As long as you carry the prescription it should pass OK. It does for me.

Yeah. The pre-declare system doesn't seem to work very well at all. I've long since abandoned declaring my medical liquids as I've learned they can't see them anyway.

As a more general rule I take anything that's spillable in my checked luggage and put it in an outer ziplock bag in case of trouble.

Only once has the precaution been needed but that once certainly makes it worthwhile.

(I say "spillable" because we did end up with a big mess when I used to apply it only to liquids. There was a bag of barley (not available at the destination) that broke. Barley isn't a liquid but a pound of barley all through one's suitcase is still a big mess!)

but you're you ;)....

scenario:

i approach you with my bottle of saline solution and you do your thing and i'm allowed to pass

two days later at your airport* and at the same checkpoint, i approach a tso (not you, you're out sick ;)) and this tso won't accept my bottle of saline solution. same bottle, same test could be/to performed but nope, gotta surrender it as the tso says no. that's the point that i'm getting at as the sop is not being followed and from what you and other tso's have posted, it appears that this tso is wrong yet as we all know, nothing can be done about it

*could be any other airport but i'm picking on yours ;)

This might work in the USA, but I promise you trying to carry a big bottle of contacts solution in your carry-on when travelling internationally outside the USA (or into the USA) will rarely work. Usually, it WILL be confiscated and the "medically necessary" line will fall on uncomprehending ears. However, for years, I've checked through innumerable bottles of contacts solution (both unopened and use-in-progress) and never had a mishap. Since I can't get sterile saline in China, I've often stocked up in the USA and carried back a dozen or more bottles at a time! I do try to put the bottles next to the stiff long side walls of the suitcase, though, and not floating around the middle of the bag.

Uh, by not alarming the ETD? :rolleyes:

The post above by Ron is one of the first in a long while that's been good. It hasn't attacked people, insisted that those of us who have serious issues with his employer are raving lunatics, or suggested that he's better than us because he has a junior detective badge. It was informative and simply stated procedure and policy that (for once) makes sense and is in line with TSA's mission-- permit stuff that doesn't alarm into the sterile area while keeping stuff that does alarm out of it.

(No, I haven't lost my mind. I just saw a good post from Ron and, like providing treats when training my puppy, feel that a little positive reinforcement works well at times. ;))

So my wife keeps telling me. :D

All true, it could very well happen. But there is a small difference that rarely makes it into forums like this. Readiness requirements are often different for different airports. JFK handles 100 times the traffic that Des Moines does, Boston was the main airport in the 9/11 plot. They are going to be a bit more … casual… at Des Moines than they would be at Boston, or maybe a supervisor has an itch between his ears that causes him to be more suspicious of some things than others. Could also be that someone in the intelligence community has heard that a liquid bomb plot might be taking place somewhere along the eastern seaboard. There are lots of possibilities other than incompetence for why things might change between one airport and another. Those are only a few. Or it may be just as you fear, incompetence. But assuming the change is nothing more than poor training or lazy screeners is faulty thinking, or not thinking at all. The ability to adjust to the threat quickly is one of TSA’s strengths, not a fault.

fair enough but perhaps i should have been a bit more clear...take it as an all things being equal-no threats, no extra-intel, no wife saying it's cuz you're you ;)) situation and perhaps using your airport again...

• you process the pax in front of me as you noted above
• you go on break
• i'm the next pax
• your break replacement refuses to allow my saline solution

under that scenario, what could justify the results. i can only say screener error-but again with no recourse on the part of the pax save calling the tsa hotline (but we all know how that goes in most cases*)

and don't go calling in sick if i come to your airport...no it's not cuz i want my saline solution taken as where i do wear glasses, i don't wear contacts but that would mean no tootsie-pop (yes, i'm an equal opportunity tootsie-popper. if you are part of the f/t family, you get one-even yankees fans but i really have to suck it for that ;))


*i say in most cases as twice where i had a complaint over how i was "processed" due to my orthopedic shoes, i did receive a call from the tsa at the airport in question

Why are readiness requirements different at different airports when the system is interconnected?

A liquid bomb plot on the eastern seaboard would mean that passengers on all inbound planes to the eastern seaboard should be checked the same as those outbound from the eastern seaboard. But that doesn't happen. TSA doesn't look at boarding passes to determine where a passenger is going and then subject that passenger to a higher level of scrutiny. And those connecting to other flights at eastern seaboard airports generally don't have to leave the sterile area to connect. Which leads to the next point.

If I know that Des Moines will be more lax than IAH, then I will just start my flight in Des Moines, connect in IAH, bypass IAH checkpoints and do my nefarious deed on the IAH outbound flight as originally planned.

So I can't see how the reasons proffered make sense from a security standpoint.

BTW, I think that many here believe that it is actually the TSA at many smaller airports that believe in greater scrutiny.

Dang them wives anyway!

