but you are in the business of confiscating them and throwing them out in the case that some poor, misinformed traveler didn't realize the grave threat posed by their gift. Thanks for another day in which you have further eroded our civil liberties while providing a minimal level of actual security!
___________________________
Just to let you know, the TSA never confiscates an item. They give the passengers their options if the item isn't allowed past their checkpoint to include mailing it, giving it to someone who isn't traveling or putting it in their checked luggage. The other option they have to voluntarily abandon the item where it is disposed of.
As for the frozen liquids or ice RB, there have been updates about ice, here is the link:
http://www.tsa.gov/311/311-carry-ons.shtm, just below the picture of a baggie full of allowable items, there are several bullet points about what is allowed and the last one comments specifically about ice.
Anon sez - "You're not in the business of busting snow globes, but you are in the business of confiscating them and throwing them out in the case that some poor, misinformed traveler didn't realize the grave threat posed by their gift."
We do not confiscate, if an item is not permitted the passenger is given the same options to check the item, give the item to someone seeing them off, in some cases to mail or ship the item to themselves or to put it into their car (if available). If the passenger chooses not to take the options, then they voluntarily surrender the item.
In the case of illegal items, TSA does not confiscate them, they notify local LEO and they take appropriate action.
P.S. Great post for the infrequent travelers!
West
TSA Blog Team
Your recent post says Britney's ice is kosher since "Ice and other frozen solid liquids are permitted as long as they’re frozen solid and X-ray screened."
So, if I freeze my cranberries or gravy solid, is it a solid?
(ironic TSA word verification of the day: "lamenes")
Thanks Bob, I hope some of the flying public actually read this. It could be the difference between having a pleasant holiday season and a month of frustration.
In response to anonymous who seems to post the same copy/paste every time (and most of your questions overlap). At least think of some new questions to go after them with, and possibly actually call the TSA.
1. Q. Why does TSA assume any liquid below 3.4 ounces is safe but that any liquid over 3.4 ounces is dangerous explosive?
A. They don't assume that it is but it is probably a balance of allowing small quantities of needed liquids vs potential damage caused to an airplane by a certain quantity of explosive
2. Q. Why does TSA toss these dangerous explosives into open containers in the middle of airports?
A. Again, they aren't assuming it is a dangerous explosive, just that there is a possibility. If the explosive is stable enough to make it onto the plane then it is probably going to be fine sitting. The proper question to ask is what is done to dispose of everything.
3. 4. See 2.
5. Q. How does TSA screen the liquids sold past its checkpoints?
A. Probably just a restriction on what can be sold. There are a lot of easier ways to sneak something onto a plane than tampering with incoming shipments, etc.
6. Q. Does TSA test a random sampling if confiscated liquids to determine how many liquid explosives people are attempting to bring through checkpoints?
A. This is a valid question that I would be interested in knowing the answer to. The issue with a random sampling (over testing everything) is if there is a 1 in 10,000 chance of someone bringing it into the airport, and you screen 1 in 100 items then there is only a 1 in a million chance you will find it in your random sampling, even if 1 in 10,000 items are explosives.
7. Q. Why can't TSA point to a single piece of independent, peer-reviewed research to support its liquid policies?
A. I would direct this question to the FAA as well.
Disclaimer:
I am not an employee of the US government or any airports. I am just hoping to try and reduce some of the questions that are repeated every post.
Best TSA travel tip for the holidays should be: DON'T travel!!!STAY HOME!!! AVOID the Airport!!! You and you precious 'rights' will be safer if you don't go anywhere!
...and when the airlines are gone we will be safer from the threat of water, shoes, large amounts of cash, etc.
(sarcasm)
You know... the completely ironic thing about the liquid ban is that anyone traveling in a group can get as much liquid through the checkpoint as they want. Remember, it's 3.4, 1, 1 per person per trip through security, not total in the "secure" zone. If the line is short, all you have to do is keep one person in the secure zone, one person in the unsecure zone, and have one person cycle through the queue.
When I purchase a snow globe after having been screened (i.e. airport gift shop) will I be required to surrender that at a gate check?
Anon said....Just to let you know, the TSA never confiscates an item. They give the passengers their options if the item isn't allowed past their checkpoint to include mailing it, giving it to someone who isn't traveling or putting it in their checked luggage. The other option they have to voluntarily abandon the item where it is disposed of.
As for the frozen liquids or ice RB, there have been updates about ice, here is the link:
http://www.tsa.gov/311/311-carry-ons.shtm, just below the picture of a baggie full of allowable items, there are several bullet points about what is allowed and the last one comments specifically about ice.
November 21, 2009 11:10 AM
....................
Anon, read the page you referenced.
The Ice statement is clearly in the section dealing with passengers who have special needs.
That is why the statements by Bob about ice being allowed are at best contradictory, and at worst a blatant lie.
I didn't make the ice statement is allowed nor place the ice is allowed sentence where it is currently located. TSA did and to say ice is allowed for all is just not true based on what TSA has provided to the public.
All it would take is for TSA to move that sentence tot he first bullet on the page, and while doing the edit perhaps they could correct the 3.0oz to 3.4oz.
Jared, why do you think Bob refuses to answer the questions you're trying to address?
For those that don't understand the threat liquids possess here is a slideshow and video of all the information made public from the court cases against the LGA terrorists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8243799.stm
The engineer only used one bottle of explosive liquid in that video, before the ban there was nothing wrong with people bringing whole back packs full of sports drinks.
RB said...
Each container must be three ounces or smaller.
Well, RB, I went to the site, and all the text I saw said 3.4 ounces, although the graphic said 3 ounces, in an obvious attempt to keep "3-1-1" simplified. I've done a lot of presenting, and there is a struggle between covering every single point out there and confusing all interest and retention out of your audience. 3-1-1 probably is easier for regular folks to remember and is fairly catchy.
I will continue asking questions of my government until answers are provided. If your unhappy with that then just skip over what I and others who offend you write.
I'm sure you will continue to ask questions. You should probably reread my comment, because there was no way to read "offense" into that. It was exactly apropos for a blog comment, being a "comment".
Questions are great. Better safety is great. Streamlined check in is great. I'm not sure this is the best forum to push that agenda. There are better ways to reach the TSA (letters, phone calls) than comments on a blog, and I would also imagine writing your congressmen and women might be a better way to push your agenda and voice your concerns.
By the way, I would do that IN ADDITION to posting your comments. Many of the dissenting commenters here (but certainly not all) are intriguing, well informed and bring up excellent points in often slightly less than constructive ways. But change isn't going to happen on the TSA blog, especially since, as you can see, you aren't the intended audience, nor is the topic matter posted culled from the comments.
I'm still surprised the blog even takes comments, but pleasantly surprised.
Scott G. Lewis said...
RB said...
Each container must be three ounces or smaller.
Well, RB, I went to the site, and all the text I saw said 3.4 ounces, although the graphic said 3 ounces, in an obvious attempt to keep "3-1-1" simplified.
..............
Perhaps you need to take another look at the page you reference.
First bullet
"All liquids, gels and aerosols must be in three-ounce or smaller containers. Larger containers that are half-full or toothpaste tubes rolled up are not allowed. Each container must be three ounces or smaller."
Again, not my words but TSA's instructions to travelers.
Just so you know I have and continue to communicate with my electeds voicing my concerns about TSA.
Any agency that allows thousands of unscreened individuals into the secure area daily while focusing on Strip Searching children and other travelers is out of touch with reality.
I will continue those efforts.
Scott G. Lewis writes:
3-1-1 probably is easier for regular folks to remember and is fairly catchy.
Which is why I've been campaigning for TSA to change the slogan to "100-1-1", since the limit is actually 100ml. Of course, I've been told that TSA will never do it, because (a) they already spent all that money on 3-1-1 signs, and (b) nobody in the US does metric.
Excuse me ... my wife is sending me to the store to get a 67.628 ounce bottle of Mountain Dew ...
I don't know rb, I just clicked the link in the article again ( http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm ) and the text reads 3.4 while the obviously simplified graphic reads 3 oz.
Regarding the elected officials -- that's about the best you can do, glad to here.
Regarding people bypassing the checks - assuming they are heavily backgrounded pre hire that would be fine. Failing that, they should be equally screened.
Ok Scott, I found the problem with what we are seeing. TSA has two pages with conflicting information.
The first has the 3.0 oz referenced and mentions ice for special needs travelers.
http://www.tsa.gov/311/311-carry-ons.shtm
or
http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm
Which does mention 3.4 oz but does not mention ice for anyone.
It is exactly things like this that demonstrates problems travelers have with TSA.
When a government agency cannot state even a very simple policy with consistency then how can anyone expect them to do the more difficult things?
Scott G. Lewis said...
I don't know rb, I just clicked the link in the article again ( http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm ) and the text reads 3.4 while the obviously simplified graphic reads 3 oz.
Regarding the elected officials -- that's about the best you can do, glad to here.
Regarding people bypassing the checks - assuming they are heavily backgrounded pre hire that would be fine. Failing that, they should be equally screened.
November 22, 2009 10:53 PM
................
Sorry for the second post here.
All of the people who work at the aiport including baggage handlers, mechanics, housekeeping, the food and beverage facilities are not 100% screened. They are subject to random screening.
I doubt they have an intensive background check.
