Tuesday, December 9, 2008

In-Line Baggage Screening: Increased Security and Convenience

Most Americans know that all checked luggage is required to go through screening before it goes onto the plane, but what happens behind the scenes? One of two types of screening systems are being used at airports across the country. “Stand-alone” inspection systems can often be found in the public lobby of an airport terminal near the airline check-in counters—although they are sometimes installed in locations outside of public view. These labor-intensive systems are typically used in small airports or in specific zones with low baggage volumes.



“Stand-Alone” Baggage Screening System Schematic

“In-Line” inspection systems, unlike their stand-alone counterparts, use heavily automated networks of Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) able to handle thousands of bags each hour at busy airports. More than half of the 2 million people that fly each day go through airports with in-line baggage screening systems.

These systems use conveyor belts to automatically screen, sort, and track baggage. Multiple EDS machines are linked to a centralized control room and several “resolution rooms.” When a bag triggers an alarm, the bag’s image is transmitted to the resolution room where trained officers determine whether a physical inspection is warranted.

If a physical inspection is required, the bag is routed via conveyor belt to an inspection area where TSA officers screen the contents of the bag while under constant supervision by closed circuit TV. A notice is placed inside each bag that is physically examined indicating an inspection took place. If there’s a problem afterward, the CCTV footage can be used to determine if a particular bag was indeed hand-searched and by whom. Once an alarm is resolved, the bag is placed back on the conveyor belt and sent on its way to the plane.

Other benefits of this technology: since the in-line system is heavily automated, the number of physical injuries sustained by officers due to lifting baggage is reduced, TSA can track each and every bag throughout the process.


“In-Line” Baggage Screening System Schematic
To learn more about how in-line baggage systems work, check out this link.

94 comments:

Anonymous said...

When will Checked Baggage be safe from airport thieves?

Anonymous said...

My question is whether the surveillance on the TSA agents doing these searches has been stepped up after the series of rather embarassing (for the TSA) scandals wherein employees were stealing customers' property and although I know that you can't really go into specifics at least broadly what that consists of.

quis custodiet ipsos custodes seems to apply especially when the TSA is concerned.

Ayn R. Key said...

Other benefits of this technology: since the in-line system is heavily automated, the number of physical injuries sustained by officers due to lifting baggage is reduced, TSA can track each and every bag throughout the process.

Good job on updating that part of the process. Hopefully this will reduce thefts by TSA inspectors.

But who monitors the bags once they leave TSA custody? That's still the biggest security hole.

Trollkiller said...

I did not see where a cheap but effective strapping machine was placed in the mix.

North Carolina Mortgage Rates said...

I'm still wondering why they can't hire the Israelis to teach them how to do screening at the airport

HSVTSO Dean said...

Dreeeaaammm... dream, dream, dreeeaaam... about yoouuu....

I'll be expecting an in-line baggage system in HSV by about the time I'm set to retire in 2040.

That said, the ones I've heard about do seem really cracker-jack.

Anonymous said...

When are you going to strap bags to keep them secure after inspection and prevent theft?

Anonymous said...

No response so asked again!
..............................
Bob, would you please give a pointer to the mandate that says TSA must report people who are carrying certain amounts of currency on domestic flights.

I would like to read that directive and also see who signed it!

December 1, 2008 2:31 PM

December 3, 2008 10:07 AM

December 4, 2008 10:16 AM

December 5, 2008 9:12 AM

December 9, 2008 CENSORED and NOT POSTED

and again today, December 10, 2008

Anonymous said...

Why has commenting on "Got Feedback/General Comments" and "A Word from out Lawyers" been disabled?

How can a person post a comment or question that you censor as being off topic if you limit the other avenues of posting.

How come you cannot answer even the most basic questions when asked.

Would you please restate the purpose of this blog?

Anonymous said...

Our ambition is to provide here a forum for a lively, open discussion of TSA issues. While I and senior leadership of TSA will participate in the discussion, we are turning the keyboard over to several hosts who represent what’s best about TSA (its people). Our hosts aren’t responsible for TSA’s policies, nor will they have to defend them -- their job is to engage with you straight-up and take it from there. Our hosts will have access to senior leadership but will have very few editorial constraints. Our postings from the public will be reviewed to remove the destructive but not touch the critical or cranky.

Please be patient and good-humored as we get underway. The opportunity is that we will incorporate what we learn in this forum in our checkpoint process evolution. We will not only give you straight answers to your questions but we will challenge you with new ideas and involve you in upcoming changes.

One of my major goals of 2008 is to get TSA and passengers back on the same side, working together. We need your help to get the checkpoint to be a better environment for us to do our security job and for you to get through quickly and onto your flight. Seems like the way to get that going is for us to open up and hear your feedback...

Thanks for joining us,
Kip Hawley
.......................................
Well, there is the direction given by Kip. So far this blog has been everything buy what he stated.

My understanding of "discussion" is that it takes at least two parties to accomplish.

TSA spouting out "Weekly Propaganda" and posting comments is not discussion.

Why don't you Bloggers try a new concept? Give discussion a try! We would all benefit.

Anonymous said...

As for your comment on providing pre-9/11 passenger convenience with post-9/11 security for checking baggage, how about working on the same balance of passenger convenience and security at the passenger checkpoint? That would increase passenger convenience much more, yet with better security.

Anonymous said...

Our airport was going to get these from the very beginning- except two airlines refused them. I'm not sure why they had any say, but we sure would still like to see these systems.

Anonymous said...

From the TSA Information for Travelers Web Page 12/10/2008:

Make Your Trip Better Using 3-1-1
3-1-1 for carry-ons = 3 ounce bottle or less (by volume) ; 1 quart-sized, clear, plastic, zip-top bag; 1 bag per passenger placed in screening bin. One-quart bag per person limits the total liquid volume each traveler can bring. 3 oz. container size is a security measure.
........................................

TSA continues to provide incorrect information to travelers.

If TSA can't get it right then why should travelers be expected to?

Are TSA employees inmcompetent? Don't they care that the information being presented to travelers is wrong?

Pretty sad that even simple things are left undone by TSA.

Anonymous said...

Since TSA has implemented baggage screening, it has a significant cost measurable in lives. Do you think you can undo it with this new system? Or will it make it easier for TSA agents to conspire with theives?

(In the article, the TSA X-rayers and screeners told accomplices what to steal. Your supervised screening recorded on CCTV can't prevent that. More stringent restrictions on carryons which force people to check their valuables, coupled with better screening equipment that can identify valuables makes this problem more attractive for theives. No wonder the truly rich avoid commercial flights.)

Anonymous said...

Explain to me why, on my last trip through FLL, a TSO decided to do an "inspection" on one of my bags BEFORE it went through the CTX?

