Update on Standard Operating Procedures
I published a blog post yesterday on the outdated, unclassified version of a Standard Operating Procedures document that was posted by the agency. It was improperly posted to the Federal Business Opportunities Web site wherein redacted information was not properly protected. Once we were made aware of the situation, it was immediately taken down from the Web site and a full review by TSA’s Office of Inspection was initiated.
TSA takes full responsibility for this improper posting and all individuals who may have been involved have been placed on administrative leave, pending the outcome of the review.
This document was not the everyday screening manual used by Transportation Security Officers at airport checkpoints. Thorough analysis has determined the flying public and aviation community are safe and our systems are secure. TSA is confident that screening procedures in place remain strong.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
Labels: Blogger Bob, policy and procedures, Standard Operating Procedures
posted by Blogger Bob at
10:06 PM
Subscribe in a reader
123 Comments:
So does this mean this was not a draft copy?
December 9, 2009 10:18 PM
"TSA is confident that screening procedures in place remain strong."
How can this be if sensitive security information was disclosed? If procedures remain strong, then doesn't that mean that the sensitive security information actually wasn't at all to begin with? Can you please deconflict this?
December 9, 2009 11:59 PM
TK, there go the bonuses they had planned to give to their senior management.
December 10, 2009 7:41 AM
Please, Bob, stop with the nonsense already.
December 10, 2009 7:45 AM
Is incompetence mandatory at TSA?
December 10, 2009 9:03 AM
Thorough analysis has determined the flying public and aviation community are safe and our systems are secure. TSA is confident that screening procedures in place remain strong.
**********************
Please explain to us why we should trust anything coming from DHS/TSA? You've pretty much lost all credibility.
December 10, 2009 9:30 AM
"TSA takes full responsibility for this improper posting and all individuals who may have been involved have been placed on administrative leave, pending the outcome of the review."
------------------------
Now wait just one second. Haven't you been telling us that privacy laws absolutely, unquestionably prevent you from revealing whether disciplinary action has been taken and, if so, what type of action. Did the rules just change or am I missing something?
December 10, 2009 9:48 AM
really it doesnt matter what type of information was there - it was sensitive and shouldnt have been made public. things like this is why we had 9/11
December 10, 2009 9:51 AM
Awesome. That just means you guys pretended to be open and transparent when in reality you were being "open" with crap that isn't even used.
December 10, 2009 9:57 AM
There was a time this blog was pretty decent. It’s a shame you turned out to be nothing more than a choir boy for the TSA spin doctors.
The last time I heard such outrageous spin from someone in the govt, it was a certain discredited President who called the Watergate break-in a “third rate burglary.” No matter how much you try to convince people that this is an ‘ancient’ proc manual that was never put in place, it won’t wash.
Fact is, the release of the manual gave away the farm. OK, maybe some of it is perhaps not in use today but the bulk of it? Oh yeah, this detailed everything right down to photos of IDs. Great, now all those who have govt IDs need to have new cards designed and issued. Who’s gonna pay for this? Uh, taxpayers of course, to the tune of millions of dollars.
Hmm, some idiots released a document to the public that detailed many of your procedures. Their punishment? Give them some paid ‘administrative leave’ compliments of the US taxpayer.
Nice. They sell out the nation, no matter how unintentional, and they are punished with a paid vacation. Brilliance on the part of TSA.
Go on, Bob, keep spinning and don’t forget the old adage: You can always fool some of the people some of the time. That is something the discredited President lived for. I would love to be a fly on the wall when the Congressional hearings begin.
December 10, 2009 10:19 AM
really it doesnt matter what type of information was there - it was sensitive and shouldnt have been made public. things like this is why we had 9/11
***************
No it didn't.
December 10, 2009 10:22 AM
As a TSO, I am appalled that this information could make its way on to the internet. Regardless of the face that it "was not the every day procedures carried out by our Transportation Security Officers", it is still SOP and therefore it is SSI! "Outdated" just doesn't work for me, I'm sorry Bob, someone at HQ screwed up, and the sooner TSA admits this, the better off our agency will be. What does "pending outcome of the review" mean Bob? Will these individuals be removed from Federal service, as would anyone on the lower chain if it happened at the airport level? What is the disciplinary plans for the persons responsible for this mess?
December 10, 2009 10:53 AM
Anonymous @ December 10, 2009 9:48 AM said...
Now wait just one second. Haven't you been telling us that privacy laws absolutely, unquestionably prevent you from revealing whether disciplinary action has been taken and, if so, what type of action. Did the rules just change or am I missing something?
----
I didn't even think of that... but that's a great point. So what's the deal, Bob? Why are you able to tell us about administrative actions taken in this case but not in others?
December 10, 2009 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...
really it doesnt matter what type of information was there - it was sensitive and shouldnt have been made public. things like this is why we had 9/11
December 10, 2009 9:51 AM
..................
So who are you blamming?
It was DHS/TSA that placed the document on the web in the first place. It had been out there exposed for 9 months.
The bad guys could be expected to keep quiet about the document while others notified TSA shortly after the discovery.
December 10, 2009 11:22 AM
Perhaps I just missed it but am curious why the TSA Acting Administrator has not made a public statement about this event.
Is she still on the job?
December 10, 2009 11:34 AM
When will the screener's SOP be released? Why are you afraid of the public knowing the EXACT laws, rules, and regulations that YOU require them to comply with?
December 10, 2009 11:50 AM
Everyone does make a mistake.
In Fact we learn from the mistakes.
It was corrected so I don't see a problem.
thank You for the Notification.
December 10, 2009 11:55 AM
[part 1 of 8: My comments have not been approved recently. I've previously posted this comment, and am re-posting it after converting to Markdown. Each link is enclosed in brackets, followed by a number in brackets. Normally, URIs for each of these would be included at the end of the document. Instead, I'll follow this post with one for each link. Thus, TSA's moderator(s) can deny my post in part as deemed appropriate.]
The Identity Project have posted an [analysis of what they think is significant about the Screening Management SOP][1] (including a comparison with the redacted excerpts they previously obtained via FOIA requests), an update on their pending FOIA appeal for the current Screening Management SOP, and their other pending FOIA requests for other screening SOPs and related documents. Of particular relevance to this post is this from IDP:
"The TSA is [claiming][2] that “The version of the document that was posted was neither implemented nor issued to the workforce. In fact, there have been six newer versions of the document since this version was drafted.” But a [side][3] by [side][4] comparison of the comparable portion of this version with the excerpt provided to us in response to our previous FOIA request shows that while the pagination differs slightly, the version number, date, and text are identical. And the version on fbo.gov was part of a legally-mandated process for ensuring a fair and open competition among potential bidders for TSA contracts. We didn’t ask for any specific version, and the TSA disclosed this one to us in January, 2009 and posted it in May 2009. Why did the TSA post this version, or provide it to us, if if had never been implemented and had already been revised? Were they trying to mislead potential bidders, mislead us, mislead the public, or all of the above? And were the TSA FOIA staff who sent us this version aware of the attempt at deception in which they were playing a part? Or was this version actually implmented, at least at one time, and the TSA is lying in its latest press releases about what happened? We hope to find out more as soon as the TSA provides us with the current version, including all updates, in response to our latest pending FOIA [appeal][5] of their failure to act on our request."