Maybe the screener had an itch between his ears. Part of the “Engage” training we received was to encourage the use of our intuition. The subconscious is a remarkable thing, it sees things that the conscious mind ignores, and has a nasty habit of telling us about it. Hunch, itch, feeling, sweating, butterflies in the stomach, whatever. “Engage” taught us to look not so much for the weapon but for the person who is likely to use it. They taught us to trust our intuition, and that if we do so then the TSA will back our decisions. They also gave us a bit of wiggle room in several areas, wiggle room that allows us to make choices or decisions based on our experience or our intuition.

Sure, that creates a “gray” area. No longer the black and white of procedure and rules. And it’s in that gray area that terrorists or those wishing to do us harm find their way in. It is TSA’s hope that when they try one of those areas that they will find a TSO standing there watching, and making notifications.

Engage was an attempt to make us a more effective screening force. I can’t speak to how effective it has been, but I do know that it has had some very positive reviews from both the passengers and the screeners. Some bad reviews as well, but you can’t please everyone.

Interconnection has little or nothing to do with it.

Sure it does, you just don’t see it. And in most cases that is the intention, that the differences be invisible to the passenger, or hidden among the clutter.

Nice theory. But if IAH is beefing up procedures because they are watching out for you, don’t you think they will be watching you as well? Gonna drive all the way to DSM to try and get that IED past the folks out there, while the FBI/NSA/CIA/SS/whatever counts the number of potty stops you make on the drive?

Come on, we can “what if” all day long and get absolutely nowhere. Suffice it to say that WYSIWYG does not apply to the TSA. It’s what you can’t see that makes it effective.

Now that’s a point I cannot argue against. The smaller airports seem to have a better knit group of screeners. A more personal relationship with their passengers since they see them all the time, and more of an esprit-de-corps among the screeners. Small town attitude maybe, but cool all the same.

maybe that's why i have an ex one ;)

fair enough but what i'm trying to get at the the screener simply saying "nope-gotta be 3.4 ounces or you can't take it" no test no nuthin'-just nope. that's not supposed to happen, right? and yes, i'm looking for a definitive answer to corroborate what your employer says. it's allowed but must be (for lack of a better term) "declared separately and pass a test". if both are done and the test "passes", then it should be allowed to pass, no? the screener can't deny it but you know that does happen ;)

Interconnection has everything to do with it. Until you decide to screen all connecting passengers, then having different screening standards at different airports is ineffective because of interconnection. And even then, that means flights coming into the airport would have been screened to a different standard than those departing.

Where did I say that IAH had an APB on me? If I want to get a prohibited item through and CLL is known to be not as strict (or have failed more Red Team tests ;)), then I just drive to CLL and hop on a plane to IAH, never having to encounter the "stricter" IAH TSA. What layer stops that from happening?

Yes, the canard about "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." :rolleyes:

Ahh, yes I get it.... The TSA just puts up the appearance of incompetence as a front. It is just another layer.... :D

Missed bullets, terminal dumps, assaults, sexual harassment is all part of the master plan.....

:D

FWIW: Here is the text of the letter allowing medical liquids.

Office of Screening Persons
with Disabilitieas
601 South 12* Street
Arlington, VA 22202-4220

Transportation
Security
Administration

MEMORANDUM
Date: September 25, 2006
From: Sandra Cammaroto
Division Manager
Transportation Security Administration
Office of Screening of Persons with Disabilities
To: Passengers with Disabilities and Medical Conditions Using Air Transportation
Subj: Changes in Allowances for Persons with Disabilities at Airport Security
Checkpoints