Her reply (and a hostile one at that, just short of "do you want to fly today") was that it was a "random inspection"; however, this "random inspection" was in violation of TSA's SOP and I called her on it. Since it was on a Saturday (when numerous cruise ships arrive) I'm thinking there was more than airline safety in the mind of this TSO.

The only amusing part of this experience was that the bag the TSO chose was loaded with a week's worth of dirty clothes. She opened the bag - looked inside - slapped the greeting card on top of the dirty laundry - closed the bag. That was the extent of her "random inspection".

I feel SO much safer now.

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said...
"Bob, would you please give a pointer to the mandate that says TSA must report people who are carrying certain amounts of currency on domestic flights."

No such document is around. Now if we reword your question.

"Bob, would you please give a pointer to the official TSA document that says a Transportation Security Officer must report people who are transporting more then 10k through a US government airport check point, airport, and any other area's located with'in the airport TSO's conduct adminstrative searches.

This would be located in the SOP(Standard Operating Procedures).

Currently, the SOP is SSI(senstive security information) and can not be disclosed under 49 CFR part 1520.

Bob has gone over the whys(check old blog comments)of these rules. So I won't go into that.

Hope this helps.

Anonymous said...

Your Checked Baggage is not safe from TSOs and others that want your I-Phone, money, computer or cash. As for security most don't use OSARP (the way it should be used)when screening your bags. The only thing in-line will do is take a baggage staff of 20 per shift down to 12.

Anonymous said...

I really don´t understand the point of this blog. I cannot think of one policy change by the TSA as a result of the many, high-quality, discussions and suggestions here.

Trollkiller´s suggestion of strapping checked luggage is a simple and cost-effective way to close a major hole in securing luggage. Many TSOs posting here agreed it was a great idea. Yet, the suggestion has been completely ignored.

Meanwhile, the TSA is investing heavily in whole body imaging (also known as virtual strip-searching), a ineffective practice since it cannot detect anything within body cavities and is a choice (which means the 1 in a billion terrorist will simply chose what works best for him/her).

Why? Imagers are there in front of the public, strapping machines are not. It is all for show.

Custom Patches said...

Very interesting technology. Hopefully these kinds of improvements will help streamline security.

Anonymous said...

Correct. Dialog does require a back and forth communication between two or more people. Sadly, this doesn't often happen on this blog. People ask valid questions and all too often the questions get ignored by those that have the power to answer the question.

As a frequent flier I have a better chance of running into a thief than a TSO has of encountering a terrorist, but I get treated as if I were an unindicted terrorist. What's wrong with this picture?

Anonymous said...

Another TSA Holiday? 5 Blog Ops but none have the time to maintain the blog. Probably out harassing some poor soul in a wheel chair.

It's TSA, I understand!

Anonymous said...

Why is pie exempt from liquid and gel restrictions?

Is this a holiday-specific exemption, or an ongoing change in policy?

Is it because pies pose no danger? Neither do any other liquids TSA has barred citizens from traveling with.

Is it because pies are a food item? Then will TSA stop barring bottled beverages, peanut butter, and other foodstuffs that pose no danger to anyone from planes?

Is it because barring pies from flights would be pointless, stupid, and do nothing to make anyone safer? Neither do TSA's other liquid policies.

What recourse does a citizen have if a TSO and that TSO's supervisor decide not to let a pie through screening?

Anonymous said...

HappyToHelp said...
Anonymous said...
"Bob, would you please give a pointer to the mandate that says TSA must report people who are carrying certain amounts of currency on domestic flights."

No such document is around. Now if we reword your question.

"Bob, would you please give a pointer to the official TSA document that says a Transportation Security Officer must report people who are transporting more then 10k through a US government airport check point, airport, and any other area's located with'in the airport TSO's conduct adminstrative searches.

This would be located in the SOP(Standard Operating Procedures).

Currently, the SOP is SSI(senstive security information) and can not be disclosed under 49 CFR part 1520.

Bob has gone over the whys(check old blog comments)of these rules. So I won't go into that.

Hope this helps.

December 10, 2008 6:56 PM
...................................

Are you a spokesperson for TSA?

If not I cannot accept your response as official. There would be no reason to assign an SSI designation to this procedure other than to cover up an unlawful act. There is no law or restraint to carry any amount of currency within this country. For TSA to even concern themselves with this is abusive. There is no restraint other than proper disclosure for carrying these large amounts in to or out of the country and once again is of no concern to TSA.

Now if you want to step up and state that you are in fact an official spokesperson for TSA then all I need from you is your full name and office.

Anonymous said...

TSA cant do security like the Israeli's, want to know why? because ISRAEL IS A DIFFERENT COUNTRY/WITH DIFFERENT LAWS, you people all say you want security like the israeli's, then write to congress and have them change it, Israeli's also profile, you want that too? TSA needs to improve yes, hopefully the new administration will make these changes happen, i believe TSA is doing the best it can, with what they have as an organization

Anonymous said...

HappyToHelp said...

Transportation Security Officer must report people who are transporting more then 10k through a US government airport check point, airport, and any other area's located with'in the airport TSO's conduct adminstrative searches.

This would be located in the SOP(Standard Operating Procedures).

Currently, the SOP is SSI(senstive security information) and can not be disclosed under 49 CFR part 1520.


Didn't you just divulge SSI?

What else is in this secret SOP?
Who writes this SOP?
Who approves these procedures?

What else can the flying public encounter when doing absolutely nothing illegal, yet because of secret rules, can be harassed.

How can carrying cash (legally) have any effect on the security of the aircraft?

It is very scary when a government agency can write and enforce rules, all behind the veil of secrecy.

Don't you think ALL the rules and regulations that we may encounter at the checkpoint SHOULD be provided to the public. I didn't know that in America we had secret laws.

I think the terrorists have won.

Sandra said...

HappyToHelp wrote:

"......"Bob, would you please give a pointer to the official TSA document that says a Transportation Security Officer must report people who are transporting more then 10k through a US government airport check point, airport, and any other area's located with'in the airport TSO's conduct adminstrative searches.

This would be located in the SOP(Standard Operating Procedures)."

Are we to take from your rephrasing of the question and your response to yourself, that the TSA has the authority to "report" people who are not doing anything illegal?

Sandra said...

Can you please get this blog fixed so that "magic words" don't have to be entered twice in order to submit a comment?

Anonymous said...

Actually, HappyToHelp, Blogger Bob answered a question about cash in November:

"Anon, we are not avoiding this. We have answered it before. It is not our mission to find drugs or currency, but we are mandated to report it once we find it. Wouldn’t it seem odd if a Federal Security Officer found drugs in your bag and simply said “Oh, it’s just cocaine, they’re good to go. “ “Nevermind, it’s just a stack of childporn.” The cash scenario might seem odd, but red flags pop up when passengers try to carry certain amounts of undeclared currency overseas. We have to report it."