Scott G. Lewis writes:
Regarding people bypassing the checks - assuming they are heavily backgrounded pre hire that would be fine.
Sure, because a background check would never prohibit a TSO from doing anything illegal ... like, say, stealing from passengers' bags at Philly, or stealing from passengers' bags at Newark, or avoiding screening while boarding a plane in Newark.
Plenty of passengers have undergone background screenings as detailed as, or more so, than TSOs; such passengers must still be screened when they enter a checkpoint, because TSA does not trust such background screenings. Yet it trusts them when it comes to its own employees.
TSM/West said...
This complaint over the loss of constitutional rights is really starting to get boring. If this was the case where are all of the law suits won by the people whose rights were violated.
November 21, 2009 8:05 AM
#########
Ok West how about one case, Bierfelddt. The ACLU dropped the suit when the TSA agreed to change the policy about people travelling with cash. Yet when a newspaper asked to see the written guidelines they were told they had to file an FOIA and there is nothing posted to the TSA website announcing the change of policy. This is a policy change that affects the public and not subject to the discretion clause that appears in all of the TSA’s policies. So why is the TSA not making this public?
Jared Bartimus said...
Disclaimer:
I am not an employee of the US government or any airports. I am just hoping to try and reduce some of the questions that are repeated every post.
##############
Since you are not an employee of the TSA or an official spokesperson your answers will not be considered valid when we disagree with a TSO on polices and procedures. Official answers from the TSA that can be used at a checkpoint are what we want. “We read it on the blog” won’t work with TSO’s either.
Quote from Scott G Lewis: "Regarding people bypassing the checks - assuming they are heavily backgrounded pre hire that would be fine. Failing that, they should be equally screened."
Problem is, Scott, that trusted insiders provide the largest threat to any security. If you want to look see examples, take a look at some of the cases of espionage: Jonathan Pollard, Harold Nicholson, Robert Hanssen, Ana Belen Montes, and many more. All of those people had high level clearances, went thru serious vetting to get those, and still were caught spying for other nations.
If one can't fully trust people who are vetted like that and are generally considered to be high quality people, it can't be logically argued that the generally (not all) lower caliber people hired by TSA and subjected to the minimal background check shouldn't be screened. We've already seen many instances where screeners were smuggling drugs, bringing loaded firearms to work (Alvin Crabtree still works at DEN despite this), pax and baggage thefts, and more.
This doesn't even factor in the many ramp workers and others who have direct access to planes with no screenign at all.
If TSA can justify shoe and liquid carnivals on the basis of one incident, then clearly there is ample evidence to show why screeners should be screened.
Robert
Anon sez - "When I purchase a snow globe after having been screened (i.e. airport gift shop) will I be required to surrender that at a gate check?"
Not by SOP, you should have no problem at all with it.
West
TSA Blog Team
Gobble, Gobble - how about openong mor ethan 2 lanes (out of 16!) at IAD on 11/21?
The line was almost up the stairs at 8:30 AM and for many travellers (including my family) the Thanksgiving week started with a missed flight and the associated frustrations and costs!
Thanks TSA!
TSOWilliamReed said...
For those that don't understand the threat liquids possess here is a slideshow and video of all the information made public from the court cases against the LGA terrorists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8243799.stm
The engineer only used one bottle of explosive liquid in that video, before the ban there was nothing wrong with people bringing whole back packs full of sports drinks.
November 22, 2009 11:05 AM
#######
And yet in spite of this potential threat there are no liquids restrictions on flights from English airports, unless they are flying to the United States. And yet there are no airplanes falling out of the skies in any country that does not restrict liquids.
TSOWilliamReed said...
For those that don't understand the threat liquids possess here is a slideshow and video of all the information made public from the court cases against the LGA terrorists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8243799.stm
The engineer only used one bottle of explosive liquid in that video, before the ban there was nothing wrong with people bringing whole back packs full of sports drinks.
November 22, 2009 11:05 AM
While the person in the video might be credible the video itself proves very little.
It is pieced together and does not show the actual device being placed and then detonated.
Any explosive could have been used to simulate the damage from a liquid explosive which is exactly what the caption below the video window states; "This video simulates the damage caused by a liquid bomb to a commercial airliner."
Going to need better material than this to prove a point.
And while on the subject, how many liquid explosives has TSA ever found?
How many shoe bombs has TSA ever found?
"The engineer only used one bottle of explosive liquid in that video, before the ban there was nothing wrong with people bringing whole back packs full of sports drinks."
The completely ironic thing, though, is that it would still be extremely easy to get that much liquid through security. It just takes more people and/or more trips to get that volume through. So even after the ban, it's still possible to bring full sports drinks worth of fluid through. It's just a little harder. That said, if you're smart enough to make a bomb without blowing yourself up, you'll probably be smart enough to get the bombs through security.
Want a cheap present for somebody? Go to the TSA secuirty checkpoint and grab yourself an abandoned snow globe!
The war on liquids was a failure from the beginning. It was intended to do something so that the once in a lifetime fliers could see that something was getting done by a bloated government agency. Pure fluff, nothing more and nothing less on TSA's part
Gadfly said...
"The completely ironic thing, though, is that it would still be extremely easy to get that much liquid through security. It just takes more people and/or more trips to get that volume through. So even after the ban, it's still possible to bring full sports drinks worth of fluid through. It's just a little harder. That said, if you're smart enough to make a bomb without blowing yourself up, you'll probably be smart enough to get the bombs through security."
We also paid close attention to the idea of terrorists combining multiple small bottles in a larger container or combining many small bottles together after going through the checkpoint. Due to the extreme volatility of liquid explosives, the international consensus was that those scenarios don’t represent a significant threat. Thanks to this unprecedented international cooperation, 67 countries, a great majority of the world’s air travelers are under a common set of security rules for the first time.
Liquids Are Not A Threat, And TSA Should Drop The Liquid Ban Immediately
"We also paid close attention to the idea of terrorists combining multiple small bottles in a larger container or combining many small bottles together after going through the checkpoint. Due to the extreme volatility of liquid explosives, the international consensus was that those scenarios don’t represent a significant threat."
Who came to this consensus, and how did they reach it? How did you find THAT many people incapable of understanding that anything easily transportable in 3.4 ounce quantities can be easily combined into larger quantities? Are your imaginary liquid explosives somehow LESS dangerous in larger quantities? How stupid do you think we are, and why do you keep lying to us?
(Word verification? Swine. Fitting.)
@Anonymous: Of course, if it's on TSA's website and it's under mythbusters, it must be true.
I find it interesting that TSA claims that bringing it in multiple small bottles isn't feasible because the explosives are so volatile yet bringing in a big bottle of the same volatile liquid would be so easy. That makes sense only in TSA world. It also indicates that with the instability of the explosive, the person would be lucky to make it out of the apartment or lab, let alone even to the airport or to security.
We still have yet to see anyone but Dr. Alford, a shill who has something to gain from this, and DHS making a big deal out of it. Peer reviewed science with review from disinterested academics (meaning they have nothing to gain by supporting or refuting the premise) would be a good start. Is TSA ever going to provide that, or just ask us to keep trusting it?
Earl
Kudos to the TSA for putting a little smile in the otherwise boring process of security rules and regulations...and a big "BOO, HISS" to the Scrooges out there who seem to enjoy being victims. Sometimes life is inconvenient--deal with it.
I think the family lanes are a great idea. It helps to keep everyone calm and at peace with each other.
Scott, looks like someone at TSA updated the page that still had 3.0 oz listed.
However they left the comment about ice in the discussion for travelers with special needs.
http://www.tsa.gov/311/311-carry-ons.shtm now is corrected to the 3.4oz amount.
Would be nice if ice was made acceptable for all travelers and not just for those with special needs.
I guess BS was considered to have special needs, unlike the rest of the traveling public.
Perhaps it would be nice for some of these busy Thanksgiving holiday travelers to just say "Thank You!"
It is the sentiment of the season!
Liquids Are Not A Threat, And TSA Should Drop The Liquid Ban Immediately
November 23, 2009 6:43 PM
I was not aware of any ban. I heard of liquid restrictions, but not bans. see the difference? thanks.
I follow this blog regularly, although I have not flown since 2007. The primary reason I have not flown is because the TSA will not clarify whether or not I am permitted to bring food which is safe for me to eat into the secure areas.
I see, over and over, what I perceive as snarky comments about "just leave it at home," and "it's easy: just buy it in the secure area."
Well, I'm sorry, TSOs. I can't do that. With the exception of WATER, there's not a d@mn thing I can consume that is available in the secure area.
Are you aware that there are no 100 ml containers available in the USA? US containers come in 2 or 4 ounces, not 3.4 ounces. I can find 100 ml containers in Canada, but the cost is all but prohibitive.
Ever packed eight ounces of chicken salad (one lunch) into three 100 ml containers? Adds bulk and weight to my food bag. Now consider packing food for a minimum of 36 hours. Before you say I do not need to have that much food, the answer is, yes, I do. In 2004, before the liquid ban was in effect, my connecting flight was delayed by fog. A journey which should have taken 6 hours flight time took 28 hours. Without my safe food bag, I would have had two choices: starve, or eat unsafe food. Either way, I risk a trip to the emergency room.
Did you know that a homemade quiche-muffin (a quiche made the size of a regular muffin) is a liquid or a gel? Did you know that sliced cheese is a liquid or a gel? Were you aware homemade beef snacking sticks are a liquid or a gel?