--
Phil [Arrested][6] at ABQ airport TSA checkpoint November 2009
No comment at this time. Fight back: donate to my [legal defense fund][7]
December 10, 2009 12:10 PM
[part 3 of 8]
[2]: http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2009/12/tsa-response-to-leaked-standard.html
December 10, 2009 12:10 PM
[part 6 of 8]
[5]: http://www.papersplease.org/wp/2009/10/27/tsa-sends-our-foia-request-into-a-black-hole/tsa-foia-screeningmgmtsop-appeal/
December 10, 2009 12:10 PM
Since this thread is about SOP.
I'm still looking for any official update of TSA web pages (the only information available to travelers) stating that taking ice through a checkpoint is permitted.
I agree that ice is apparently permitted for those with special needs but nothing is stated for others.
Since you guys have extra time on your hands how about an update.
Oh, is the Britney video ready yet?
December 10, 2009 12:37 PM
Everyday it seems like their is an SOP issue. All the airports I fly out of, DO NOT follow the same guidelines. What is management doing??? Also, I would like to know how complaints are resolved?
December 10, 2009 1:12 PM
Phil said...
[part 1 of 8: My comments have not been approved recently.
..............
Phil, why not place your entire post elsewhere with a link to it here.
TK may be willing to give you space for it.
Certainly you don't think Free Speech issues will be supported by
TSA defenders of the Constitution do you?
December 10, 2009 1:42 PM
Anonymous said...
"TSA takes full responsibility for this improper posting and all individuals who may have been involved have been placed on administrative leave, pending the outcome of the review."
------------------------
Now wait just one second. Haven't you been telling us that privacy laws absolutely, unquestionably prevent you from revealing whether disciplinary action has been taken and, if so, what type of action. Did the rules just change or am I missing something?
December 10, 2009 9:48 AM
-------------------
Actually all he has told you is that someone is suspect but they are still investigating, but until said invesitgation is over said suspects are on vacation (if anyone considers something sort of like school suspension vacation).
December 10, 2009 4:25 PM
"TSA is confident that screening procedures in place remain strong."
Bob, for something to "remain" strong it must be strong to begin with. TSA's farcical security theater is nothing of the sort. Until you stop wasting everyone's time with your shoe and liquid and ID fetishes, you will remain a sick joke and justly hated by Americans.
December 10, 2009 4:33 PM
It amazes me that people are so quick to cast stones, as long as they aren't the one who makes a mistake (and that is all this was). People want to be protected but don't want to make any sacrifices to acheive that goal. "Oh please screen the middle eastern man wearing a turbon, but don't screen the "good ole boy" or the buisnessman, or the elderly, because there is no way that a terrorist would think to dress like a normal everyday person!". Am i to believe that no one on this blog has ever meade a mistake at work? This must be the "Perfect Employee" blog! Well God forbid that you should ever make a mistake and thousands of self righteous bloggers burn you at the stake! The people who made this mistake are human just like all of you, they have kids and families and bills, and responsibilities! More than likely they are going to lose their jobs and never work for the government again. Isn't that enough for everyone or do we need to throw the final stake in their hearts with our cowardly, behind closed doors "tough guy" blogging? Personally, i think people need to get over themselves and see this for what it was...a mistake!
December 10, 2009 6:05 PM
Too bad Bob. TSA after 9/11, managed to squander the good public relations it had with travelers by not responding to valid complaints. Instead of using the complaints as a learning tool TSA ignored the frequent fliers and managed to create a very hostile us vs them attitude. Should some things be kept under wraps? Sure, but you let the public know what is expected from them in return. TSA, IMHO, hasn't done that.
You (TSA) roll out poorly planned processes and expect those processes to flawlessly work and then blame the passengers for process failure. Sorry, but the real world doesn't work that way.
Your agency had a chance to do things right but blew it.
December 10, 2009 6:13 PM
TK etal, you notice that you're not getting any response from Bob on your questions? This should stand as evidence to how TSA regards the citizens of the USA.
TSA holds us in contempt and view us as the cause of all of their problems.
December 10, 2009 6:16 PM
Seriously?
You post the playbook on the Web for 9 months and it's no problem?
The system and passengers are safe? What extensive analysis do you base that on? Anything you can share or is that sensitive information?
Are you working with intelligence agencies to see who viewed and downloaded your playbook during the past 9 months? Who says caves in Afghanistan aren't full of these playbooks right now?
Are the procedures that haven't changed in the past six versions being changed as a result of this incomprehensible leak? Can you address law enforcement, congress, CIA personnell screening changes now that their IDs are publicly available?
Where does the buck stop at TSA? We shall soon see.
December 10, 2009 10:14 PM
TSOWilliamReed said...
Anonymous said...
"TSA takes full responsibility for this improper posting and all individuals who may have been involved have been placed on administrative leave, pending the outcome of the review."
------------------------
Now wait just one second. Haven't you been telling us that privacy laws absolutely, unquestionably prevent you from revealing whether disciplinary action has been taken and, if so, what type of action. Did the rules just change or am I missing something?
December 10, 2009 9:48 AM
-------------------
Actually all he has told you is that someone is suspect but they are still investigating, but until said invesitgation is over said suspects are on vacation (if anyone considers something sort of like school suspension vacation).
December 10, 2009 4:25 PM
***********************************
That is exactly what he has said. Accept its not like school suspension since they are still getting paid!
***********************************
Rosemary Blair said...
Everyone does make a mistake.
In Fact we learn from the mistakes.
It was corrected so I don't see a problem.
thank You for the Notification.
December 10, 2009 11:55 AM
***********************************
Rosemary, corrected or not, the damage is already done. Since some of the screening SOP was incorporated into the management SOP, the damage is real, and there is no correction for something like this. The mistake in this case was a critical one, and the person(s) responsible should be fired. If a TSO released SSI information, that TSO would be dealth with swiftly, meaning, REMOVED.
December 11, 2009 9:14 AM
Bob:
What does the SOP manual say about what articles must be removed before going through the metal detector? Could you answer yes or no to these:
a) a windbreaker
b) a thick, wool sweater
c) a lightweight, half-zip fleece
d) a hooded sweatshirt.
Additionally, despite what the manual says, what will TSA agents in the field say?
December 11, 2009 10:13 AM
As i see it, to use a oft repeated phrase, "If you have nothing to hide, then there is nothing to worry about." That holds true for EVERYONE.
December 11, 2009 12:34 PM
I agree, lost ALL credibility.
December 11, 2009 1:17 PM
TSOWilliamReed said...
Actually all he has told you is that someone is suspect but they are still investigating, but until said investigation is over said suspects are on vacation (if anyone considers something sort of like school suspension vacation).
===============
In every past incident involving a TSO and a passenger the TSA has refused to say anything other than “appropriate action has been taken”. Nor do they announce the action taken against an employee claiming that the employees privacy is protected under federal law. Yet in this case they have no problem telling us the employees in question have been suspended pending the results of the investigation. Sounds like a violation of the federal privacy law the TSA claims to protect their employees when we want answers.