Please note the word OVERSEAS.

The question you responded to was about domestic travel.

So is it required that travelers with more than $10,000 in cash who are traveling in-country be reported?

George said...

Another TSA Holiday? 5 Blog Ops but none have the time to maintain the blog. Probably out harassing some poor soul in a wheel chair.

Believe it or not, the lack of timely moderation of this blog doesn't bother me. I would hope that the people who "maintain the blog" have more important things to do than that. If the TSA dedicated even one employee to this blog full-time (or enough to allow rapid posting of comments), I'd consider it a major waste of taxpayer money.

What does bother me is that the people who "maintain the blog" consistently ignore valid questions, criticism, and suggestions that people repeatedly post here. In doing that, they're ignoring the opportunity to improve their operation along with their very sorry reputation with the public. I thought that was the purpose of this blog. If that was indeed the purpose, the blog is a failure (just like the TSA itself).

I suspect the TSA leadership have recognized that failure and have given up on it. In the early days the people who ran this blog would at least respond to comments. The responses usually were repetitions of the official party line, defenses of the TSA or TSOs, statements that they couldn't answer the questions because the information is SSI, or sometimes outright lies. But at least they took us seriously enough to respond, even though the response wasn't helpful or productive. Now they don't even bother to acknowledge us. If an earlier post from an anonymous TSO is any indication, they consider our comments as "babbling" and not worth wasting their time. They still want to keep the blog around for occasional posts of self-congratulatory propaganda, but the comments are nothing more than an echo chamber where people who have issues with authority and can't understand or appreciate the great work the TSA is doing can babble incessantly to themselves.

The TSA still has severe credibility and public relations problems, which if anything this blog has only worsened. Presumably these problems will be one of the great many troubled legacies the Bush administration will bequeath to Obama (and to the nation). And because the TSA's problems are insignificant compared to the other crises the new administration will have to contend with, I don't see TSA improvements as a priority. So things will most likely continue exactly as they are now.

Anonymous said...

Strapping machines are not the answer to the hole in security you speak of. They can secure baggage sure but if someone wanted to steal from your bag or put something in it they will not serve the purpose you want. A strapping machine can strap a bag and you can take the strap off with just your hands. You don't even need a knife. So how does that secure your luggage? It doesn't. Problem not fixed so I would suggest something else.

-James

Anonymous said...

Why is pie exempt from liquid and gel restrictions?

Maybe not that many pies fly through the checkpoint and they can take the time to screen them accordingly just like baby bottles and such now.

Is this a holiday-specific exemption, or an ongoing change in policy?

It has been that way for a while now.. not a holiday period exemption.

Is it because pies pose no danger? Neither do any other liquids TSA has barred citizens from traveling with.

Over and over again on this blog there is information on liquids and gels. They pose a threat so get off that subject. It is possible for a pie to pose a threat if it were tampered in some way. You just keep on thinking outside the box and it will come to you.

Is it because pies are a food item? Then will TSA stop barring bottled beverages, peanut butter, and other foodstuffs that pose no danger to anyone from planes?

If every item like that were to be screen then the checkpoint would go very slow and no one would be flying. I doubt the public wants that.

Is it because barring pies from flights would be pointless, stupid, and do nothing to make anyone safer? Neither do TSA's other liquid policies.

Probably because it is a waste of a good pie :-P

What recourse does a citizen have if a TSO and that TSO's supervisor decide not to let a pie through screening?

Um well I'm sure if it gets to a supervisory level and they cannot clear the item then it should not go. If they can't clear it I believe that is a good enough reason to not let something go through security. People should be mindful of that even if it really is just a pie.

Anonymous said...

however, this "random inspection" was in violation of TSA's SOP and I called her on it.
_____________________________________________________

Wow good job. And how is it you knew that it was in violation of anything!?

Anonymous said...

Correct. Dialog does require a back and forth communication between two or more people. Sadly, this doesn't often happen on this blog. People ask valid questions and all too often the questions get ignored by those that have the power to answer the question.
_____________________________________________________

Valid questions! Ha! The questions are ignored because there are hardly valid questions asked. It is the same questions over and over. Questions that are either none of the persons concern or questions that have been answered over and over, but no one likes the answer. Oh and a lot of the questions are very ignorant! Half the time they are not even worthy of an answer. You compainers believe that your questions have not been answered since you do not like the answer you have been given. I'm telling you this blog is a waist!

Anonymous said...

Probably out harassing some poor soul in a wheel chair.
_____________________________________________________

Your right, poor souls. Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!
Or a person with bad intentions can not hide a dangerous item on their elderly parent or handycap child. People do these things you know.
If they are sick enough to hurt other people, it usually does not matter if it is someone that they know or don't know.
There is no harrassment going on at the checkpoints. None! There are sick people out there. You can not look at someone and tell if they are worthy of hurting another human being.
There is no profiling of young or old, of handycap or not.
Everyone can leave the word harrassment out of their statements because you obviously have no idea what the goal of security is.

Anonymous said...

I have not visited for a few months.....it is as if I never left. The same knuckleheads are still asking the same questions.

Marshall's SO said...

To the anonymous poster who "responded" sequentially to three other posts: if you want to be taken seriously, learn to spell and use proper grammar.

Anonymous said...

The 9000 room at terminal 4 is in-line and the TSOs worked as a team to shop in your checked baggage during screening. the TSA needs leaders not in-line baggage.

Anonymous said...

To Blogger Bob and company,

Please do a blog article outlining exactly why the TSA is required to report large amounts of cash found on a person who is flying completely within the borders of the USA.

Please explain why this has become a function of the TSA, who decided this was a security issue, and how this affects the security of a flight.

Let's put an end to this question. Full disclosure from the TSA would be appreciated.

What next? Books we are carrying? Political affiliation? Sexual preference? The list could go on, as we all know anything outside the norm could signal sinister intent. Just like concealing a completely legal and harmless item, triggers a search. If it is legal and harmless what difference does it make if I conceal it or have it out in the open?

Jim Huggins said...

James writes:

Strapping machines are not the answer to the hole in security you speak of. They can secure baggage sure but if someone wanted to steal from your bag or put something in it they will not serve the purpose you want. A strapping machine can strap a bag and you can take the strap off with just your hands. You don't even need a knife. So how does that secure your luggage? It doesn't. Problem not fixed so I would suggest something else.

Ahh, but it does help more than you think it does.