Did you know homemade powdered seasoning constitutes a liquid or a gel?
In 2007, I had a 2 ounce baby food jar with seasoning in it that I could mix with oil and vinegar to put on a salad for safe salad dressing. A TSO decided it looked like a liquid, and called for an inspection of my food bag. The TSO doing the inspection was surly about changing her gloves, and SMACKED MY HANDS when I reached out to stop her from dumping my food onto a dirty table.
Before the TSA ban on liquids, I could fill bottles with home-squeezed orange juice, pack homemade sausages and quiches, and arrive for my flight around three hours early. This allowed me to pick a time between flights, when the check point was not busy, and be able to take my time getting through it.
Once through, I could walk to my gate (or, if it was a long distance, take a wheel chair or electric cart) and then settle in to have a leisurely breakfast, then board my plane and have a quiet trip. Layovers were brightened by the knowledge that I had plenty of safe food and drink for lunch or dinner.
There are many thousands who have the same medical needs I do as far as safe food.
I would be glad to work with the TSA. Unfortunately, the TSA cannot seem to get it through their heads that I cannot just "buy it in the safe area." It isn't that I won't. It's that I can't. Because there is nothing SAFE in the safe area for me to eat.
Why post now? Well, I'm NOT traveling for Thanksgiving, or Christmas, so I'll be able to eat delicious food that is safe for me. But I'd really like to be able to travel by air, hassle free. Any suggestions, TSOs?
Why post now? Well, I'm NOT traveling for Thanksgiving, or Christmas, so I'll be able to eat delicious food that is safe for me. But I'd really like to be able to travel by air, hassle free. Any suggestions, TSOs?
November 24, 2009 6:37 PM
I have a suggestion.
People with special needs have to be accommodated.
I suspect if you are prevented from having items that protect your health by an employee of the government then that person could be held responsible for restricting your ability to travel and possibly held accountable for violating your rights.
What you should do is plan a trip with whatever items you need and if TSA prevents you from taking your medically required items with you to file a complaint with the police agency at that airport. Also have a lawyer on speed dial to move the process forward.
TSA is suppose to keep WEI off of airplanes, not interfere with a persons medical needs.
K. A. Siley said:
"I would be glad to work with the TSA. Unfortunately, the TSA cannot seem to get it through their heads that I cannot just "buy it in the safe area." It isn't that I won't. It's that I can't. Because there is nothing SAFE in the safe area for me to eat."
I'd rather not buy food from the vendors either. I do not have your health issues, but I prefer to know what I am eating. No added fats, salt, or sugars that are not disclosed. Good health is based on a healthy diet, most of the airport vendors food is unworthy of consumption. I am sure TSA doesn't give healthy eating any consideration, the airport management certainly could care less as long as their vendors pay their leases, and the average TSO that I have seen reflects the rampant obesity that is a growing health concern in this country.
Oh, yes. There are liquid RESTRICTIONS.Ever tried to decant 20-24 ounces of homemade orange juice into 6-8 100 ml containers which are not designed as drinking cups? It simply isn't practical -- and I reiterate -- I cannot "just buy it in the safe area" because the orange and other flavored drinks they carry are not safe for me. Most airlines, because of food service contracts, carry Minute Maid OJ, and that's not safe for me, either.
RB: I'd like to be able to perform the scenario you suggest, but I can't afford a lawyer.
I doubt I would have much luck carrying my safe food through a check point the way I did in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007.
Security in 2002 were especially polite and helpful and sped me on my way to an international flight with my roll-on of safe food and best wishes.(I verified that the food I would not have eaten prior to arrival was permitted into my destination country.)
After 2002, it became increasingly difficult up to 2007, and I haven't flown since.
I'm frankly afraid to: I put a great deal of work into my homemade safe food, and I don't want to lose it. I cannot put it in my checked baggage (the usual suggestion) because then I don't have it to eat. Although a friend came up with a solution to Mr. Gelpack's dilemma: carry an empty quart ziplock bag through Security. Once through, ask one of the vendors for a couple scoops of ice to put in the bag, and keep the food fresh. Dump the melt water, and repeat as necessary for the trip.
Again: TSOs, what is the solution?
To K.A. Siley:
I am really sorry to hear about your story. I am a TSO at SMF and I have gathered some advice for you.
Hard coded rules
-Medical liquids, creams, gels, and aerosols are exempt from the 311 liquid policies. This includes items used to cool said items such as ice packs or gel packs.
-These items need to be declared at the checkpoint. (You will need to inform a TSO/TSO’s of their medical need)
-Give yourself extra time for the additional scrutiny that is needed in order to clear your items.
Advice
- Since you know you will need extra time to complete screening, I suggest you use the family lane. This will keep the normal flow of traffic going for your fellow passengers.
- If possible, separate your medical items from the bag or have them in a separate container. You are not required to have your medical items in a quart sized clear plastic baggy. This will reduce your bag check time.
- Have transparent containers to hold your medical items. The more the officer can see, the easier the officer can inspect your items for WEI. This will reduce your bag check time.
- Before reaching the checkpoint, decide how much medical information you are willing to tell a TSO. A TSO will ask you questions so he or she can better do their jobs. The more information you are willing to give, the better the officer can assist you and your needs. This will reduce hassle during screening.
- If you have any special requirements, inform the TSO inspecting your property (such as new gloves, clean work station, ect…). If possible, explain your needs before you reach the open baggage inspection area. You may or may not need to explain your needs to multiple officers. Be patient, stay cool, and you will find the situation will remain calm. This will reduce hassle during screening.
- If you have a snarky or incompetent officer, please ask for a supervisor. Again, you will probably need to explain your situation over again. Learn to explain your situation multiple ways to ensure everyone is on the same page. The better informed the person conducting your search is, the less chances your will have of an airport nightmare. This will reduce heart ache at the checkpoint for all parties involved.
-If you are having problems at the checkpoint, don’t be afraid to ask for help.
-Know who you are talking to. One stripe means TSO, two stripes means LTSO, and three stripes mean STSO. A supervisor is a STSO. You may or may not be referred to a LTSO first before talking to a checkpoint supervisor. A LTSO can also be an acting checkpoint supervisor if the checkpoint supervisor is away.
I hope this helps. God bless and happy holidays.
-Tim
"I suggest you use the family lane."
Are you claiming that program is still functional? I travel 70k+ miles per year. I have yet to see than used. A few weeks ago in Boston I was told they are never used.
K. A. Siley said...
Oh, yes. There are liquid RESTRICTIONS.Ever tried to decant 20-24 ounces of homemade orange juice into 6-8 100 ml containers which are not designed as drinking cups? It simply isn't practical -- and I reiterate -- I cannot "just buy it in the safe area" because the orange and other flavored drinks they carry are not safe for me. Most airlines, because of food service contracts, carry Minute Maid OJ, and that's not safe for me, either.
RB: I'd like to be able to perform the scenario you suggest, but I can't afford a lawyer.
....................
You might try contacting the ACUL or a local legal aide group and discussing your problem prior to travel.
If you attempt travel and are denied you medically needed items they might agree to work on your behalf.
If TSA will not allow your items file your complaint and then make the decision to travel or not. Buying a refundable ticket would protect you from loss should you choose to not travel that day.
The only way to resolve this type of problem is taking TSA to task.
Hey TSO Tim @"Hard coded rules
-Medical liquids, creams, gels, and aerosols are exempt from the 311 liquid policies. This includes items used to cool said items such as ice packs or gel packs."
Maybe you can understand Bob's recent post and interpret it for us.
Was Britney's Big Gulp of ice some sort of medical exemption or is is it really just a solid that needs only an x-ray and glancing visual inspection to insure no melting?
"Again, you will probably need to explain your situation over again. Learn to explain your situation multiple ways to ensure everyone is on the same page. The better informed the person conducting your search is, the less chances your will have of an airport nightmare. This will reduce heart ache at the checkpoint for all parties involved."
It is grotesque that someone should have to explain, over and over again, why they need food simply to get on an airplane, just because TSA continues to overreact to a nonexistent threat. Shame on each and every one of you.
Anonymous said...
"I suggest you use the family lane."
Are you claiming that program is still functional? I travel 70k+ miles per year. I have yet to see than used. A few weeks ago in Boston I was told they are never used.
November 25, 2009 8:14 AM
................
That's because TSA is not capable of having the same policies and procedures at all airports.
A demonstration of TSA's lack of direction and management.
A suggestion for those wanting to know just how early to get to the airport and make it through security with ample time to make your flights, may I suggest the TSA website: http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/waittime.shtm
Oh, oops, that has been non-operational for many months now. I guess they really couldn't care about the traveling public after all.
With an annual budget of $7 billion, you would think that fixing a website could be manageable.
Bob, any idea when we will see that website functional again?
Re:
-Tim
November 25, 2009 5:40 AM
Tim:
That was one of the most useful and compassionate postings I have ever seen from someone in TSA.
While one may more may not pick nits with what you said, my hat is off to you for tone and tenor of your posting.
The rest of TSA -- including some of the official bloggers -- have lot to learn from you about how to share information in a manner that is not condescending or offensive.
If there were more employeess like you, I would elect to start flyign again.