December 11, 2009 1:27 PM
Here's my suggestion for avoiding this problem in the future:
Take the file with the blacked-out SSI and print it out. Then, using s desktop scanner, scan the printed document into a .PDF file. That way, you can distribute the file and there's no SSI that can be extracted from it.
Unfortunately, I believe your knowledge of information technology is on par with your knowledge of the industry you regulate. This is evidenced by your proposal of the Large Aircraft Security Program (LASP), which shows a clear misunderstanding on TSA's part of how general aviation works.
December 11, 2009 5:01 PM
There is a baseline SOP, but each airport goes above and beyond that in different ways. It is confusing for travelers, and I feel for you. However, it is meant be be "unpredictable", though "less predictable" is more appropriate.
December 12, 2009 1:29 AM
Bob, where's the dialog?
You make statements and don't answer our questions?
Seems to be pretty much one sided.
December 12, 2009 2:49 PM
It appears to be a significant breach from what I've read, although it is refreshing to see quick admission of the problem and to observe prompt action taken to find resolution. People make mistakes; we all do. Taking accountability shows true organizational maturity.
From what I've read on the blog I'm confident the issue will be resolved in a professional manner. I appreciate the work you all do!
December 13, 2009 1:07 PM
You may as well just leave the document there. The damage has already been done, and you will never be able to pull it back in.
December 13, 2009 4:18 PM
I *really* don't see the problem about releasing the unredacted document.
This is a case that the only people that don't know what's in the document are the people being protected (the flying public). I believe that anyone wishing to do harm already knows how the TSA operates. Wouldn't it be as simple as being hired by the TSA?
Or am I alone in my opinion?
Randy
December 14, 2009 10:54 AM
So Blogger Bob how is the witch hunt going? Have we decided on the sacrificial lambs?
December 14, 2009 12:19 PM
TSOWilliamReed said...
Anonymous said...
"TSA takes full responsibility for this improper posting and all individuals who may have been involved have been placed on administrative leave, pending the outcome of the review."
------------------------
Now wait just one second. Haven't you been telling us that privacy laws absolutely, unquestionably prevent you from revealing whether disciplinary action has been taken and, if so, what type of action. Did the rules just change or am I missing something?
December 10, 2009 9:48 AM
-------------------
Actually all he has told you is that someone is suspect but they are still investigating, but until said invesitgation is over said suspects are on vacation (if anyone considers something sort of like school suspension vacation).
----------
I fail to see how this would be allowable under the incredibly strict interpretation of the privacy laws that TSA has cited in the past. Can we please get an official comment indicating TSA's official policy with regard to these situations.
December 14, 2009 12:50 PM
Gee, Bob, you're really giving the Delete-O-Meter a workout. All one has to do is quote the leaked document and WHAM into the Black Hole you go.
December 14, 2009 1:02 PM
Blah blah blah, who cares? If the TSOs do their job properly, it doesn't matter if the SOP is released publicly. I'm more interested in the unanswered questions, like how can it be justifiable to treat soft drinks or shampoo as hazmat only until it has been confiscated, at which point it is thrown in the trash with a bunch of other 'hazmat' with absolutely no inspection? Why are these bottles of 'hazmat' treated like they are just bottles of harmless substances? The obvious answer seems to be because they are harmless substances, and TSA knows it, yet 3-1-1 continues to be enforced. We also still have yet to see a single piece of peer-reviewed research that shows 3-1-1 is effective.
Yet more PR damage control on the blog, still no actual information. You guys foul up so often it's beginning to become boring!
December 14, 2009 3:10 PM
How about updating this blog??
December 14, 2009 5:12 PM
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Dan Kozisek said...
When will the screener's SOP be released? Why are you afraid of the public knowing the EXACT laws, rules, and regulations that YOU require them to comply with?
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Hey Dan, I travel a lot, and I mean twice a week for the last six years at my current job, and if you think that TSA will release the documents on EXACTLY HOW they do everything, and that anyone who wants to cause a 'man-made disaster' a.k.a. terrorist won't use those documents to subvert every layer of security than you're just stupid.
If you wanted to take down a plane, and some idiot asked the security people for their exact manuals on who they look for, how they check them, and all of their secondary processes, wouldn't you read those documents and then know EXACTLY HOW to get things past them?
Yeah, you would.
I don't care how many flights I have to miss because someone calls a bag check on my bag or the line is long because the person checking the tickets in my line is slow, (to date it's two flights), but I'm very happy and proud to be able to tell you how many flights I've missed, because without those people doing what they do I probably wouldn't be alive, as in dead Dan, as in some idiot like you asked for the manual and someone who wants to kill a lot of people got it and completed their mission!
So, TSA, federal government, Mr. President, and above all, God, please excuse Dan, because he knows not what he's asking, and he had trouble in school, and his parents beat him with a stupid stick. Amen.
Peace,
William Bennington
December 14, 2009 11:28 PM
Hello?? Testing???
Now that we know your secrets (not all that secret) are you in hiding?
December 15, 2009 6:48 AM
Why was my comment on video-SOP deleto-O-metered???
December 15, 2009 11:09 AM
Anonymous said... Why was my comment on video-SOP deleto-O-metered??? December 15, 2009 11:09 AM
------------------
We expect that participants will treat our employees with respect.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
December 15, 2009 11:19 AM
@Bob: "We expect that participants will treat our employees with respect."
Unlike how screeners treat the flying public ...
Earl
December 15, 2009 11:31 AM
William Bennington,
If you think security thru obscurity works, then I have a bridge to sell you.
It doesn't take much for a terrorists to travel frequently and observe what's going on, what triggers bag searches, what they can get away with, etc. The SOP isn't terribly hard to deduce.
The federal government has published the algorithms they've use to encrypt top secret information - the AES algorithm (which was incidentally created by foreigners) that even anyone can use. That algorithm, despite being public, is certified to protect TS information until at least 2030. Sure, it's being analyzed and attacked. The fact remains, though, that if your security methods are strong enough, it doesn't matter if it's public or not. If they're strong, they'll withstand an attack. If not, weakness will be found. Wouldn't you rather have the good guys reviewing things as well to identify weaknesses so they can be corrected rather than pretending they don't exist?
Security thru obscurity doesn't work. You can't have 45k employees and expect that it will remain secret. You can't expect that if you can find the weakness, that no one else won't. You don't fix things by sticking your headi n the sand and pretending that there are no weaknesses and no improvements can be made. Likewise, you'll never know if someone else knows your procedures.
And of course, TSA has to be willing to listen
What happens with security thru obscurity is that when a weakness is discovered, it also embarrasses the agency that practices it and makes them look incompetent. What you get is what we have now with TSA. The good thing coming out of this is that thru this embarrassment, TSA is now shamed to fix some issues that should have been fixed a long time ago. It just hoped that no one would notice.
Kippie himself stated that TSA's SOP is designed to catch the dumb terrorists. The smart terrorists have already figured this stuff out. Publishing it won't harm anything. If the security's sound, it would actually HELP the flying public by knowing what to expect and how they can avoid extra bag checks, etc, so they can travel without hassle and harassment.