Right now, one of the problems with luggage is not only that theft can happen, but that there is no accountability. TSA can say "someone with the airlines must've stolen your item". The airlines can turn around and say "someone with TSA must've stolen your item". And we've
seen articles posted here with examples of both kinds of thefts.

Suppose that TSA straps your luggage after inspection and hands it to an airline employee. Suppose you open your luggage and discover than an item was stolen. If the luggage strap was intact, it's highly likely that the theft occurred while TSA had the bag. If the luggage strap was not intact, it's highly likely that the theft occurred while the airline had the bag.

Now, you can go to the agency responsible for permitting the theft and pursue your claim, without them trying to pass the buck. This gives both the TSA and the airlines positive incentive to police their own workforce to make sure that thefts don't happen in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Strapping machines are not the answer to the hole in security...Problem not fixed so I would suggest something else.

The solution is to have as an option.
The traveler, if they desire, should be allowed to stand and watch the TSA open and go through their belongings. After the inspection the traveler would be allowed to place a lock of their choice on their luggage.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Probably out harassing some poor soul in a wheel chair.
_____________________________________________________

Your right, poor souls. Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!
Or a person with bad intentions can not hide a dangerous item on their elderly parent or handycap child. People do these things you know.
If they are sick enough to hurt other people, it usually does not matter if it is someone that they know or don't know.
There is no harrassment going on at the checkpoints. None! There are sick people out there. You can not look at someone and tell if they are worthy of hurting another human being.
There is no profiling of young or old, of handycap or not.
Everyone can leave the word harrassment out of their statements because you obviously have no idea what the goal of security is.

December 12, 2008 2:11 PM

An other example of the TSA's finest!!

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said...
Are you a spokesperson for TSA?

No but if you want official answers you need to use propper channels.

contact info!

Anonymous said...
Don't you think ALL the rules and regulations that we may encounter at the checkpoint SHOULD be provided to the public. I didn't know that in America we had secret laws.

There are no secret laws. No secret regulations.

laws

regulations

TSA security is situational and is a case-by-case basis.

Anonymous said...
So is it required that travelers with more than $10,000 in cash who are traveling in-country be reported?

Aww I see the confusion now. I'm in your debt. The word reported is the issue.

Heres my question: Reported to who?

Here is the example of my confusion. You send your bag through the xray. It contains a shampoo bottle that is over 3.4oz. The xray operator "reports" his/her findings to another TSO who performs a bag check.
Your shampoo was reported.

What does reported mean to you?

Anonymous said...
Are we to take from your rephrasing of the question and your response to yourself, that the TSA has the authority to "report" people who are not doing anything illegal?

Read the above example. You are "reported" every time you are found to have a liquid that exceeds the 311 rule.

Anonymous said...
There is no restraint other than proper disclosure for carrying these large amounts in to or out of the country and once again is of no concern to TSA.

Your right. There is no restraint. If TSA personel believe a law has been broken why would that not be of any TSA's concern? and more specificly a federal law(The Bank Secrecy Act). TSA is not law enforcement. You will never be arrested by a TSO. What is the concern here? Everybody has the right to report to law enforcement when they believe the law has been broken. Why should TSA not have this right? What good would they be if they couldn't?

Glad to see this discussion moving foward.

Anonymous said...

What recourse does a citizen have if a TSO and that TSO's supervisor decide not to let a pie through screening?

Um well I'm sure if it gets to a supervisory level and they cannot clear the item then it should not go. If they can't clear it I believe that is a good enough reason to not let something go through security. People should be mindful of that even if it really is just a pie.

December 12, 2008 12:34 PM

......................
So you think a person has no need, right or ability to question a decision that they think may be in error. Is that right? No recourse other than to not fly or to have their property confiscated.

Sorry, I disagree.

Another reason TSA must be terminated!

Anonymous said...

Sandra said...
Can you please get this blog fixed so that "magic words" don't have to be entered twice in order to submit a comment?

December 11, 2008 6:27 PM

Why would you expect TSA to fix this little problem when they cannot (will not) fix any number of problems inside TSA?

Heck, they won't even talk back to the participants here on the blog.

Flying_Medic-CCEMTP_FpC said...

I to want to know if this is going to reduce the theft from baggage, as i have had more things stolen many times over since 9/11 then 20 years of traveling prior to 9/11, and everytime there was a TSA flyer in the bag.


to the Anonymous December 12, 2008 2:11 PM

pure Bravo Sierra, harrassment happens every day of the week by TSA. If you believe other wise you need a pysch eval at your local MH and quick.

I spend more time in the airport then i really care to. I have witnessed harassment first hand and been harassed personally when traveling and when coming to the airport to pick up a patient or organs. Its not a imagined threat its very real and has been very uncivil on TSAs end more times then not(DYWTFT, and other veiled Terroristic threats). To the point a flight nurse i work with (5' nothing 100 lb redhead) went off on a 3-striper for practically practicing medicine without a license and interfering with a critical patients care.

if you believe that baloney about elderly terrorists you seriously need help. Are you a TSA agent? Because honestly you sound like one that has drank way to much kool-aid. quit looking for the 1 in centillion (10 w/ 600 zeros behind it) probablity because it just isnt going to happen, and makes you look foolish. TSA cant accomplish its original chartered goals of keeping knives, guns, and incendiaries off aircraft (but yet a TSA agent can willfully carry a gun through a CP but not get charged or fired aka alvin crabtree) but yet still creeps its mission into areas it has no clue about on a knee jerk reaction. Once you get the basics down then you can expand but not till you have proven you have improved security.

This non-sense of SSI about SOP, is hogwash you cant have secert rules that have to be followed or face penalty. Till the rules are clearly laid out your gonna meet lots of resistance (dont give me the website or postings on this site because there contradictory and wrong (3-1-1 vs 100ml and so on).

communication is a two way street and the way it sounds now its one way as TSA isnt listen to critcizms and getting defensive when they get made look bad by posters or the press. If anyone from TSA HQ wants to meet with me fine (or other medical personel, artists), scubadivers), but meet me on even neutral ground with a open mind, then you might get somewhere.

also instead of identifying yourself you decided to hide behind the Anonymous tag. so why dont you identify yourself.

Rob

Anonymous said...

I have not visited for a few months.....it is as if I never left. The same knuckleheads are still asking the same questions.

That's because the folks at DHS/TSA haven't seen fit to answer a one of them. Come back in couple years. Things might have changed by then.

Anonymous said...

As always, I would like simple, straight, san weasel-word answers from the TSA. We all would.

For the purpose of the following questions, please assume the phrase 'traveling domestically' can be replaced with 'traveling between two or more destinations contained with the borders of the States, Territories, Possessions, or Administrative Districts of the United States of America.'