Folks, please remember that while your pumpkin pie may be OK, you CANNOT bring canned pumpkin, or evaporated milk, in your carry-on bag! Every year it seems we get people who intend to bake that pie upon reaching their destination. They hear that "pies are allowed" and assume that means ingredients are, too. Not so!
Also, for the record, someone claimed that screeners haven't been briefed about the policy change re: ice, and that is not so, at least at my airport. We were briefed last week. Sure, it was 10 days or 2 weeks after the change supposedly was made, but hey -- better late than never, eh? :)
HAPPY THANKSGIVING Everyone.
It really sickens me that TSA HAS NO PROOF that 3-1-1 is a policy that makes sense. They claim to have research backing up their claims, but have never shared it. Come on Bob, go to bat for us on this, your organization already has a major PR problem, what with the dozens of civil rights violations and other snafus every year. This blog is supposed to be a dialog with the community, but you ignore every inconvenient question. Fix it.
The lack of consistency of procedure at various airports is unacceptable. Your explaining it away as "tactics" is so transparent. We are not fooled. Codify your procedures (we wouldn't mind a copy of that document) and TRAIN YOUR PEOPLE. Your TSOs have serious ego and power-tripping problems. Maybe it's the new faux-cop uniforms, but more likely it's just a lack of training and oversight. Fix it.
You guys could learn a lot from Tim. Honesty, useful and accurate information, politeness. If you can't answer a question because of some foolish TSA policy or just don't know the answer, say so, stop ignoring us. It's a sad state of affairs when your commenters are doing a better job interfacing with the public than the blog staff. Fix it.
Hmm..that snow globe point is pretty interesting.
I would've never thought...
Anon said
Ok West how about one case, Bierfelddt. The ACLU dropped the suit when the TSA agreed to change the policy about people travelling with cash. Yet when a newspaper asked to see the written guidelines they were told they had to file an FOIA and there is nothing posted to the TSA website announcing the change of policy. This is a policy change that affects the public and not subject to the discretion clause that appears in all of the TSA’s policies. So why is the TSA not making this public?
-----------------------------------
TSA never changed the policy. The policy has always been that cash (no matter how much) was not a problem as long as the person carrying the cash was traveling with in the US. The policy was also to question if other signs of illegal activity were present when the TSO conducted a bag check in accordance with his rules. Nothing has changed except that better training is being given to TSO.
RB response to anon
Anonymous said...
"I suggest you use the family lane."
Are you claiming that program is still functional? I travel 70k+ miles per year. I have yet to see than used. A few weeks ago in Boston I was told they are never used.
November 25, 2009 8:14 AM
................
That's because TSA is not capable of having the same policies and procedures at all airports.
A demonstration of TSA's lack of direction and management.
-----------------------------------
It's very nice of you to assume what direction TSO's are given from management. First of all family friendly and expert lanes are only a suggestion to travelers to use. Not mandatory. If you approached a screening checkpoint with two bags and were asked to use a lane other than the expert lane yu would complain that you are an expert and should be allowed to use what ever lane you wanted to. And you would be right. Thats why these lanes are only suggestions. By the way TSA has a lot of the same policies at every airport. No guns no shoes no explosives I could keep going. They also have discretionary policies to allow for unpredictability. Whether you agree with it or not thats another example of a same policy.
To TSO Tim at SMF,
Thank you for taking the time to compose your thoughtful, spot on reply.
Sincerely, another TSO (female)
Anon TSO said
Also, for the record, someone claimed that screeners haven't been briefed about the policy change re: ice, and that is not so, at least at my airport. We were briefed last week. Sure, it was 10 days or 2 weeks after the change supposedly was made, but hey -- better late than never, eh? :)
November 25, 2009 6:26 PM
-----------------------------------
To the Anon TSO. The issue of ice has been in the SOP FAQ's for several months. Take some initiative and research .
Tim,
My thanks to you for assembling a very useful set of information -- and in a non-condescending manner. I am typing this in between fixing turkey, dressing, homemade gravy, spinach in brie sauce, cranberry-apple-pecan compote, mock sweet potatoes, almond flour muffins, and egg nog ice cream. Sorry, I can't invite any bloggers to dinner. (smile)
You said,
>> Hard coded rules
>> -Medical liquids, creams, gels, and aerosols are exempt from the 311 liquid policies. This includes items used to cool said
items such as ice packs or gel packs.<<
I don't have "medical items" per se. Just food. My CPAP. And my four-prong cane. And I have been advised by TSOs that food does not qualify as a medical item, and that I am therefore not permitted to have ice packs or gel packs to keep my food cold. I have also been advised that bottles of orange juice are not permitted because they are liquids, and no liquid is exempt from the restriction.
Even citing http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/specialneeds/index.shtm, where it states "Liquids including water, juice, or liquid nutrition or gels for passengers with a disability or medical condition" is not helpful. TSOs in several cities fail to understand my repeated "I cannot just buy it in the secure area."
>>-These items need to be declared at the checkpoint. (You will need to inform a TSO/TSO’s of their medical need)<<
There appears to be a disconnect between my understanding of this statement, and the understanding of the TSOs at the airports I have traveled through.
I have approached TSOs to declare my food bag, and been told, "Put it on the belt," and then I have been snarled at because I want to be present when they are inspecting my food. I feel that TSOs should be obliged to follow public health rules regarding food safety. With one exception (and I believe this was prior to the establishment of the TSA) most TSOs apparently feel that they are exempt from these rules.
In addition, how do I prove that I have a medical need? My doctor is willing to write a letter of exemption for me, but we both sat there in her office and said, "But what do we put IN it that they will understand?" Can you point me to the URL which details what should be included in a letter of medical necessity?
>>-Give yourself extra time for the additional scrutiny that is needed in order to clear your items.<<
I always do. I travel with my food bag, a Cpap, a computer, and a camera. I walk with a four-pronged cane. I am fully aware that this amount of gear could be a problem, and would rather sit quietly at my gate for an hour or so than try to hurry through the check point.
>>Advice
- Since you know you will need extra time to complete screening, I suggest you use the family lane. This will keep the normal flow of traffic going for your fellow passengers.<<
Does the family lane actually exist? I have read about it many times on this blog, but I have never seen it in action. Seattle, Chicago, Houston, Newark, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Atlanta... I've never seen one open.
Truly -- no sarcasm intended -- I've asked TSOs which lane I should be in because I have a bunch of stuff to be inspected, and I've always been directed to whatever lane was open. I sometimes feel as if I should make a big yellow diamond which says, "Warning! Slow Moving Passenger!"and paste it on my back
(to be continued)
>> - If possible, separate your medical items from the bag or have them in a separate container. You are not required to have your medical items in a quart sized clear plastic baggy. This will reduce your bag check time.<<
My food is ALWAYS in a separate bag. My CPAP is in a separate bag. I've been given H-ll, and had my boarding pass marked "SSSS" by the security twits right before the check point because I had "too many bags." I set up my carry-on so that my computer and camera go IN the carry-on, so as to cut down on the clutter once on board. I tried carrying them loose to expedite placing them on the belt at the check point, and was told that I was permitted "X" number of carry-ons, and that even if I intended to repack once through the check point, I had to have them packed as I approached the check point, then must unpack them at the check point, and repack them once past the check point.
>> - Have transparent containers to hold your medical items. The more the officer can see, the easier the officer can inspect your items for WEI. This will reduce your bag check time.<<
Always. Heck. *I* need to be able to see what's in the containers. Homemade mustard is great on a souffle bread roll-up, but terrible on homemade yogurt. Having to carry several dozen containers to keep each container under 100 ml adds to the confusion.
>> - Before reaching the checkpoint, decide how much medical information you are willing to tell a TSO. A TSO will ask you questions so he or she can better do their jobs. The more information you are willing to give, the better the officer can assist you and your needs. This will reduce hassle during screening.<<
I have no problems with explaining the way I eat or anything about sleep apnea to anyone who will listen. I do question why CPAP users have to have their breathing machines swabbed for chemicals. I find I resent having test chemicals swabbed on something I'm going to be breathing through.
>> - If you have any special requirements, inform the TSO inspecting your property (such as new gloves, clean work station, ect…). If possible, explain your needs before you reach the open baggage inspection area. You may or may not need to explain your needs to multiple officers. Be patient, stay cool, and you will find the situation will remain calm. This will reduce hassle during screening.<<
You know, this sounds very reasonable. However, in practice, it frequently does not work. Every time I try to explain to officers that I have special needs, my perception of their attitude (and this is only my perception) is that they either (a) don't care, and see me as an impediment to shuffling people through the check point, or (b) they think I am lying about having special needs. Whether I try to explain, or try to brave my way through is irrelevant.
It's hard to remain calm when I am made to walk back and forth through the metal detector because my hair clips or my medic alert bracelet set the d@mned thing off. Meanwhile, my unattended food and gear is thrown on an unattended table where anyone could pick it up, and/or it is being inspected by TSOs with dirty gloves and an attitude. It's especially hard to do this without my cane. I appreciate the courtesy of TSOs having wooden canes at the check point, but they aren't adjustable to my height, and they're hard to walk with.