Robert
December 15, 2009 11:40 AM
"We expect that participants will treat our employees with respect.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team"
Yet, you and other TSA employees on this forum are not held to the same standard...
December 15, 2009 12:00 PM
"if you think that TSA will release the documents on EXACTLY HOW they do everything, and that anyone who wants to cause a 'man-made disaster' a.k.a. terrorist won't use those documents to subvert every layer of security than you're just stupid."
Nonsense. Good security would be effective even if every single detail of how it works were released to the public. But TSA has no interest in good security; they'd rather terrorize the public with boogeymen like explosive shampoo and flip-flops.
December 15, 2009 12:10 PM
We expect that participants will treat our employees with respect.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
I also expect to be treated with respect by TSA staff. Not happening.
December 15, 2009 12:42 PM
So I was right. Any reference to the actual content of the leaked document will be delete-o-metered.
Wow, Bob.
Phil was smart to number his comments. It adds a further layer of embarassment to the blog team's comment approver - which is only one member of the team.
December 15, 2009 12:47 PM
OK. So you are indifferent to people using their handles to put links in your blog for their commercial benefit.
But how about when "William Bennington" is using his sig as a personal attack.
www.danisstupidandwhinesalot.com
Come on Mr. Moderator.
December 15, 2009 1:05 PM
"I also expect to be treated with respect by TSA staff. Not happening."
So you're saying all 43,000 are not treaing you respectfully. I would suggest that it's you, not them...
December 15, 2009 3:12 PM
"Additionally, despite what the manual says, what will TSA agents in the field say?"
I would ask (discreetly, if possible) if the passenger has anything on under the bulky item. If so, I would ask if they can remove it and put it through the x-ray, or I can give them a quick patdown. If they don't have anything on underneath or don't want to take it off, I'd do a patdown if a male, or refer a female to a felmale TSO.
TSOJoe
December 15, 2009 3:24 PM
Seems like an excellent time to give new life to this blog and return to the stated purpose of discussion with the public.
A good start would be a frank discussion of the "Shoes out of the bins" issue that has never been resolved to anyone's satisfaction.
TSA blog posters have said the shoes in or out of the bins is optional yet that is not what happens at airports.
TSA employees have stated elsewhere that they "strongly" encourage that shoes must be on the belt and only give in if the passenger insist on keeping shoes in a bin.
So what is the real policy regarding this?
Why is it even a topic of discussion?
Either way should be ok but the way its being handled now is unsatisfactory.
When we get done with that little bit of business then we can move on to the ice topic again. There is certainly no information provided by TSA that indicates everyone can bring ice through a checkpoint. What would be so hard to just write down what TSA wants so we all can know what is expected.
I am very serious when suggesting that a new path can be taken turning this blog into a service to the public instead of what it is now.
Surely everyone would be happier if that were to happen.
December 15, 2009 4:09 PM
It would be interesting to see what the outcome of the investigation was and if it is indeed possible to fire a federal employee.
December 15, 2009 8:59 PM
I have only one question Bob, what about all the OLC information on jump drives or all the information I have at home about TSA? The only thing that keeps me (or most TSA Officers) from sending this out is one thing, we do not work for #44, we do our job for the people of America!
December 15, 2009 10:51 PM
Bob, what about if I send Spot light OLC info to the press? You need to control the OLC.
December 15, 2009 10:54 PM
Bob, what about this info????
The “Threat in the Spotlight” is a weekly article written specifically for screeners and screener supervisors discussing topics that would be considered threat related. The items discussed could be actual threats, as announced by the FBI, Homeland Security or other sources. These items could refer to terrorist tactics and capabilities or involve a discussion of policies and procedures related to IED identification.
December 16, 2009 12:06 AM
(Part One of Two)
“Anonymous said...
December 15, 2009 4:09 PM
Seems like an excellent time to give new life to this blog and return to the stated purpose of discussion with the public.”
I agree and I will take up on your offer. :)
“So what is the real policy regarding this?”
The short version is just like what Lynn blogged about back in May. “Starting this week, officers will be asking passengers to put their shoes directly on the X-ray belt instead of in a bin at the checkpoint.”
Let’s break this down per position.
The TSO at the Walk-Through Metal Detector (WTMD) if not at a quiet checkpoint will give announcements about placing your shoes directly on the built. Usually something like this: “Please place your shoes directly on the X-ray belt. They are not required to be in your grey bin.” (That is what I say) This is just one of many advisements that you could receive while waiting in line just before the X-ray at the checkpoint.
An X-ray loader (if applicable) will usually position your items for the best X-ray image possible (Their job is to reduce bag checks and baggage reruns). If you don’t want your shoes taken out of the bin by this officer, you will need to instruct the officer to not do so. If you decline to place your shoes on the belt, the officer will usually encourage you to place them on the belt. I am pretty frank with passengers who decline, and just tell them it will reduce their chances of additional screening. Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn’t. It is up to the passenger.
The X-ray operator has it a little different. There were a few changes to how the X-ray operator determines if your shoes are clear or warrant further inspection based on the X-ray image produced (Some behind the scenes stuff). This is where the shoes being on the belt shine. Lynn said it best “This will help to declutter bins and give officers a better view of shoes coming through, as well as everything else. Our officers are seeing some pretty packed bins with shoes, electronics, wallets and other items, and when they can’t get a good look, a cluttered bin is more likely to get pulled aside for additional screening. Nobody likes that.” It is perfectly possible for an X-ray operator to clear your shoes if they are placed in a bin. From my experience, the majority of passengers still place their shoes in the bin for X-ray screening. Just remember that placing your shoes on the X-ray belt gives the X-ray operator the best chance to clear your shoes without secondary screening or a rerun through the X-ray machine. This is completely optional (or at least it is suppose to be).
This is what is currently happening at my checkpoint. A field perspective you may say. You are in fact right that there were officers going around who thought it was mandatory for passengers to place their footwear directly on the X-ray belt(From your post, I can infer that there still is.). I have personally corrected two to three officers at my airport on this, but I have not done so in a long time (hasn’t been an issue at my checkpoint).
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 3:04 AM
(Part Two of Two)
“Why is it even a topic of discussion?”
Good question. If the checkpoint handled the SOP changes just like Lynn posted, then this wouldn’t be a topic. Let’s look at some of the root causes of problems passengers are having at the checkpoint and discuss them.
The number one issue seems to be mandatory shoes on the belt. My first thought on this subject is a training issue. Let’s discuss how this information was presented to me at the checkpoint and how I was trained on how this SOP change would be applied. Prior to the rule change, I went through an online learning course on TSA’s Online Learning Center (OLC). It is an interactive slide show that involves video and audio. The day the new SOP changes took effect, before I started my shift, I received a briefing on the new SOP changes and how it effects our operations at the checkpoint. I was then instructed to complete a read-and-sign (a document that holds all the SOP changes. An officer reads it and signs off on it in order to prove that the officer has read and understood the new rules).
Obviously there is a break down somewhere for the officers who are doing mandatory shoes on X-ray belt.
The best person to contact when a officer is enforcing bad policy is the supervisor on shift currently at that checkpoint. The supervisor can do a on the spot correction and retrain the officer (and many other things as well). A common practice at my airport is to make the officer look up the rule in the SOP.