Is it illegal for a person traveling domestically via surface transportation to carry more than $10,000 of negotiable items on their person? Please cite referenced CFRs in your answer.

Is it illegal for a person traveling domestically via private aircraft to carry more than $10,000 of negotiable items on their person? Please cite referenced CFRs in your answer.

Is it illegal for a person traveling domestically via the public air transportation network (airlines, etc) to carry more than $10,000 of negotiable items on their person? Please cite referenced CFRs in your answer.

Is it illegal for a person traveling domestically via public air transport to carry more than $10,000 of negotiable items on their person through a TSA checkpoint? Please cite referenced CFRs in your answer.


Thank you.

Anonymous said...

"Over and over again on this blog there is information on liquids and gels. They pose a threat so get off that subject."

No, they don't. TSA has proven unable to point to a single piece of independent, peer-reviewed research that supports its insane liquid policies. And I as a patriot will not stop questioning TSA for pointless, abusive practices that do nothing to protect, and much to harm, flight security.

"If every item like that were to be screen then the checkpoint would go very slow and no one would be flying. I doubt the public wants that."

Checkpoints ARE slow, no one IS flying, and the public hates TSA.

HSVTSO Dean said...

Anonymous wrote:
Didn't you just divulge SSI?
What else is in this secret SOP?


No, he didn't divulge SSI. And the SOP contains, as its name implies, the standard operating procedures for which TSA operates.

Anonymous also wrote:
Who writes this SOP?
Who approves these procedures?


Been trying to figure that one out for a while now. For my part, I've decided that the SOP itself is (or, at least, was) made by people who have never step foot onto a screening floor :D

Anonymous said...

"Because we say so" might be an answer that TSA enforcers and minions like, but it isn't an acceptable answer to citizens over the age of 5.

Ask the questions until you get answers.

Anonymous said...

Posting of comments seem broken in posts of 2008-11-24 and older.

If this is policy decision, it is a conflicts with Bob's post-9/11/2008 moderation policy of directing off-topic comments to old posts--old posts are closed.

If it is merely a problem with these bloggers operating their blogging software, that seems on par for TSA's general level of excellence.

yangj08 said...

Responding to various Anonymous comments-
"Questions that are either none of the persons concern"
Um, no. It is never "none of the persons concern" when they want to know just what it takes to get past security without harrassment.
"or questions that have been answered over and over, but no one likes the answer"
Think long and hard about why the "answer" is not appreciated. It usually has to do with the fact that it is contradicted in daily operation or a non-answer.
"Half the time they are not even worthy of an answer."
Also, no. As a government agency the TSA does have an obligation to answer questions asked of it by the public to a satisfactory degree barring SSI (and I have my questions about the use of this designation, but it'll have to stand for now). There is no right to this kind of judgement ever when acting in official capacity.

"Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!"
Right! Let's throw out the baby with the bathwater! And it's spelled "handIcapped"!

"Everyone can leave the word harrassment out of their statements because you obviously have no idea what the goal of security is."
On the contrary- been through security in Japan? Notice any differences? Consistency in policy between airports is one; rapid implementation of screening technologies (such as for liquids) is another.

"I have not visited for a few months.....it is as if I never left. The same knuckleheads are still asking the same questions."
"Knuckleheads"? Really?

Anonymous said...

Your right, poor souls. Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!
Or a person with bad intentions can not hide a dangerous item on their elderly parent or handycap child. People do these things you know.
If they are sick enough to hurt other people, it usually does not matter if it is someone that they know or don't know.
There is no harrassment going on at the checkpoints. None! There are sick people out there. You can not look at someone and tell if they are worthy of hurting another human being.
There is no profiling of young or old, of handycap or not.
Everyone can leave the word harrassment out of their statements because you obviously have no idea what the goal of security is.


I had a kidney removed. When flying through O'hare a TSO wanded me and found 30 + staples holding the fresh incision closed (incision around 12 inches long). He wanted to remove the translucent dressing to see if there was anything underneath. The TSO was screaming at my, already angry wife to STAND BACK. I think the only thing that kept him from removing the translucent dressing was the fact I was about to puke all over him. I view that as harassment and potentially life threatening. You can come down off of your high horse now.

Anonymous said...

The prohibition of the moist is silly as long as you don't have a similar program for solids. 3oz of RDX is a heck of a lot more dangerous, cheap, and concealable than a toothpaste.

From your actions we can know that "security and convenience" that TSA is interested in is job security and convenience for your employees.

Anonymous said...

"Your right, poor souls. Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!
Or a person with bad intentions can not hide a dangerous item on their elderly parent or handycap child. People do these things you know."

How many terrorists using wheelchairs has TSA caught? How many terrorists, period, has TSA caught? The answer to both questions is zero.

And, of course, it bears repeating: No one saying there should be no security at airports. What we want is smart security, proportionate to the actual risks to aircraft and passengers -- risks which are very, very small.

Your statement that there's "no harassment" at checkpoints is patently false, as dozens of well-documented cases of TSO abuse and misconduct attest.

Anonymous said...

Of course, now we're going to have to put our shoes in checked luggage - something about them being weapons now. And that's a $25 windfall to the airlines for every passenger who wasn't going to check anything before.

Robert Johnson said...

Quote from Anonymous: "Please note the word OVERSEAS.

The question you responded to was about domestic travel.

So is it required that travelers with more than $10,000 in cash who are traveling in-country be reported?"


Actually's it's not TSA's concern regardless of traveling domestically or overseas. The customs declaration for carrying cash valuing over $10k US is a customs issue only.

I'd still like to see where TSA claims legal authority to examine cash, where it's carried and why without any statutory authority to do so.

Quote from an Anonymous TSO/TSA apologist: "alid questions! Ha! The questions are ignored because there are hardly valid questions asked. It is the same questions over and over. Questions that are either none of the persons concern or questions that have been answered over and over, but no one likes the answer. Oh and a lot of the questions are very ignorant! Half the time they are not even worthy of an answer. You compainers believe that your questions have not been answered since you do not like the answer you have been given. I'm telling you this blog is a waist!"

First off, a nonanswer to a question is not an answer. So yeah, people aren't going to like that answer because the question hasn't been answered.

"Because" isn't answer. "Because we say so" isn't an answer.

Questions have been asked. TSA refuses to answer for the most part. When it does answer, the answers are nonanswers which warrant further questions. Those questions are ignored.

So if you see the same question asked repeatedly, it's probably because TSA either ignored the question or gave a nonanswer. Neither is acceptable.

If you really believe there is no harassment going on at checkpoints, please travel thru the following places without any TSA credentials and tell me that there's no harassment going on: DFW, EWR, DCA, IAD, and BWI, to name a few. DFW and EWR have particularly bad reputations.