(to be continued)
(continued from previous post)
>> - If you have a snarky or incompetent officer, please ask for a supervisor. Again, you will probably need to explain your situation over again. Learn to explain your situation multiple ways to ensure everyone is on the same page. The better informed the person conducting your search is, the less chances your will have of an airport nightmare. This will reduce heart ache at the checkpoint for all parties involved.<<
What is the best way to ask for a supervisor? I must have the wrong technique, as it upsets me to be snarled at when making a such a request. Some TSOs, thank goodness, are helpful and polite. Sadly, it's the ones who require calling for a supervisor who make it the most difficult to do so.
>> -If you are having problems at the checkpoint, don’t be afraid to ask for help. <<
Again, how? Should I ask the airline ticket counter for handicapped assistance? What is the best way to convey to the TSOs at the checkpoint that I'm not carrying this food bag or the cane or the CPAP or anything else just to make their day miserable?
Saying, "Excuse me, I need help" doesn't seem to cut it.
>> -Know who you are talking to. One stripe means TSO, two stripes means LTSO, and three stripes mean STSO. A supervisor is a STSO. You may or may not be referred to a LTSO first before talking to a checkpoint supervisor. A LTSO can also be an acting checkpoint supervisor if the checkpoint supervisor is away.<<
Thank you. This is helpful. I believe it was an STSO who helped me the time the snarkey hired security before a checkpoint gave me grief.
>> I hope this helps. God bless and happy holidays. <<
Thank you. I am finishing this up the day after Thanksgiving. We had a great dinner, and a good time with family. Hope yours was equally good.
-- K.
>> Anonymous said, "Folks, please remember that while your pumpkin pie may be OK, you CANNOT bring canned pumpkin, or evaporated milk, in your carry-on bag! Every year it seems we get people who intend to bake that pie upon reaching their destination. They hear that "pies are allowed" and assume that means ingredients are, too. Not so!" <<
A pumpkin pie is typically made of pumpkin or butternut squash, eggs, some type of sweetening (sugar or honey), something creamy, be it cream,condensed milk, or half & half yogurt, and spices.
It is a custard...
I'm truly not trying to be snarky. I'm trying to understand.
Why is a pie, which typically contains 2-4 cups of filling, permitted, but a translucent container with those same 2-4 cups of filling deemed "a liquid or a gel" which must be thrown out at the check point?
Tim, while generally your post was good, I take exception to this statement:
"Before reaching the checkpoint, decide how much medical information you are willing to tell a TSO. A TSO will ask you questions so he or she can better do their jobs. The more information you are willing to give, the better the officer can assist you and your needs. This will reduce hassle during screening."
No passenger should ever be asked anything about his/her medical condition as screeners are not medical experts. All a passenger needs to say is: such and such is required because of a medical condition.
No more information from the passenger; NO questions from screeners about medical conditions.
Regarding ice, How long is the flight? You'll be hard pressed to keep that ice in an icy state.
LAS (mccarren airport) has a family lane! we even have little signs that point it out next to the TDC podium
What are the rules regarding frozen liquids, Bob?
It is grotesque that someone should have to explain, over and over again, why they need food simply to get on an airplane, just because TSA continues to overreact to a nonexistent threat.
Well... seeing how we as humans have not developed telepathy powers yet, we still have to communicate verbally. How is it unreasonable that you will likely have to explain yourself to the different chains of command in the Checkpoints? TSO's/LTSO's/STSO's are just supposed to know what your needs are? You should be more sensible when you think.
If the TSA wants to keep to the 'voluntary surrender is not confiscation' line, they need to implement the same policy used by the airport security in some 'hostile' countries. To wit: All your baggage goes through security with you. Any item in your carry-on that is 'verbotten' in the cabin is removed from your carry-on, anything completely 'forbidden' is 'voluntarily surrendered', and the rest is physically handed to you for placement in your checked baggage. Checked baggage is then, at your expense and option, wrapped with plastic wrap and sealed in front of you to prevent 'removal and insertion of objects'. Checked baggage goes on its merry way into baggage handling system. You and your carry-on baggge goes on your merry way to your flight.
Bob: If you can name two major international airports that do this, you know more about airport security than your superiors.
"How is it unreasonable that you will likely have to explain yourself to the different chains of command in the Checkpoints? TSO's/LTSO's/STSO's are just supposed to know what your needs are? You should be more sensible when you think."
Or TSA could be sensible and admit that food and liquid present zero threat to aircraft and that TSA thus has no business interrogating passengers about their food and liquid needs. But I guess you'd rather have TSA continue doing bin Laden's work for him.
TSM/West said...
RB response to anon
Anonymous said...
"I suggest you use the family lane."
Are you claiming that program is still functional? I travel 70k+ miles per year. I have yet to see than used. A few weeks ago in Boston I was told they are never used.
November 25, 2009 8:14 AM
................
That's because TSA is not capable of having the same policies and procedures at all airports.
A demonstration of TSA's lack of direction and management.
-----------------------------------
It's very nice of you to assume what direction TSO's are given from management. First of all family friendly and expert lanes are only a suggestion to travelers to use. Not mandatory. If you approached a screening checkpoint with two bags and were asked to use a lane other than the expert lane yu would complain that you are an expert and should be allowed to use what ever lane you wanted to. And you would be right. Thats why these lanes are only suggestions. By the way TSA has a lot of the same policies at every airport.. No guns no shoes no explosives I could keep going. They also have discretionary policies to allow for unpredictability. Whether you agree with it or not thats another example of a same policy.
November 27, 2009 9:07 AM
.........................
Screening from a travelers point of view should be the same at every airport. The same rules and processes in place.
Tell me how not doing so would make TSA less effective?
This issue of different rules at different airports is one of the primary reasons TSA employees catch so much grief from the public.
This is a problem senior TSA leadership could fix but for some reason has not.
Which was the point of the post you commented on!
TSM/West said...
Anon said
Ok West how about one case, Bierfelddt. The ACLU dropped the suit when the TSA agreed to change the policy about people travelling with cash. Yet when a newspaper asked to see the written guidelines they were told they had to file an FOIA and there is nothing posted to the TSA website announcing the change of policy. This is a policy change that affects the public and not subject to the discretion clause that appears in all of the TSA’s policies. So why is the TSA not making this public?
-----------------------------------
TSA never changed the policy. The policy has always been that cash (no matter how much) was not a problem as long as the person carrying the cash was traveling with in the US. The policy was also to question if other signs of illegal activity were present when the TSO conducted a bag check in accordance with his rules. Nothing has changed except that better training is being given to TSO.
November 27, 2009 8:38 AM
................
then how do you explain this:
http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/11/blogger-roundtable-at-tsa-hq-with.html
2.21.2008 (From A Word With our Lawyers" Blog Post)
I see that at least one person was troubled by the fact that TSA's screening of airline passengers sometimes yields evidence of crimes not directly related to aviation security. Our responsibility and focus in the airport screening process is to prevent a terrorist attack involving aircraft. In the course of carrying out our mission by screening for weapons and explosives, however, we sometimes incidentally discover illegal items unrelated to transportation security. Federal law and policy require that we refer such items to law enforcement officers for appropriate action. See, for example, United States v. Marquez, 410 F.3d 612, 617 (2005). Francine Kerner – TSA Chief Counsel
Discovery of Contraband During the Screening Process OD-400-54-2 May 9, 2005
Expiration – Indefinite
Summary - This directive provides guidance to ensure nationwide consistency in the appropriate referral or initiation of civil enforcement actions for incidents involving discovery of contraband during TSA screening procedures.
Procedures - When TSA discovers contraband during the screening process that is not a TSA Prohibited Item, the matter should be referred to the local Law Enforcement Officers as appropriate. An Enforcement Investigative Report should not be initiated.
Examples of such contraband include:
- Illegal Drugs
- Drug Paraphernalia
- Large Amounts of Cash(10,000.00)
The OD was signed by TSAs Chief Operating Officer at the time, Jonathan J. Fleming
For the rest of the document, (contact numbers and e-mails) please use the FOIA process for OD-400-54-2
Jared Bartimus said...
1. Q. Why does TSA assume any liquid below 3.4 ounces is safe but that any liquid over 3.4 ounces is dangerous explosive?
A. They don't assume that it is but it is probably a balance of allowing small quantities of needed liquids vs potential damage caused to an airplane by a certain quantity of explosive
-------------------------------
To be fair, dihydrogen monoxide (a common carry on item) is an extremely dangerous chemical. It surprises me that even 3.4 oz bottles of that stuff is allowed through security. All it'll take is one accident of some poor pilot inhaling the stuff to cause a serious accident!
TSM/West said...
TSA never changed the policy. The policy has always been that cash (no matter how much) was not a problem as long as the person carrying the cash was traveling with in the US. The policy was also to question if other signs of illegal activity were present when the TSO conducted a bag check in accordance with his rules. Nothing has changed except that better training is being given to TSO.
----------------
Please provide a copy of the official policy. Because I do not understand how carrying a large sum of money is a threat to an airplane.
According to this article, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/rules-changed-after-paul-aide-detained-at-airport/
"The new rules, issued in September and October, tell officers "screening may not be conducted to detect evidence of crimes unrelated to transportation security" and that large amounts of cash don't qualify as suspicious for purposes of safety."
However "TSA spokeswoman Lauren Gaches said the new "internal directives" are meant to ensure their screeners are consistent. She acknowledged the policy on large sums of cash had changed, but wouldn't provide a copy of either document. She said the directives would not be released unless a Freedom Of Information Act request was submitted by The Washington Times."