I think some possible solutions to this type of problem is to pull SOP changes off of the OLC and do some old fashion human to human training. In turn, an instructor should have to sign off on the officer. If the officer enforces bad policy, the trainer should be held accountable. I welcome any suggestions to add to this idea and I look forward to any comments. If you help me form a good suggestion for change at TSA, I will happily post this idea to the TSA idea factory and let you know how it does.
I will do my best to post tomorrow.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 3:08 AM
Why discuss shoes in bins, when shoes should remain on feet?
And ice is just a new spin on the liquids nonsense, that should also stop.
Lets discuss the big points.
December 16, 2009 4:41 AM
Why do I have to place my shoes on the X-ray belt?
Please watch the shoes on belt video before commenting on my blog comments.
Thank you,
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 6:18 AM
This is what is currently happening at my checkpoint. A field perspective you may say. You are in fact right that there were officers going around who thought it was mandatory for passengers to place their footwear directly on the X-ray belt(From your post, I can infer that there still is.). I have personally corrected two to three officers at my airport on this, but I have not done so in a long time (hasn’t been an issue at my checkpoint).
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 3:04 AM
Tim if I place my shoes in a bin without any other items it should be clear thats where I want them. If anyone removes them at that point it is no longer optional.
You indicate that there are problems viewing shoes when in a bin but not on a belt. Can you explain why shoes in a carry-on bag are not a problem?
If the policy is truly optional then why is TSA almost forcing the issue?
If a statement to the effect that shoes go on the belt is made then I believe a reasonable person would take that as a requirement.
Published a concise policy for the public! In fact a complete set of rules that passengers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint should be available.
Why does TSA expect a free people to know and comply with secret rules?
Oh, it seems the Secretary of DHS told Congress that refusing the Strip Search machine does not get a person a pat down.
Is this a new policy that has not been announced or did the Secretary state something to the Congress that is not true?
You guys need to get one story and stick to it.
December 16, 2009 12:31 PM
I think some possible solutions to this type of problem is to pull SOP changes off of the OLC and do some old fashion human to human training. In turn, an instructor should have to sign off on the officer. If the officer enforces bad policy, the trainer should be held accountable. I welcome any suggestions to add to this idea and I look forward to any comments. If you help me form a good suggestion for change at TSA, I will happily post this idea to the TSA idea factory and let you know how it does.
I will do my best to post tomorrow.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 3:08 AM
Tim as I understand what you posted a TSA employee signs off that they have completed whatever training that particular evolution consisted of.
The problem I see is people pencil whipping the training.
Evidence of that happening is the wide range of policy implementation problems that people see at various airports.
Another one of those lack of integrity issues that seem all to common at TSA!
Of course if travelers knew what rules they had to comply with it would be easier on everyone.
December 16, 2009 12:37 PM
Now, see, I would think shoes would be better off in a bin/tray, with nothing else placed in that bin. Seems like shoelaces could very easily get tangled up in the workings of the belt or the scanner if the shoes are resting on the belt itself.
December 16, 2009 2:43 PM
Happy to Hinder wrote;
I am pretty frank with passengers who decline, and just tell them it will reduce their chances of additional screening.
So, with you it is put shoes directly on the belt or increase the chances of being groped with the same rubber gloves you groped the last dozen people with?
December 16, 2009 3:56 PM
TSM said...
Quoted:
" Anonymous said...
Bob:
What does the SOP manual say about what articles must be removed before going through the metal detector? Could you answer yes or no to these:
a) a windbreaker
b) a thick, wool sweater
c) a lightweight, half-zip fleece
d) a hooded sweatshirt.
Additionally, despite what the manual says, what will TSA agents in the field say?
December 11, 2009 10:13 AM"
There is a good chance the answer will be yes to any or all of those.
December 16, 2009 4:19 PM
.........................
A big part of the problem is that Bob nor any other TSA Manager can't answer to what any one TSA employee will do in the field since they apparently can do whatever they like.
The traveler is handicapped with not having a concise set of rules that must be followed.
December 16, 2009 4:56 PM
RB said-
Tim if I place my shoes in a bin without any other items it should be clear thats where I want them. If anyone removes them at that point it is no longer optional.
For once I am in agreement with RB. As an officer/screener, its helpful to myself and the passenger to allow them to place their footwear either on the belt or in the bin. If for whatever reason a passenger wants to keep all their belongings in as few of bins as they can, they should be allowed to. TSA needs to do a much better job of allowing passengers to feel safe and secure with their belongings. If that means placing their items in a particular way, without interfering with x-ray inspections, then they should be allowed to. I dont think thats asking for a lot.
Though I'm sure that wasn't the point RB was getting at, from my experience, it seems to make the passenger feel less invaded with someone telling them where to place their belongings. Thus, making for a friendlier experience.
December 16, 2009 9:21 PM
(Part One of Two)
“RB said…
Tim if I place my shoes in a bin without any other items it should be clear thats where I want them. If anyone removes them at that point it is no longer optional.”
Hey RB. The optional part is the placement of the shoes before its first run of the X-ray machine. If an X-ray operator cannot clear your shoes with the first X-ray image, the X-ray operator will place the shoes into any orientation needed to obtain a good X-ray image and not damage your property. If the X-ray operator cannot clear your shoes with the second image, a bag check (physical inspection) will take place by a floor officer.
An officer who is loading the X-ray machine will place everything in the bin or out of the bin into the best orientation possible to clear your items. If you don’t want this officer to assist you, then you must let the officer know. The loader will also ask you and encourage you to send your foot wear on the X-ray belt.
“Ayn R. Key said…
So, with you it is put shoes directly on the belt or increase the chances of being groped with the same rubber gloves you groped the last dozen people with? “
Negative ghost rider, the passenger is only increasing the chances of the shoes needing to be rerun through the X-ray machine and possibly an inspection of the shoes. With this knowledge, a passenger can make an informed decision whether they want their shoes in the bin or not. Common reasons for keeping shoes in a bin are: don’t feel like it, shoes cost a lot of money, shoes are the only thing in my bin, and I don’t want to get black marks on my shoes from the X-ray belt.
“RB said…
You indicate that there are problems viewing shoes when in a bin but not on a belt. Can you explain why shoes in a carry-on bag are not a problem?”
It is all about orientation of the items and the X-ray image. If an X-ray operator cannot get a good image, the X-ray operator is going to try again by rerunning your objects at a better angle. TSA already suggest that your pack neatly and anybody remember that old simpliFLY ad campaign. Packing neatly is optional as well, but not packing neatly increases your chances of a bag check (physical inspection).
“RB said…
If the policy is truly optional then why is TSA almost forcing the issue?”
TSA is just trying to get things moving faster. Is this the answer, I don’t know. I’m pretty sure that we can think of ways to improve this.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 11:22 PM
(Part Two of Two)
“RB said…
If a statement to the effect that shoes go on the belt is made then I believe a reasonable person would take that as a requirement.”
Absolutely, good point RB. How do you know if something is a requirement? Just ask. The TSO should tell you. At least, I would tell you if you ever go through my checkpoint.