I really think many TSO's don't travel as normal people to see what the flying public sees. Many only see what happens at their own checkpoints.

Go out and see the world and see what's happening out there ... you just might be surprised.

Robert

Anonymous said...

I found only one post dated 12/15 and that was on the "Roundtable" article.
Surely more submissions have been made than one lonely post.

Please state again what the censors are using for guidelines please!

What is the purpose of this blog if TSA will not answer questions and then limits beyond reason readers submissions?

Earl Pitts said...

"I have not visited for a few months.....it is as if I never left. The same knuckleheads are still asking the same questions."

And TSA's still not answering them.

Yep, nothing's changed.

Earl

Anonymous said...

So, Terminal 4, 9000 room is not an issue? Remember, if 25% of all TSOs leave per year, its going to be a good book. True Leadership, not in-line.

Ungureanu Ioan said...

The physical inspection idea and inspection by closed circuit TV are obsolete. I think the only enhancement in the system is semi-automate mechanism. Also there are some in-line weak points, remember if there are similar bags with similar aspect with similar content, and one, only one has a different weight difference and contains bad things? I think the screening technologies must evolve more to provide detailed information. But, well, generally it is a welcome improvement.

Anonymous said...

Free Hint to TSA: If the operators don't know how to work your equipment, it really shows. Especially when it is on national TV.

This is especially important to remember if there is some beancounter in management who thinks that a TSO can be thrown to the wolves with no training.

Anonymous said...

Your right. There is no restraint. If TSA personel believe a law has been broken why would that not be of any TSA's concern? and more specificly a federal law(The Bank Secrecy Act). TSA is not law enforcement. You will never be arrested by a TSO. What is the concern here? Everybody has the right to report to law enforcement when they believe the law has been broken. Why should TSA not have this right? What good would they be if they couldn't?

Glad to see this discussion moving foward.

December 12, 2008 5:25 PM

............................
Well you bring up the BSA law. Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Sandra said...

HappyToHelp wrote:

"Anonymous said...
Are we to take from your rephrasing of the question and your response to yourself, that the TSA has the authority to "report" people who are not doing anything illegal?

Read the above example. You are "reported" every time you are found to have a liquid that exceeds the 311 rule."

1. It was not Anonymous who wrote that, it was Sandra.

2. I asked if people who are not doing anything illegal, i.e., carrying >$10,000 cash domestically, are reported. Your response did not address that issue.

If you are "HappyToHelp" please, at least, get your information correct.

Sandra said...

Anonymous wrote in response to my question about the "secret" letters:

"Why would you expect TSA to fix this little problem when they cannot (will not) fix any number of problems inside TSA?

Heck, they won't even talk back to the participants here on the blog."

I totally agree. The failure to run something as simple as a blog efficiently and effectively is a symptom of the overall uselessness of the TSA.

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said...
So you think a person has no need, right or ability to question a decision that they think may be in error. Is that right? No recourse other than to not fly or to have their property confiscated.

Sorry, I disagree.

Another reason TSA must be terminated!


Sorry I disagree with both of you!!

You have lots of recourse. The supervisor is just the beginning.

at checkpoint:

1.Have the supervisor call his boss "the check point screening manager". Keap calling for a boss untell they decline and take the name of the last person you spoke with.

2.Call law enforcement... they can mediate most problems.

not at checkpoint:
1.Got Feedback

2.Ton's of contact info

3.SF-95

4. Get a lawyer and file suit.

Anonymous said...

HappyToHelp spouted some nonsense:

"There are no secret laws."

You sir, do not know what you are talking about.

Review Gilmore vs. Gonzales

Find the transcripts or CSPAN footage from the government hearing on:

"Secret Law and the Threat to Democratic and Accountable Government"

Or just Google "secret laws"

Or don't bother.

Why let facts and reality get in the way of your condescending remarks?

Anonymous said...

HappyToHelp said...
Anonymous said...
So you think a person has no need, right or ability to question a decision that they think may be in error. Is that right? No recourse other than to not fly or to have their property confiscated.

Sorry, I disagree.

Another reason TSA must be terminated!

Sorry I disagree with both of you!!

You have lots of recourse. The supervisor is just the beginning.

at checkpoint:

1.Have the supervisor call his boss "the check point screening manager". Keap calling for a boss untell they decline and take the name of the last person you spoke with.

2.Call law enforcement... they can mediate most problems.

not at checkpoint:
1.Got Feedback

2.Ton's of contact info

3.SF-95

4. Get a lawyer and file suit.

December 16, 2008 8:14 PM

regarding your last three options, property has been confiscated and will not be returned no matter what else happens.

That equals no recourse.

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said...(in poor taste)
You sir, do not know what you are talking about.

Review Gilmore vs. Gonzales


"That's what John Gilmore wanted to know. At San Francisco's airport, just like the rest of the country's airports, there was a sign that began "A Notice From the Federal Aviation Administration" and includes the sentence "passengers must present identification upon initial check-in."

I think its rather odd how the FAA would post signs about secret laws. How is that keeping it secret. Also, Gilmore was not charged with anything.... because.. ding ding... he did not break the law or a law. He also lost... go figure.

source:Gilmore Vs. Gonzales

Anonymous said...
That equals no recourse.

Only if you don't use your options do you have no recourse. You got a good answer. Its okay not to like it.

Sandra said...
1. It was not Anonymous who wrote that, it was Sandra.

Sorry Sandra... made a mistake. Just don't say I was discrimination :p

I asked if people who are not doing anything illegal, i.e., carrying >$10,000 cash domestically, are reported. Your response did not address that issue.

Here is a short and sweat answer. If any TSA personel believe you are breaking the law you will be reported to law enforcement.

Anonymous said...
Well you bring up the BSA law. Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

Go ahead, I'll wait.


Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520


If you are worried about traveling with large sums of money through a TSA checkpoint then check this link out.

Traveling with Special Items

Does this work. I can say yes from personel experience.

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said...
You sir, do not know what you are talking about.

Sure do my condescending friend.
Systems, measures, or procedures -- SSI(well documented on this site and others)
laws and regulations -- on the books(TSA provides links... check post above)
executive orders at the checkpoint -- ask the president (in reference to "Secret Law and the Threat to Democratic and Accountable Government")

If you want me to comment on Gilmore vs. Gonzales its not going to happen. The blog team has beaten that dead horse many times and I have read many opions of it here and on flyer talk(name dropping woot woot).

Anonymous said...
regarding your last three options, property has been confiscated and will not be returned no matter what else happens.

True. The government will only offer money back. Of course I'm not sure of the peticular issue that you are having as you are anonymous and have not stated on this thread what problem you are having with the redress system. If your having problems or need help just post your question. This blog is hooked up to HQ.