Sounds like West you've received inaccurate training on the new policy. And passengers will need to have a copy available to prevent future fishing expeditions.
I just read my first TSA blog. May I commend you for getting across important information in a pleasant and amusing way. I have two metal joints, so I am wanded at each and every airport. 99% of the TSA people I meet are sincee, helpful folks who are doing an incredibly difficult job trying to keep moron Americans safe. I realize that our present system is not perfect, but we have to do something, we are the ones who suffered a terrible terrorist attack, and it pains me to see the criticism heaped on people doing a thankless job. I go out of my way to make the agents feel decent about the fact that they are doing something to me that could be considered annoying. Only an idiot doesn't appreciate TSA and the work they do, day in and day out. Thanks, guys.
Or TSA could be sensible and admit that food and liquid present zero threat to aircraft and that TSA thus has no business interrogating passengers about their food and liquid needs. But I guess you'd rather have TSA continue doing bin Laden's work for him.
November 30, 2009 11:31 AM
Riiiiggghhhht... because bin laden wanted you to get foot fungus and restrict your freedom to fly, right? If you continue to ignore the fact that liquid explosives exist and can be used to cause an explosion in the cabin of the plane (which ='s a bad thing) then we can progress. Im not holding my breath with that though.
The way I see it, by you not wanting security in your home country, you're inviting bin laden and friends in to attack us again. Seems like you're doing is work for him. (see? i can spin it just like you). :)
Anonymous said..
"According to this article, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/rules-changed-after-paul-aide-detained-at-airport/
"The new rules, issued in September and October, tell officers "screening may not be conducted to detect evidence of crimes unrelated to transportation security" and that large amounts of cash don't qualify as suspicious for purposes of safety."
I think you might be misunderstanding this statement. It is not saying that TSA can not report or refer to law enforcement large amounts of currency or other items that may be criminal in nature (child porn, for example). I believe what it is saying is that the search can not be solely for the purpose of finding these items; however, if during a seach for a suspected prohibited item, the officer encounters a large sum of cash, drugs, etc. then they are still going to involve their supervisor and possibly law enforcement. That's how I interpret the direction. I could be mistaken.
"The way I see it, by you not wanting security in your home country, you're inviting bin laden and friends in to attack us again. Seems like you're doing is work for him."
I do want security. I want sensible security that is proportionate to actual risks, is as non-invasive as possible, and is conducted by people who understand and respect the rights of citizens. Wanting that does not make anyone a willing accomplice of bin Laden's. However, uniformed agents putting people through pointless security theater, demanding to know medical histories of those who are inconvenienced by its nonsensical liquid policies, and taking nude photos of minor children -- in essence, terrorizing Americans who want to fly from point A to point B -- are, in fact, doing Osama bin Laden's work for him.
" First of all family friendly and expert lanes are only a suggestion to travelers to use. Not mandatory."
You ignore the point. The lanes are NOT being used. By anyone.
Except some bureaucrat generating misleading metrics.
I do want security.
Remarkable. Now share with us how your dream checkpoint would operate. Then i will poke holes in your concepts and make you realize how difficult running a checkpoint can really be. Others are welcome to take on this challenge
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said..
"According to this article, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/rules-changed-after-paul-aide-detained-at-airport/
"The new rules, issued in September and October, tell officers "screening may not be conducted to detect evidence of crimes unrelated to transportation security" and that large amounts of cash don't qualify as suspicious for purposes of safety."
I think you might be misunderstanding this statement. It is not saying that TSA can not report or refer to law enforcement large amounts of currency or other items that may be criminal in nature (child porn, for example). I believe what it is saying is that the search can not be solely for the purpose of finding these items; however, if during a seach for a suspected prohibited item, the officer encounters a large sum of cash, drugs, etc. then they are still going to involve their supervisor and possibly law enforcement. That's how I interpret the direction. I could be mistaken.
December 1, 2009 1:02 PM
.........................
Cash is not an illegal item.
Child porn is illegal.
Certain drugs are illegal.
Someone with cash alone has done nothing to merit attention.
But hey, you TSA folks seem intent on destroying usable evidence while playing mall cop.
Fofana Ruling
McCarty Ruling
Shoes on belt.
Apparently that's not a recommendation, its a REQUIREMENT. Coming through JFK's Delta Terminal tonight from the Customs area, I was ordered to put my shoes on the belt and if I insisted on putting them in a bin, I would have to wait for a supervisor. I was told that it could take "up to an hour, so you'll miss your flight" to wait for a supe.
On top of that, the screeners insisted that "a rule is a rule". And then made deriding comments about me and a previous passenger that had asked that his shoes stay in a bin.
Don't give me a line about "cluttered and better view", because there was a pair of shoes in my bag. There is no problem screening those (even in a cluttered suitcase) without removing them.
To top it off, the checkpoint did not have any complaint forms (not that they do any good).
Bob, you need to get the word out to all the stations that some of us have had shoes get torn up or stuck in a machine.... and that "on the belt, out of the bin" is optional. That or outright admit the rule is a sham because shoes in a bag don't have to come out.
And you wonder why frequent travelers despise the TSA.
@"
Remarkable. Now share with us how your dream checkpoint would operate. Then i will poke holes in your concepts and make you realize how difficult running a checkpoint can really be. Others are welcome to take on this challenge"
###########
That same hole-poking exercise works on the existing checkpoint, from accepting boarding passes printed by the potential terrorists to concentrating the passengers into a ripe target for a suicide bomber. Your focus on the fol-de-rol at the checkpoint is like putting multiple Medeco locks on the barn door while leaving loose boards on the barn.
RB said
Someone with cash alone has done nothing to merit attention.
-----------------------------------
You are absolutely right. If you read my last post, that is exactly what I said. Any amount of cash is ok. It's only when we see any thing else indicating illegal activities do we get a LEO involved. I don't care if you have a million dollars in your bag, if there is nothing else pointing to an illegal activity you're free to go, no questions asked.
Anon Said: Bob, you need to get the word out to all the stations that some of us have had shoes get torn up or stuck in a machine.... and that "on the belt, out of the bin" is optional. That or outright admit the rule is a sham because shoes in a bag don't have to come out. And you wonder why frequent travelers despise the TSA.
---------------------------
I just forwarded your comment to the Customer Support manager at the airport. If you would like to provide more information and receive a response, I suggest you use the Got Feedback program.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
Just went through the St Louis airport and shoes that were placed into the bin were removed by the TSO working the machine. Told her that it was supposed to be optional and she copped an attitude. Screening was at the A gate, far left.
Don't they bother to train those people working there? How many more years will it take before they figure out how to do their jobs?
TSM/West said...
RB said
Someone with cash alone has done nothing to merit attention.
-----------------------------------
You are absolutely right. If you read my last post, that is exactly what I said. Any amount of cash is ok. It's only when we see any thing else indicating illegal activities do we get a LEO involved. I don't care if you have a million dollars in your bag, if there is nothing else pointing to an illegal activity you're free to go, no questions asked.
December 4, 2009 8:13 AM
This is exactly what your said:
"I think you might be misunderstanding this statement. It is not saying that TSA can not report or refer to law enforcement large amounts of currency or other items that may be criminal in nature (child porn, for example)."
You say you can refer someone for cash and did not tie doing so into other potential wrongdoing.
Why would you refer someone to law enforcement for any amount of cash?
Seems TSA would better use its resources looking for WEI!
Bob said:
"I just forwarded your comment to the Customer Support manager at the airport...."
Can you commit to posting the answer you receive from this person on the blog?
"I just forwarded your comment to the Customer Support manager at the airport."
Swell. Now where's the Britney tape, Bob?
Anon Said: Bob, you need to get the word out to all the stations that some of us have had shoes get torn up or stuck in a machine.... and that "on the belt, out of the bin" is optional. That or outright admit the rule is a sham because shoes in a bag don't have to come out. And you wonder why frequent travelers despise the TSA.
---------------------------
To which Bob replied:
I just forwarded your comment to the Customer Support manager at the airport. If you would like to provide more information and receive a response, I suggest you use the Got Feedback program.
---------------------------
Bob, over on Flyertalk, the TSA people are saying that a passenger has to actually INSIST on keeping their shoes in a bin, and only then will the screener allow them to do so. This is not quite the same as "optional." It relies on passengers being very assertive at the very point where most feel they need to be compliant and obedient to get through without a hassle.
Can you clarify here whether it's really optional or whether passengers need to make a fuss to be allowed to protect their shoes?
Wouldn't it be cool if these rules were actually written somewhere comprehensive instead of people having to show printouts of this blog to TSA staff?
What about corkscrews in carry-on?
This is a good tips actually, but still lots of question behind this. but as we always now that every needed action is best for the country. Thanks for the post.
"LAS (mccarren airport) has a family lane! we even have little signs that point it out next to the TDC podium"
I see many of these lanes. The point is they are now used about as much as the puffer machines.
"but as we always now that every needed action is best for the country."
Untrue. Much of TSA's nonsensical security theater does nothing to make us safer, and much to cause us harm.
Jack sez - "What about corkscrews in carry-on?"
Corkscrews are allowed, as long as they do not have an attached blade. Many of the corkscrews now have a small blade attached for cutting oranges, lemons, etc. As long as the item is simply a corkscrew, it is allowed. Take care Jack and enjoy!