One of the primary goals of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is to
provide the highest level of security and customer service to all who pass through our
screening checkpoints. Our current policies and procedures focus on ensuring that all
passengers, regardless of their personal situations and needs, are treated equally and with
the dignity, respect, and courtesy they deserve. Although every person and item must be
screened before entering each sterile area, it is the manner in which the screening is
conducted that is most important.
In order to achieve that goal, TSA has established a program for screening of persons
with disabilities and their associated equipment, mobility aids, and devices. Our program
covers all categories of disabilities (mobility, hearing, visual, and hidden). As part of that
program, we established a coalition of over 60 disability-related groups and organizations
to help us understand the concerns of persons with disabilities and medical conditions.
These groups have assisted TSA with integrating the unique needs of persons with
disabilities into our airport operations.
The purpose of this advisement is to provide those with disabilities and medical
conditions with changes related to the ban on liquids, aerosols, and gels effective
Tuesday, September 26.
Since the initial total ban on liquids, gels and aerosols took effect on August 10, we have
learned enough fiom the UK investigation to say with confidence that small, travel size
liquids are safe to bring through security checkpoints in limited numbers. We are
confident in our increased security measures throughout the airport. Therefore,
passengers can purchase drinks in the secure boarding area and bring them aboard their
flights.
The US and UK have continued to work closely together and have shared technical and
threat information with partners in Canada and the European Union. These measures are
being simultaneously adopted in partnership with the Canadian government, and the EU
is also considering these measures.
The needs for the changes are to support the sustainability of the security system. We are
working with the airlines and airports to make these changes. The aviation sector
continues to operate at Homeland Security threat level Orange or high and will remain so
for the foreseeable future. It is unlikely that further adjustments to the ban on liquids,
gels and aerosols will be made in the near future.
There are two changes: we are adjusting the current ban on liquids, aerosols and gels to
allow travelers to carry travel-size toiletries (3 ounce or less) in ONE, QUART-SIZE,
clear plastic, sealable bag through security checkpoints. In addition, travelers can now
bring beverages and other items purchased in the secure boarding area on-board the
aircraft.
We are continuing to permit prescription liquid medications and other liquids needed by
persons with disabilities and medical conditions. This includes:
all prescription and over-the-counter medications (liquid, gel, and aerosol), including
KY jelly, eye drops, and saline solution for medicinal purposes;
liquids (to include water, juice, or liquid nutrition) or gels for passengers with a
disability or medical condition;
life support and life sustaining liquids (bone marrow, blood products, transplant
organs);
items used to augment the body for medical or cosmetic reasons (e.g. mastectomy
products, prosthetic breasts, bras or shells) containing gels, saline solution, or other
liquids; and
gels or frozen liquids needed to cool disability or medically related items used by
persons with disabilities or medical conditions.
Passengers with disabilities and medical conditions can choose to put their small
bottleslitems of liquid medication in the one quart sealable bag (mixed with toiletries)
without the need to declare these items. However, if the liquid medications are in
volumes larger than 3 ozs each, they may not be placed in the quart-size bag and must be
declared to a Transportation Security Officer. A declaration can be made verbally, in
writing, or by a person's companion, caregiver, interpreter, or family member. Declared
liquid medications and other liquids for disabilities and medical conditions must be kept
separate from all other property submitted for x-ray screening.
It is recommended (not required) that passengers bring along any supporting
documentation (ID cards, letter from doctor, etc.) regarding their medication needs. It is
recommended, not required, that the label on prescription medications match the
passengers boarding pass. If the name on prescription medication label does not match
3
the name of the passenger, the passenger should expect to explain why to the security
officers. To ensure a smooth screening process, passengers are encouraged to limit
quantities to what is needed for the duration of the flight.
Passengers will still be required to remove their shoes as part of the screening process,
however, persons with disabilities, medical conditions, and prosthetic devices DO NOT
have to remove their shoes. Those who keep their shoes on will be subjected to
additional screening that includes a visual/physical and explosive trace detection
sampling of their footwear while the footwear remains on their feet.
Lastly, TSA's checkpoint security screening procedures for persons with disabilities and,
medical conditions have not changed as a result of the current threat situation. All
disability-related equipment, aids, and devices continue to be allowed through security
checkpoints once cleared through screening.
Disability and medically related items permitted beyond the checkpoint include:
wheelchairs; scooters; crutches; canes; walkers; prosthetic devices; casts; support braces;
support appliances; service animals; any and all diabetes related medication, equipment,
and supplies; orthopedic shoes; exterior medical devices; assistive/adaptive equipment;
augmentation devices; ostomy supplies; medications and associated supplies; hearing
aids; cochlear implants; tools for wheelchair disassembly/reassembly; personal
supplemental oxygen; CPAP machines; respirators; C02 personal oxygen concentrators;
baby apnea monitors; Braille note takers; slate and stylus; tools for prosthetic devices;
and any other disability-related equipment and associated supplies.
For additional information on transportation security:
Overall guidance to travelers with disabilities is located on the web site of the
Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration at:
htt~://www.tsa.rrov. This guidance includes disability/medical conditions specific tips.
If you have additional concerns or questions you can also contact TSA's Call Center at
1-866-289-9673 or by email at tsa-contactcenter~dhs.gov
For concerns about potential civil rights violations, you can contact TSA's Office of Civil
Rights at 1-877-336-4872, TTY 800-877-8339 or by email at tsa-contactcenter(ii),dhs.~ov
Warmly,
Sandra Cammaroto

How thoughtful... :rolleyes:

I celebrate 25 years with mine next month. A wonderful woman, and how she has tolerated living with me for this long without mayhem is a mystery.

Correct. Its not supposed to happen, but if it does you are more than free to ask for a supervisor if you think the decision was in error.

Sure it happens. I cant quote SOP for you (SSI stuff), but what I told you is what is supposed to happen. That it does not sometimes is not a shock. If a supervisor tells me that we don’t have the time for the testing then I do as I am told. I know that it’s a pain for the passenger, but the priorities have been changed by the person allowed to change them, for reasons that are allowed. More of that “flexibility” I was talking about earlier. Its not always a good thing for some folks, and that’s just the way life is.