“RB said…
Published a concise policy for the public! In fact a complete set of rules that passengers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint should be available.
Why does TSA expect a free people to know and comply with secret rules?”
I can’t help you there, but I do give Lynn brownie points for giving the public the heads up on the policy change. I would love to see a compromise between the TSA and you guys on this issue. Good luck.
“Lanz said…
Now, see, I would think shoes would be better off in a bin/tray, with nothing else placed in that bin. Seems like shoelaces could very easily get tangled up in the workings of the belt or the scanner if the shoes are resting on the belt itself.”
I agree. It would be interesting to know if there has been an increase in damage claims related to shoes on the X-ray belt since the start of this campaign. I did a quick search on the internet and nothing came up.
Any further questions or comments are welcome. Any clarification will be provided as much as possible without hitting the SSI wall.
Thank you,
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 11:24 PM
“RB said…
Tim as I understand what you posted a TSA employee signs off that they have completed whatever training that particular evolution consisted of.
The problem I see is people pencil whipping the training.”
This was a constant issue I would run into during my US Army days. Thanks for bringing this up. I have quite a few suggestions to counter act this practice and I will add them to my upcoming idea factory post. I am still looking for any other contributions, thoughts, and comments.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
December 16, 2009 11:39 PM
There are some excellent comments here by knowledgeable people on aviation security re the profound breach of aviation security that occurred with the SOP being posted for NINE MONTHS, redacted or non redacted IT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THERE.
I cannot express my rage at the incompetents (which includes the TSA lawyers) who were responsible for posting that document online. I can tell you this: that Acting Administrator Gale Rossides statement to the House Committee today, stating that the "system is secure" WAS ASTOUNDING TO THOSE OF US WHO ARE AVIATION SECURITY PROFESSIONALS-IT WAS ABSOLUTELY ONE OF THE MOST OUTRAGEOUSLY MISLEADING STATEMENTS I'VE EVER SEEN TO A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE.
No self-respecting security professional would EVER make such a sweeping generalization in stating that the "system is secure" when this document ABSOLUTELY IS VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL TO THE CURRENT ONE-TO SAY OTHERWISE IS AN OUT AND OUT LIE.
Cong. Bennie Thompson-please make good on your comment to the TSA Administrator today AND GET THE NEEW VERSION OF THE SOP AND COMPARE IT TO THE POSTED VERSION-THEN THE ADMINISTRATOR SHOULD BE IN TROUBLE-BIG TROUBLE FOR MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT THAT THIS SOP WAS "DISCONTINUED" "NOT CURRENT" AND OTHER NONSENSE THAT ROSSIDES SPEWED.
THE REAL DANGER TO AVIATION SECURITY IS THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, I'M SORRY TO SAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AVIATION SECURITY RETURNED TO THE FAA WHERE IT NEVER SHOULD HAVE LEFT IN THE FIRST INSTANCE!
December 17, 2009 12:23 AM
We expect that participants will treat our employees with respect.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
----------------------------
This is pretty galling for at least two reasons: 1) You are clearly reading the posts, but instead of responding to reasonable questions you devote your lone appearance to chiding a commenter; 2) Your employees claim the right to grope me and to look at naked images of my children. Any notion of "respect" is clearly meaningless in the context of the TSA.
Also... the whole brouhaha over this "leak" is pretty silly. Anyone who would be willing and able to take advantage of the material that was accidentally posted would have easily been able to get a copy of the SOP in the first place. We're talking about a document that's issued to thousands and thousands of people. The fact that no one has done so is just more evidence that the threat of terrorism has been enormously overblown.
December 17, 2009 5:01 AM
Anonymous asks:
What does the SOP manual say about what articles must be removed before going through the metal detector? Could you answer yes or no to these:
a) a windbreaker
b) a thick, wool sweater
c) a lightweight, half-zip fleece
d) a hooded sweatshirt.
TSM replies:
There is a good chance the answer will be yes to any or all of those.
"A good chance"? This is a TSA checkpoint, not a Vegas casino.
Seriously, is it that hard for anyone employed by TSA to answer a question with a straightforward "yes" or "no"?
December 17, 2009 7:08 AM
HappyToHelp said...
(Part One of Two)
“RB said…
Tim if I place my shoes in a bin without any other items it should be clear thats where I want them. If anyone removes them at that point it is no longer optional.”
Hey RB. The optional part is the placement of the shoes before its first run of the X-ray machine. If an X-ray operator cannot clear your shoes with the first X-ray image, the X-ray operator will place the shoes into any orientation needed to obtain a good X-ray image and not damage your property. If the X-ray operator cannot clear your shoes with the second image, a bag check (physical inspection) will take place by a floor officer.
An officer who is loading the X-ray machine will place everything in the bin or out of the bin into the best orientation possible to clear your items. If you don’t want this officer to assist you, then you must let the officer know. The loader will also ask you and encourage you to send your foot wear on the X-ray belt.
......................
The problem is not with having help getting bins into the xray.
The problem is a TSA employee removing my shoes that I placed in a bin by themselves. The TSA employee has just made optional a fallacy.
You guys have bigger fish to fry yet your leaders refuse to clarify this matter.
That is a sign of failed leadership!
December 17, 2009 9:38 AM
At our airport we have always asked passengers to not place shoes in the bin. This is because Ketchikan Alaska gets about 200 inches of rain a year and people don't like putting there jackets and suitcases in muddy wet bins. I can tell you that our x-ray has absolutely NO places that shoelaces could be caught in. The only moving part is the belt yet there are no gaps or open areas for anything to get caught in under the belt. The only spot anything could get caught in would be between the belt and the metal rollers but due to physics its very unlikley any property will get caught there, fingers yes. I have worked at this airport for a year and a half now and have never seen a bag damaged by our checkpoint x-ray or rollers. We have a bin loader at the tunnel entrance to make sure items are orientated properly when going through. What position your bag goes into the machine matters when taking a picture. Most of the time we leave shoes that are in bins by themselves alone but if you toss your jacket on top of your shoes we will usually seperate the shoes to make more room for your jacket and so the items in your pockets don't appear to be inside of your shoes when going through the x-ray.
December 17, 2009 11:14 AM
TSAnonymous wrote:
"The key here is that those items, according to the link, were placed in bins "outside TSA checkpoints". This happened before TSA specifically got involved, in the public area of the airport. Once the person has entered the screening checkpoint and the item is discovered, it is then considered to be suspect and we are unable to donate it at that point. At that point someone has voluntarily surrendered it to TSA and it becomes our responsibility (and our liability). Prior to the checkpoint, if people set up donation bins or whatever, that is their responsibility and their liability.The key here is that those items, according to the link, were placed in bins "outside TSA checkpoints". This happened before TSA specifically got involved, in the public area of the airport. Once the person has entered the screening checkpoint and the item is discovered, it is then considered to be suspect and we are unable to donate it at that point. At that point someone has voluntarily surrendered it to TSA and it becomes our responsibility (and our liability). Prior to the checkpoint, if people set up donation bins or whatever, that is their responsibility and their liability."