West
TSA Blog Team
TSM/West said, "This complaint over the loss of constitutional rights is really starting to get boring."
It comes as no surprise you're "bored" by the fact TSA officers swear an oath to adhere to the U.S. Constitution then routinely betray that oath and violate the Second, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendment rights of all Americans.
TSM/West said, "If this was the case where are all of the law suits won by the people whose rights were violated."
Where did you get the bizarre notion judges reliably enforce the Constitution? Under the Sedition Acts of 1798 and 1918, Americans were imprisoned for merely criticizing politicians, conscription, U.S. entry into World War I, etc. and judges had no problem with that. The Supreme Court didn't get around to partially enforcing the First Amendment until the 1920s. The fact politically-appointed judges often rubber stamp the trampling of individual liberties by government minions doesn't make it right. You might want to write that down.
You neglected to explain how TSA rules supersede the Second Amendment and why the TSA's warrantless searches aren't overt violations of the Fourth Amendment. The U.S. Constitution is supposed to be our supreme law of the land ... yet virtually everything the TSA (and BATFE) does are blatant violations of that document. Not, of course, that you folks have any problem with that.
The basis for the liquid rule has been so, so thoroughly debunked, why do you still have it?
Really, I did an excellent job at debunking keeping liquids from passing the checkpoint by posting about both your mythical liquid bombs in the same post (so you can't claim you're talking about the other one) and why each of the requirements I listed was necessary (since you listed them as necessary) and how a bomb that matches all the requirements simply doesn't exist.
You have lost on that issue so many times, it's truly sad that you still repeat it. I don't understand why you still repeat it. It makes no logical sense, even from an agency as illogical as the TSA.
By the way, you aren't confiscating anything in the same way a mugger isn't robbing from you - when he says "your money or your life" he's offering you a choice and therefore you chose to give him your money. You are getting truly pathetic.
"I'm truly not trying to be snarky. I'm trying to understand.
Why is a pie, which typically contains 2-4 cups of filling, permitted, but a translucent container with those same 2-4 cups of filling deemed "a liquid or a gel" which must be thrown out at the check point?"
I don't know. I don't make the rules; I just have to enforce them if I want to keep my job. Believe me, I don't like it, either.
The most logical assumption I can come up with is that it's bad P.R. for the TSA to be see chucking homemade pies in the trash barrel, but TSA has never seemed overly concerned about PR, so I don't know.
And the same tests that could be applied to a pie to make sure it's not concealing explosives could be applied to a can or a Tupperware container.
I, for one, would be happy to test people's food, beverages and toiletries send them on their way intact. Yes, it would take longer to get through security, but perhaps we could have designated lanes for the people who are willing to trade the inconvenience of a longer line for the privilege of being able to travel with these items.
At least at the airport where I work, the number of travelers is down significantly, while staffing remains the same, so I think there would be enough officers to conduct such testings if we cut back on breaks.
I'd be happy to give up some of my breaks if it meant passengers could keep their stuff.
I just hope I don't get fired for posting this. LOL
Snow globes.
Yeah, I feel safe now that these menaces will be confiscated.
OK, sorry, not confiscated, the passengers will just have to pay to mail or check them. That's what I get for not reading all the comments.
Still, snow globes. This seems like a suboptimal use of limited security resources.
Do you recommend shoes be placed directly on the belt, or require it? If "recommend", do the screeners at LAX who constantly bellow that they have to be placed directly on the belt know that it is not required?
the blade is really for cutting foil, not for cutting fruit! but hey, thanks for the clarification.
Scott G Lewis said:
RB said...
Each container must be three ounces or smaller.
Well, RB, I went to the site, and all the text I saw said 3.4 ounces, although the graphic said 3 ounces, in an obvious attempt to keep "3-1-1" simplified. I've done a lot of presenting, and there is a struggle between covering every single point out there and confusing all interest and retention out of your audience. 3-1-1 probably is easier for regular folks to remember and is fairly catchy.
--
in my mind, the reason it's 3.4 was established is clearly to give passengers some leeway, since not all toiletries or containers are sold in that exact size, and because in variations of liquids and gels in weight vs. volume. 3 ounces is deemed to be a safe amount to allow a passenger to carry aboard. it's not 3.5 ounces, because that would amount to a higher amount and different standard, and mathematically rounded is four ounces not three.
Anonymous writes:
in my mind, the reason it's 3.4 was established is clearly to give passengers some leeway, since not all toiletries or containers are sold in that exact size, and because in variations of liquids and gels in weight vs. volume.
No, that's not it at all.
As has been pointed out many times, TSA initially picked a standard of 3 ounces. Other countries later picked a standard of 100ml, which is roughly 3.4 ounces. Rather than change their "3-1-1" signage to "100-1-1", they changed the rule to 3.4 ounces, but never the signage. Several TSA websites still refer to the outdated amount, unfortunately.
Anon sez - "the blade is really for cutting foil, not for cutting fruit! but hey, thanks for the clarification."
I stand corrected! Being a less enlightened adult beverage drinker (I prefer German Beer and once in a great while a whisky), I was uninformed as the proper use of the blade. I learned something today, thank you! (seriously, thanks!)
West
TSA Blog Team
Yours post talks of Family lanes.
Please tell us what airports we can actually see them in operation at.
Thanks in advance.
So I'm reading the TSA website... and the ice complication seems rather simple to me. It still is listed under the bullet for medications and milk, insinuating that it is for cooling of these products only. Therefore Britney's cup should not have been allowed, and you can't walk through the checkpoint with a cup of your own, regardless of whether there is melted liquid in it.
We're planning travel with teens this Christmas. Teens like to graze and sometimes there isn't always ample food - or food they like - on the aircraft to quell their hunger. Two of the restrictions for food include peanut butter and jelly. Makes sense this would apply to jars of each. Does this also apply to PB&J sandwiches made at home? Are there any restrictions for snacks prepared at and brought from home? Would a lunch size fruit cup or pudding be considered as not permitted? Thanks for all you do to keep us safe. Really do appreciate you guys and gals.
Doug Wagner said...
We're planning travel with teens this Christmas. Teens like to graze and sometimes there isn't always ample food - or food they like - on the aircraft to quell their hunger. Two of the restrictions for food include peanut butter and jelly. Makes sense this would apply to jars of each. Does this also apply to PB&J sandwiches made at home? Are there any restrictions for snacks prepared at and brought from home? Would a lunch size fruit cup or pudding be considered as not permitted? Thanks for all you do to keep us safe. Really do appreciate you guys and gals. December 13, 2009 4:52 PM
--------------------------------
Hi Doug. PB&J sammiches are fine. Or, you could even put the peanut butter or jelly in individual 3.4 oz containers. But the sandwiches are the easier option. Food is fine to bring along, but realize that if it can be poured, sprayed or spread, it is going to have to adhere to our liquid policies. You can check out this link for more info: http://bit.ly/3GQekE
Thanks!
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
"Hi Doug. PB&J sammiches are fine. Or, you could even put the peanut butter or jelly in individual 3.4 oz containers. But the sandwiches are the easier option. Food is fine to bring along, but realize that if it can be poured, sprayed or spread, it is going to have to adhere to our liquid policies."
So 3.5 ounces of peanut butter spread on a sandwich is fine, but 3.5 ounces of peanut butter in a container is a dangerous explosive.
Bob? This is why America hates you. And this is why you deserve to be hated. You people are idiots, you're lying to us, and we know you're lying to us.
What about wait times? Your calculator has been 'under construction' for months...
Blogger Bob said, ""Hi Doug. PB&J sammiches are fine. Or, you could even put the peanut butter or jelly in individual 3.4 oz containers. But the sandwiches are the easier option. Food is fine to bring along, but realize that if it can be poured, sprayed or spread, it is going to have to adhere to our liquid policies.""
Bob:
Okay, so does this mean that chicken salad roll-ups or beef salad roll-ups are permitted, even if they contain (each) more than 3.4 ounces of filling?
I typically pack two roll-ups per plastic bag. Total weight of each bag of rollups is from 8-10 ounces, of which some is the mock bread used as a wrap. Is this permitted, or must I carefully weigh each roll-up to be sure it does not either (a) have more than 3.4 ounces of filling, or
(b) have a total weight of 3.4 ounces? Does each roll-up have to be backed separately, or may I cut down on my contribution to landfills by using a single bag for multiple roll-ups?
I would eat my roll-ups on the spot after being told I'd have to ditch them rather than throwing them out. I wonder if I would then be denied boarding since I would contain possible explosives.
I wish you to understand that I really and truly have no desire to make life any harder for TSOs than it has to be. I try very hard to be polite to them, even when they are yelling at me and slapping my hands because I try to keep them from handling my food in a manner inconsistent with public health regulations.
All I want is to be able to carry food which is safe for me to consume. I want to carry it in a manner which is useful and simple to implement.
I don't want to end up being carried off a plane because the TSA confiscated my food, and I had to fast.
And... I still don't have an answer to my question. Why is a pumpkin pie, which is 2-4 cups (16-32 ounces) of filling permitted on an airplane, but the same amount of baked filling in a translucent container will be confiscated and thrown out as being in violation of the liquid and gel policies?
I truly do not understand.
Can I carry on a 10 oz bottle of opti-free replenish (contact solution)? I don't want to have it thrown away AND its a necessary item -like saline.
Doug Wagner said...