HappyToHelp said...

Here is something new for the discussion on traveling with cash.

quoted from "AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE"

2. Liaison to Local, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
m) Develops or establishes procedures to notify, as appropriate, Law Enforcement agencies, important information including when passenger cash limits are exceeded (i.e. $10k)

This should lead you guys in the right direction on who to talk to in regards to the cash issue.

hope this helps

source: AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE

Phil said...

Someone asked:

"Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

"Go ahead, I'll wait."


Unhelpfully, someone replied:

"Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting"


The TSA "Currency Reporting" page says nothing about limits of currency that may be carried through a TSA checkpoint, only that $10,000 or more must be reported if it is to be taken into or out of the United States.

Why is TSA, who exists to enhance transportation security, wasting time counting money they find on people en route to domestic flights?

--
Phil
Add your own questions at TSAFAQ.net

Anonymous said...

If your having problems or need help just post your question. This blog is hooked up to HQ.

And HQ will ignore them, just as they've done with all other questions posted here.

Mr. Gel-pack said...

HappyToHelp @"
1.Have the supervisor call his boss "the check point screening manager". Keap calling for a boss untell they decline and take the name of the last person you spoke with.

2.Call law enforcement... they can mediate most problems.

not at checkpoint:
1.Got Feedback

2.Ton's of contact info

3.SF-95

4. Get a lawyer and file suit."

################################

Happy,

I had a gel-pack confiscated by a TSO supervisor in STL. It was keeping 13 oz of my wife's breast milk from spoiling. From a half-remembered view of some TSA website, I argued that it was OK for breastmilk, and the TSO supervisor said that gel-packs were only allowed for medical items, not infants. Since TSA doesn't publish or share their SSI secret rules or SOPs, there isn't anything for law enforcement to mediate, or anything a passenger can use to prove an item is permitted if a TSO says 'no'. Is a cop going to listen to some troublemaker say "but their website says...."? Should TSA allow passengers who bring in printouts of bits of the website, like "Bob says pie is permitted" to keep their items? That is as insane as your trusting potential terrorists to not photoshop their boarding passes.

After the milk spoiled and we poured it down the drain and my wife cried, I read the above cited page that said breastmilk is a "liquid medication", and I complained on 'got feedback'. But since TSA cannot replace 13 oz of my wife's breast milk, there isn't a dang thing you can do about my case. Lawsuit-wise, you TSAers weasel out with some "...or anything else the screener determines as a replica of something a paranoid might find dangerous" language that I can't find on your history-revising website right now. Do you seriously think I could successfully sue the TSA for a $2 gelpack or $1000 for some irreplaceable breastmilk? "Happy-to-Blow-Smoke" is more like it.

TSA has rigged the game in its favor and just pretends that there is some recourse based on some PR fluff posted on some history-revising non-authoritative website.

I know you can't replace my wife's breastmilk, so I'll forgive TSA when they prove to me that they can train their employees to follow their own rules. Before then, TSA is anti-mom, anti-baby, and anti-USA.

Anonymous said...

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520

If you are worried about traveling with large sums of money through a TSA checkpoint then check this link out.

Traveling with Special Items

Does this work. I can say yes from personel experience.

December 17, 2008 6:41 PM

Perhaps I don't read well, but I cannot find anywhere in the referenced material any mention of TSA and reporting of people who have large sums of money to LEO.

I think we all know that leaving or entering the United States with over $10k requires certain customs forms to be submitted but once again this is not a TSA function.

The BSA makes no mention of the TSA and they have no part, reason or expectation to refer anyone to LEO for carrying cash.

Robert Johnson said...

Quote from HappyToHelp: "Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520"


All that's doing is regurgitating a law which everyone has already acknowledged exists.

Again, the question is where does it fall under TSA's authority to enforce it? It's a Customs issue and doesn't fall under TSA's scope (though it's pretty clear TSA is trying to expand that scope). Please show us where TSA has the legal authority to question if the proper forms have been filed.

I also don't see even if something wasn't declared yet right then for an international departure that it couldn't be declared up until the time of departure. Again, it's a Customs issue.

It's none of TSA's business if it's declared or not. Let your other DHS brethren and sisters enforce the law. TSA is not the be-all-end-all of what happens in an airport. It's become a self-important agency that thinks its more than the $8 an hour private security replaced. It's not.

Robert

Anonymous said...

Happy-to-Help posted in part.........

Anonymous said...
Well you bring up the BSA law. Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520

Happy, did you take the time to read the referenced material? In no way is TSA a part of that requirement. TSA is not Customs. Customs Agents or real agents, not like you TSO's.

Again any TSO who takes note of a person with a large sum of cash and takes any action is violating that persons rights.

I can't wait for a few of you TSO's to end up in the slammer for your illegal acts.

Jim Huggins said...

Mr. Gel-pack writes:

Lawsuit-wise, you TSAers weasel out with some "...or anything else the screener determines as a replica of something a paranoid might find dangerous" language that I can't find on your history-revising website right now.

I believe the exact quote is:

"Transportation security officers (TSOs) may determine that an item not on the prohibited items chart
is prohibited. In addition, the TSO may also determine that
an item on the permitted chart is dangerous and therefore
may not be brought through the security checkpoint."

Anonymous said...

HappyToHelp said...
Here is something new for the discussion on traveling with cash.

quoted from "AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE"
2. Liaison to Local, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
m) Develops or establishes procedures to notify, as appropriate, Law Enforcement agencies, important information including when passenger cash limits are exceeded (i.e. $10k)

This should lead you guys in the right direction on who to talk to in regards to the cash issue.

hope this helps

source: AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE

December 18, 2008 12:35 PM

...........................
I'n not sure what an AFSD is but I do know that TSO's are not LEO's.

So your reference holds no water.

HappyToHelp said...

Anonymous said...
I'm not sure what an AFSD is but I do know that TSO's are not LEO's.

AFSD info

I guess its a dream job LOL

My point was just ask the person at your local airport who developes the procedures. Why talk to middle men?

Anonymous said...
Happy, did you take the time to read the referenced material?

Yes.

Anonymous said...
Again any TSO who takes note of a person with a large sum of cash and takes any action is violating that persons rights.

Nope. I noticed you said "rights". How many are we talking about?
A TSO will not arrest you and they have not enforcement powers. :p

Anonymous said...
Again, the question is where does it fall under TSA's authority to enforce it?

TSA does not enforce it. TSA gives law enforcement referrels based on the airports security program. TSA has broad responsibility for transportation security across all transportation modes and to assess threats
to transportation under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) 49 USC §114. TSA is also
responsible for screening persons and property carried aboard passenger aircraft by an air carrier or foreign
air carrier under 49 USC §44901, and promulgated certain regulations at 49 CFR § 1540.105, 1540.107. Have fun TK.