Would you like to retract that statement in light of this statement from this very blog:
"Depending on the size of the airport, each day, week or month, the items are picked up. .... Or, as some airports do, we donate items to approved, non-profit organizations in accordance w/GSA regulations.
We have heard of local schools receiving the scissors. We have heard of local police departments training with the mace. Some VA hospitals sell some of the items to help make ends meet. Some non-profits, including several state surplus property divisions, sell the material on the auction web site eBay, and put the profits in THEIR coffers. TSA does not sell or profit in any way from the selling of this voluntarily abandoned property."
December 17, 2009 11:17 AM
Jim Huggins said...
Anonymous asks:
What does the SOP manual say about what articles must be removed before going through the metal detector? Could you answer yes or no to these:
a) a windbreaker
b) a thick, wool sweater
c) a lightweight, half-zip fleece
d) a hooded sweatshirt.
TSM replies:
There is a good chance the answer will be yes to any or all of those.
"A good chance"? This is a TSA checkpoint, not a Vegas casino.
Seriously, is it that hard for anyone employed by TSA to answer a question with a straightforward "yes" or "no"?
December 17, 2009 7:08 AM
---------------
It isn't random its just different views of different officers. If this kid can hide all of this under his clothes think of the other things he can hide that won't set off a metal detector.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMA2zkodZCk
December 17, 2009 11:18 AM
“RB said…
Published a concise policy for the public! In fact a complete set of rules that passengers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint should be available.
Why does TSA expect a free people to know and comply with secret rules?”
----------------
We have posted all the rules you need to know. Any thing else should be told to the passengers at the checkpoints. We can not give you what you want RB. What you want is a way to get through security without being screened in any way. This can not happen, there is no way to go through a checkpoint 100% of the time without being screened. What you are basically asking TSA to do, wether you realize it or not, is to release a guide on how to avoid screening. Its not like the bad guys would be at all interested in something like that.
December 17, 2009 11:24 AM
"TSA is just trying to get things moving faster. Is this the answer, I don’t know. I’m pretty sure that we can think of ways to improve this."
Yep: Admit the truth that shoes pose no risk to anyone and stop the mandatory shoe carnival. This would speed up screenings immensely and make everyone happier and safer.
December 17, 2009 11:41 AM
Do the screeners at LAX know that shoes can indeed go in a bin?
None of the ones at the checkpoints at LAX seem to know that. They repeatedly bellow "Shoes do not go in the bins!"
December 17, 2009 2:16 PM
TSOWilliamReed said...
“RB said…
Published a concise policy for the public! In fact a complete set of rules that passengers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint should be available.
Why does TSA expect a free people to know and comply with secret rules?”
----------------
We have posted all the rules you need to know. Any thing else should be told to the passengers at the checkpoints. We can not give you what you want RB. What you want is a way to get through security without being screened in any way. This can not happen, there is no way to go through a checkpoint 100% of the time without being screened. What you are basically asking TSA to do, wether you realize it or not, is to release a guide on how to avoid screening. Its not like the bad guys would be at all interested in something like that.
December 17, 2009 11:24 AM
............
I asked for no such thing.
I am asking for and will continue asking for the rules I must follow to move through a TSA Checkpoint.
I am not asking for your screening methods, two very different things.
I want clear rules on what is or is not allowed.
I want a clear published policy on things like ice, shoes, and medicine, things that are treated differently at each airport today.
I want a means to challenge decisions before having my property confiscated by TSA.
I see nothing in what I am requesting that weakens the screening process.
Since you claim all of the rules I need to know have been posted give me a link to the new Ice Rule, the one that applies to everyone!
Why is it that a supposedly professional organization cannot perform a known job with exacting standards?
December 17, 2009 2:44 PM
"TSA makes me play the shoe carnival, I make them play the bin and new gloves carnival."
Me too. I also make a point of very slowly putting my shoes back on right as they come out of the X-ray.
December 17, 2009 3:55 PM
Jim Huggins wrote:
Seriously, is it that hard for anyone employed by TSA to answer a question with a straightforward "yes" or "no"?
Sorry, but that just hit my sense of irony like a sledge hammer. You KNOW they cannot answer either 'yes' or 'no' to that question.
Thanks for the laugh. I know you didn't mean it that way and I'm not making fun of you, but thanks for the laugh.
December 17, 2009 4:29 PM
Why doesn't TSA compensate its workers for doing a good job? Maybe if the officers got recognition and better pay they would perform better.
December 17, 2009 7:27 PM
RB said…
Published a concise policy for the public! In fact a complete set of rules that passengers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint should be available.
Why does TSA expect a free people to know and comply with secret rules?
----------------
To which TSOWilliamReed replied:
We have posted all the rules you need to know. Any thing else should be told to the passengers at the checkpoints. We can not give you what you want RB. What you want is a way to get through security without being screened in any way. This can not happen, there is no way to go through a checkpoint 100% of the time without being screened. What you are basically asking TSA to do, wether you realize it or not, is to release a guide on how to avoid screening. Its not like the bad guys would be at all interested in something like that.
As RB has already said, it's not about getting through "without being screened". It's about knowing and preparing so that passengers don't lose property or get unreasonably detained. Having the TSA telling you the rules when you get to the checkpoint is not good enough, for at least three reasons:
1) Many people are (rightly or wrongly) nervous about questioning anyone in a uniform with a badge. Requiring people to ask "is this allowed" or "what do I do with this?" puts them under pressure which would not be necessary if the rules were known beforehand.
2) Some screeners are too busy or too self-important to answer questions. This may be due to inadequate staffing levels, or it may be attitude. One time at LAX the screener was standing just past the WTMD looking at a point on the ceiling and shouting the rules over and over again. There were only three passengers at the whole checkpoint, but he didn't look at us or respond to my question, just kept saying "take your shoes off, take your liquids out, take your laptop out" like a recording.
3) Most rules need to be known before the passenger gets to the checkpoint. It's no good getting to the checkpoint and then finding out that you can't bring a frozen gel-pack for baby food, or diamond earrings, or a leather bookmark. This blog is full of stories of people who were asked to "surrender" such things because the "rule" was only made up at the checkpoint.
Note that I'm not talking about bottled soft drinks or knives or other things which are clearly "prohibited."
I'm not trying to avoid getting "screened." But I am trying to avoid some screener taking away my property due to a secret rule that says it's not allowed.
December 17, 2009 10:14 PM
Current Links to the document are still active as of last check. The posting of the various real creds is the most glaring mistake. Once it has been posted you can never take it down. One question. Why are the TIP images sold to anyone who pays the manufacturer for the TIP option considered SSI?
December 18, 2009 10:20 AM
"I always try to use as many bins as possible."
It really makes you feel good to slow things down, inconvenience people and make extra unnecessary work for others?
December 18, 2009 10:27 AM
TSA screening procedures are becoming annoying. Looking at the article I've posted below; Their screening procedures may be less effective than we realize
http://www.hlswatch.com/2009/10/15/%E2%80%9Cdo-i-have-the-right-to-refuse-this-search%E2%80%9D/
December 18, 2009 12:03 PM
The rules are.., there are no rules.
at least that's what it seems like.
http://www.hlswatch.com/2009/10/15/%E2%80%9Cdo-i-have-the-right-to-refuse-this-search%E2%80%9D/
December 18, 2009 12:50 PM
Anonymous said...