We're planning travel with teens this Christmas. Teens like to graze and sometimes there isn't always ample food - or food they like - on the aircraft to quell their hunger. Two of the restrictions for food include peanut butter and jelly. Makes sense this would apply to jars of each. Does this also apply to PB&J sandwiches made at home? Are there any restrictions for snacks prepared at and brought from home? Would a lunch size fruit cup or pudding be considered as not permitted? Thanks for all you do to keep us safe. Really do appreciate you guys and gals. December 13, 2009 4:52 PM
--------------------------------
Hi Doug. PB&J sammiches are fine. Or, you could even put the peanut butter or jelly in individual 3.4 oz containers. But the sandwiches are the easier option. Food is fine to bring along, but realize that if it can be poured, sprayed or spread, it is going to have to adhere to our liquid policies. You can check out this link for more info: http://bit.ly/3GQekE
Thanks!
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
December 15, 2009 10:25 AM
Bob - Thanks for the reply. This will help a lot as the flights are lengthy. Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
"I wish you to understand that I really and truly have no desire to make life any harder for TSOs than it has to be."
TSOs have made their own lives harder by choosing to work for this disgusting, un-American agency. So have at it!
I travel frequently and the people who make a big deal about all of the rules are the people who fly once or twice a year. I have learned to live with it, not that I agree with it. You people who are in line in front of me, quit complaining! You should have followed what the 100 signs told you leading up to the security point. And yeah..that bottle of water you just paid 3 bucks for...you can't take that through so throw it away.
Glad to see holiday travel is heading up this season. Hopefully the team will be ready. TSA is such an important part of encouraging travel in this country.
Honestly, folks, it all depends on the screener you're dealing with and how they interpret the rules. Yesterday I worked with an X-ray operator who called a bag check on a paper punch; he thought it should be taken away because it could be used like pliers (which are a prohibited item). I'm not making this up! Now, can you imagine anyone trying to hijack a plane with a paper punch? But that's the mentality at the checkpoint. (BTW, I convinced him to let the passenger keep his paper punch.)
The moral of the story is that if you absolutely MUST have foods or liquids or office supplies (LOL), please have a "plan B," such as funds available to purchase them airside if the ones you brought with you are deemed inadmissible. Also, remember you have the right to request to speak to a supervisor at any time during the screening process. In some cases, I have seen supervisors overrule TSOs and allow passengers to keep harmless items, so it's worth a shot.
Also please remember that if you're flying during the holidays, leave extra time to get through the checkpoint as the lines are longer at this time of year. Please be assured that we're doing our best to get you on your way as quickly as possible.
Once again, I hope I don't get fired for posting here. :)
The change in policy of allowing iced/frozen liquids to pass through the checkpoints is a step in the right direction...
If Liquids over 3.4 ounces are confiscated on the basis that they may be liquid explosives, then why are they all thrown together in an unsealed bin, directly next to the checkpoint qeues where hundreds of people are standing... None are tested. If any were dangerous, this practice simply takes the threat away from the aircraft, and instead brings it upon the airport itself.
TSO's have gotten real good at looking for toiletries in people's carry on luggage, which in turn has made them perfect distractors, taking the x-ray operators attention away from the rest of the bag and far more dangerous items.
A step in the right direction would be to train staff on the physical properties of liquid explosives, and following that, allow them to use their own discretion in the confiscation of liquids.
Assuming there is no other suspicious items in the passengers bag, the passenger does not exhibit any suspicious behaviors, and the liquids pass ETD screening and liquid screening, then there really is no justifiable reason to not let them pass...
Also, if the individual is seen drinking the liquid, it is clearly not a threat, as anyone who drank liquid explosives would become severly ill within minutes.
There certainly are liquids that should not be allowed to pass- Flammables, HAZmats, and peroxide formulas. But factory sealed pepsi cannot concievable be a threat.
Perhaps the only advantage of the liquid policy is that it means more bags get opened, which in turn increases the chances of illegal items being stumbled on during the search.
By better training, expanding behavior detection and improving technology, theres no reason the liquid ban should remain in place as it is.
I have tried to follow your advice to place my shoes on the belt rather than in the bin and was met with a TSA agent at PHL who screamed "In the bin! In the bin!" at me.
As usual, the TSA policies and practices are utterly inconsistent. And the TSA gate agents continue to treat innocent law-abiding passengers with contempt.
Martin Watson said, "I travel frequently and the people who make a big deal about all of the rules are the people who fly once or twice a year. I have learned to live with it, not that I agree with it. You people who are in line in front of me, quit complaining! You should have followed what the 100 signs told you leading up to the security point. And yeah..that bottle of water you just paid 3 bucks for...you can't take that through so throw it away."
Anonymous said, "The moral of the story is that if you absolutely MUST have foods or liquids or office supplies (LOL), please have a "plan B," such as funds available to purchase them airside if the ones you brought with you are deemed inadmissible."
Neither Mr. Watson nor Mr./Ms. A. Nonymous have grasped the point of my questions.
I can't have a "Plan B" to buy food air side because anything I buy air side, assuming I am stupid enough to consume it, will result in violent diarrhea. I bet you would just love being on a plane with me if I followed your "Plan B."
If I don't have food which is safe for me to consume, I risk collapsing from low blood sugar. That, too, would make your travel entertaining, should the airplane have to divert to an airport for emergency medical treatment.
I really don't like either of these alternatives. Which is why I am trying to get the TSOs to give me some kind of guidance as to how to appropriately pack my safe food so that it does fall within the parameters.
I also do not think it is inappropriate to ask why a pie is permitted through security, but the same amount of pie filling in a container constitutes a menace to aviation safety.
I have not flown since 2007 because of these restrictions. Because the TSO will not answer my questions, the probability is that I will not fly in 2010.
I find this unacceptable.
I just found this blog when I went to TSA website to see what knee-jerk policy they have come up with in light of the latest failed plot.I see we all have to hold our water one hour prior to landing,and no laptops in your lap!!!Don't get anything out of overhead luggage one hour prior to landing,what about carry on under the seat?I say we all fly naked,and put clear plexiglass on restroom doors!!!All these rules are window dressing,the TSA will not do what needs to be done and profile,people will die in the name of political correctness.
These new requirements are a joke-stay in your seat for the last hour of the flight- (So a terrorist can still do what he wishes one hour and fifteen minutes from landing)- No more than one carry one---a business man on a 9 hour flight must be hard pressed to decide what to take- many of us don't check bags due to tight schedules. Finally, and unfortunately, probably most person who wish to strap liquid to their bodies will make it past most security check points. There is no sure system that is 100%. In this case, there were plenty of red flags- rather than inconvienencing the traveler, let's figure out who dropped the ball and why! This guy was on a watch list, yet still had a valid USA visa AND his father had warned the US Embassy of his concerns.
Short of patting down every single passenger (which some airports in other countries do anyway) there is no sure fix to this problem.
Great suggestions. You might want to mention that now you can't have your one item of carry on be a wheeled bag. Canada is refusing to let wheeled bags on. This morning my daughter had to check hers through because it fit the rules except it had wheels.
Matt Said: "Short of patting down every single passenger ( which some airports in other countries do anyway ) there is no sure fix to this problem." Exactly. But there is nothing TSA can do when this country is full of such selfish, self-centered people that care only about not being inconvenienced in any way.
WARHUKKER wrote that people will "die in the name of political correctness" if they do not profile. Profiling will not work. EVERYONE needs to be screened. If not, people will die due to the selfishness of people like you.
I can not believe all the complaining about not being able to move around the cabin for the last hour of an international flight. It's an aircraft, not a playground! If you can not sit down for 1 hour, you should stay home.
The last hour of an international flight is when the aircraft is over the US. The terrorists, like the one on Christmas, board a plane with explosives in another country ( because their screening is not as good as TSA ) and want to blow it up when it arrives in the US.
Is preventing this from happening really not as important as you being able to roam the cabin during the ascent into the US?
What are the professional qualifications of your TSA Explosives Unit Chief? Is this person qualified at all for that position? Does this person have a formal college degree in explosives chemistry and/or explosives physics? Does your Explosives Unit Chief have laboratory/research experience in handling energetics or specialized explosives formulations? Why have we not heard from this person? Why are you hiding this person from the public? Who does this person report to at TSA? What are the qualifications required for that position? Do you regard this person as an expert in the field of explosives and energetics? Will you post the professional resume' of this person on this blog?
I noticed a piece in the news about the TSA taking a childs Play-Doh even though it is not listed as a banned substance. Apparently there is considerable discretion airport to airport and TSA screener to TSA screener about what is a hazard and what is not... How about some concrete rules regarding who gets to take a childs Christmas present.
I am a physician who treats patients with radioactive substances and warns them that the radioactivity may be detected and cause a problem in certain settings like airport security checks. So I am wondering what, in fact, is the current policy and practice at airport security checks regarding detection of radioactive materials that passengers might take on board with them, which might be the basis of a “dirty bomb.” I have inquired while traveling myself, and I get the impression that this is not done at all security checks, may not be done at all, or may be done selectively. I want to know what to tell the patients. Thank you.
Dr. K
This makes me want to open a gift shop in the airport that specializes in snow globes!
If travelling into the USA with some dietary supplements (vitamins etc.), is it okay to prepare a small container with a few of each of my supplements, rather than bringing each in its original container?
Post a Comment