Anonymous said...
And HQ will ignore them, just as they've done with all other questions posted here.

Why post if you feal that way? I'm curious. Bored or just tired of posting over at FT?


To... Mr. Gelpack

Get in contact with the TSA-Contact Center. Phone# 1-866-289-9673 E-mail: TSA-ContactCenter@dhs.gov

...and fill out a SF-95 for damages. Sorry I didn't post this info ealier back when you first reported this on the blog. I thought bob would address it but I was glad he apologized.

All right its friday. Now to start my vacation. Happy holidays guys. Will post more when I get back the 29th.

Happy holidays.

HSVTSO Dean said...

Anonymous wrote:
I'n not sure what an AFSD is but I do know that TSO's are not LEO's.

Assistant Federal Security Director for Law Enforcement, is what an AFSD-LE is. They're the TSA dude at the airport that does a lot of the interaction with the local LEOs, setting security policies with local law enforcement, stuff of that nature. Generally, they'd probably work with the local chief of police—or, at least, that's how it works here.

There's a number of AFSDs that do different jobs. Like, one AFSD will be in charge of screening operations, another will be the LEO liaison. I think the reference he was making was from the Career Guide (it's on the tsa.gov website, I'm just in a lazy mood and don't care to look up the coding to put it as a link, so the URL is at the end of this comment) for the AFSDs.

2.m under their Major Responsibilities header on page 5 does, indeed, state that it is the AFSD-LE's responsibility to develop/establish procedures for "the notification of law enforcement agencies, when appropriate, of important information."

And the example it gives is, indeed, "when passenger cash limits are exceeded (i.e. $10k)"

In this case, I think the general procedure is to call Customs to establish that they're not flying overseas, and, if they are, that they've filled out all applicable forms and such of declaration. Obviously, if the passenger is flying domestically, then nothing happens and you go on your happy, merry way.

AFSD-LE Career Guide URL: http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/afsd_lawenforcement_career_guide.pdf

Mr. Gel-pack said...

Yeah Happy, the "Transportation security officers (TSOs) may determine that an item not on the prohibited items chart is prohibited. In addition, the TSO may also determine that an item on the permitted chart is dangerous and therefore may not be brought through the security checkpoint" quote hidden on the pdf is the carte blanche that destroys your recourse.

When TSOs use that rule to take baby food, gel-packs, battery packs, pies, and rubber band balls, it shows that the recourse methods you point are pure PR fluff. They look reasonable on the website, but are absoutely useless in practice. Kinda like the rest of TSA Security Theatre.

Steve F said...

Why isnt more money spent on getting baggage to its destination? What does it matter that you can screen a bag if it can't get to its destination?

Anonymous said...

Steve F said...
Why isnt more money spent on getting baggage to its destination? What does it matter that you can screen a bag if it can't get to its destination?

December 20, 2008 8:51 PM
......................
That would make it harder for TSO's to pilfer checked baggage.

Nothing to be gained by making sure baggage is secure!

Anonymous said...

Ha, if I were to truly believe that TSA actually moniters every checked bag searches, I am the Duke. They have and they will NEVER moniter thier own employees, they actually care less what happens to the passengers baggage and all pertaining thefts. It is only after the local law enforcement get way too many complaints will any action be taken. No action will be taken by TSA itself, as they say, they got security to worry about. Right along the line, they have a code of ethics to follow by, blah, let them see how it really is. I have flown numerous times since 9/11 and every time I get either rude comments, rude attitudes and many other disrespectful attitudes from their agents. How about this for chance, one of them decides to hit you , but you can not defend yourself in the attack or otherwise be labeled as an terrorist and so forth. Oh good luck in getting a complaint heard. Again, they careless as their agents are the best out there.

Read the stores of the thefts, attacks and so forth that stems from the TSA agents. Now dont get me wrong here, there is a need for the security, but there is NO oversight from the public side hence many violations occur at the hand of the TSA agents and the public is the victim with no recourse.

Vincent said...

What a ridiculous charade. Why can't the airlines provide security and then passengers can vote on what they want with their dollars. Why do we use a Soviet solution? This is a sham and a fraud. The government has never been good at anything, why would we trust our lives to it. They are making us less safe through this communist charade.

Vincenzo said...

I've brought several gels through these communist checkpoints in my carry on. Just more proof that it is all a fraud and a shame. These security measures are defeated daily by hundreds of thousands of people. If terra-ists wanted to bring things through they would use alternate means, or better yet go to a supermarket, football game, baseball game, movie theatre, etc, etc, etc. When will this communist, Orwellian government fraud start stationing gestapo at these venues? He you can't be too safe now can you? Your much more likely to be killed by lightning, a shark, gumball, or your DVD player than a terrorist. Just look how easily the sheople will accept the government into their rear areas without questioning even the most obvious of things.

Anonymous said...

When will passengers be paged to be present during physical baggage searches? That eliminates most of TSA's liability with regards to baggage theft. With CCTV and a phone system, passengers could just watch the search remotely, telling the inspector how to unlock and re-lock the baggage.

That's how the rest of the world does it: The baggage inspector pages the passenger. No TSA-recognized locks required. No unlocked baggage "suggested".

I'm all for this in-line system to increase efficiency and to reduce TSA payroll. However, only if passengers are paged and present (even via TV) if physical searches are required.

Anonymous said...

I'm confused about what to do about a recent situation that occurred after my checked luggage was inspected... My luggage was missing my medication but had someone else medication instead. This is kinda of a catch-22 as federal law prohibits one from having a different persons medications I'm inclined to throw the other persons out and not report it.

I did get the TSA notice that my luggage was inspected along with my medicine missing and replaced with another persons meds. What to do?

Guest said...

Is there a scenario where this in-line feature will delay the plane as baggage is rerouted for gate changes? I'm not sure I'm sold on this.

Drew said...

It seems to me that security is constantly getting more complicated for everyone since 9/11. For drivers we have different classes of licenses, which allow people with certain classes to drive larger and more dangerous vehicles. For air travel, we should allow people to obtain some so sort of qualified/easy boarding ID for people who have been proven to be less at risk. Just an idea as there has to be some way to advance security without hindering everyone’s travel.

Dave the World Cruise Person said...

When will Checked Baggage be safe from airport thieves?

An integrated GPS tracking system would be the best answer for this.

Seth Chillian said...

I think that the way the TSA is handling things is entirely ineffective. There needs to be a massive overhaul in the way things are done.

Accura Network said...

Nice Job...........
you just gave above that to "follow link" but there was no link and page was not found