"TSA makes me play the shoe carnival, I make them play the bin and new gloves carnival."
Me too. I also make a point of very slowly putting my shoes back on right as they come out of the X-ray.
-----------------------------------
That doesn't do anything except annoy the people behind you. The TSA doesn't care how long you take to get through. They get paid either way. How about taking it out on them instead of subjecting everyone behind you to your stubborn attitude.
December 18, 2009 1:23 PM
TSOWilliamReed, I can't believe the lack of logic you demonstrate by saying that publishing the rules allows you get to thru without being screened.
All I have to say is: "Say what?!?!"
If the rules are published, people know what they can and can't bring. They bring the things they can, leave the things they can't at home or check it, and they go thru the process without getting hassled. Just how on Earth is that getting thru without screening?
YOU (TSA collectively) are still looking at the items, and by seeing nothing of interest because it's all permitted, clears the bag and sends the passenger on his/her way. It's not like the passenger showing up says to the screener "Hey, I have nothing on your prohibited items list. Let me thru." If the screener allowed them to pass in that case, then yes, they WOULD be going thru without screening. If TSA's still screening the bags, then there's no way TSA's letting thru any passengers that aren't screened (airport employees getting thru unscreened is another issue).
Let's apply your logic to real life for a second. Let's say my state decides that certain things are going to be moving violations, like speeding and reckless driving. Does that mean that I'd be getting away with speeding and reckless driving if I knew that both were prohibited? No, I'd be a lot less likely to do those things.
TSA wants the public to be a partner in security. I agree with that being a good thing. However, we can't help TSA if it won't tell us what's expected of us with any specificity. Additionally, by not informing the public, you're creating more hassle for yourselves. Maybe it's for job security to slow the process so you have work to do. I don't know.
What you're advocating is like Dean Wormer from Animal House putting us on "double secret probation." You can't expect us to reasonably meet your requirements when it's not specifically defined (or if it is, you don't tell us).
Al
December 18, 2009 5:57 PM
Anonymous said: "That doesn't do anything except annoy the people behind you. The TSA doesn't care how long you take to get through. They get paid either way. How about taking it out on them instead of subjecting everyone behind you to your stubborn attitude."
TSA's lack of caring about how long we wait is evident in the inanity of the screening process and how long it takes to get thru even without people gumming up the works.
If you're going to call people out about stubborness, please compare them with TSA and THEN tell me who's more stubborn.
TSA wastes plenty of time that these acts of protest is inconsequential. If someone's gumming up the works, go around them or find another line. Pretty simple.
Al
December 18, 2009 5:59 PM
"I would not retract that statement, although I would modify it to point out that I was specifically referring to Liquids, Gels, and Aerosols. In other words, items that we do not know for certain what they are. Prohibited items such as scissors and knives, we know what they are, and they may be donated to the appropriate agencies. Liquids, we are unable to determine whether they are an actual bottle of water/shampoo, something that has been poisoned, or even a liquid explosive without costly and time-consuming testing. So it is not able to be donated like knives and scissors are."
Are you aware that last year, the California Senate considered a bill to make it mandatory for airports to donate unopened toiletries, etc.? The TSA did not object. However, it was the CA airports themselves that objected based on the cost and alleged liability issues.
Sen. Dean Florez's website:
"Under Senate Bill 1577, travelers who find themselves at airport security with new, unopened toiletries which do not meet the criteria to carry on-board a plane would have the option to place them in a bin bound for charities such as local homeless centers. Those items include gels and liquids which are over 3 ounces.
Some airports, such as Sacramento International Airport, have indicated they are willing to get on-board with the program with some minor modifications Florez says he is happy to make. He is perplexed by the position of others, such as Oakland International which calls the program – which changes little except where such items end up -- an “onerous” burden."
December 18, 2009 6:32 PM
"How about taking it out on them instead of subjecting everyone behind you to your stubborn attitude."
Anything any citizen can do so make the checkpoints even more unpleasant makes TSOs' lives more unpleasant, and that's a win in my book!
December 18, 2009 10:23 PM
TSOWilliamReed said...
..................William please post a pointer to the new Ice rule.
One that applies to everyone.
You keep saying how the rules are different at each airport.
That is one of the big problems TSA refuses to deal with.
For a traveler the TSA experience should be the same at AUS, DFW, SAN, LAS, LOS or any other airport.
TSA leadership failure!
December 18, 2009 11:50 PM
I for one was absolutely shocked and disgusted to read that if I pass through a TSA metal detector (and "begin" screening) I cannot choose to refuse further screening if the TSA feels the need to perform a pat-down or backscatter x-ray scan. TSA agents are then instructed to monitor me closely while a law enforcement officer is summoned in order to detain me. And although the document does not specify that I will be detained and have a search forced on me, well, if that's not what's going to happen feel free to correct me.
December 19, 2009 11:11 AM
My god you people are so bitter with TSA have you nothing better to do? work perhaps?
December 19, 2009 12:16 PM
Yes many flaws exist in TSA but the constant complaining and the bitter posts do nothing.
December 19, 2009 12:46 PM
I think it is so great people try to get back at us (TSA) by using extra bins and holding up the line which doesn't affect us at all but if it makes ya feel better keep it up! :) real mature too!
December 20, 2009 10:57 AM
Maybe they just need to work harder and move more bins more often. I'll use as many bins and I want. My coat? That's another bin!
Stop the insanity (shoes, liquids, etc) and I will stop mine (bins, gloves ,etc.) Stop yelling commands and start treating me like a human and I will stop being a jerk to you and I will stop filing complaints each time you even start stepping out of the SOP.
December 20, 2009 2:48 PM
So I was right. Any reference to the actual content of the leaked document will be delete-o-metered.
Wow, Bob.
Phil was smart to number his comments. It adds a further layer of embarassment to the blog team's comment approver - which is only one member of the team.
December 21, 2009 9:01 AM
"Jannis said...
Thanks (sarcastically) to all the jokers who slow done security lines by using as many bins as possible and putting their shoes and other belongings back on right in front of the x-ray. It’s too bad you are not smart enough to realize this does nothing to “get back at” TSA. All you do is slow down the security lines for the hundreds of other passengers trying to come thru after you. When I see you in the airport, holding up the line in front of me, I will let you know exactly what I think of your behavior that delays me."
So, Jannis, this is all about selfish little YOU? Does it really matter to you that other people have the same rights that you do? It's the check point that is the problem, along with your attitude, not the other travelers.
If the check points were more carefully designed with passengers in mind there would be space and seating for people to organize and put their belongings back together after the security theater.
December 21, 2009 10:50 AM
TSOWilliamReed said...
The basic rules to get through a checkpoint are on the signs and posted on the website, some airports are different because some officers have different views and some managers like to run things differently.
********
Rules are applied evenly at every location. What you are telling us is that individual TSO's and airports can invent their own rules to make things more convenient for them and not the passengers. This is precisely the reason the real rules need to be posted. So TSO's can be just as accountable as passengers. And so Britney Spears doesn't get exemptions for ice the rest of us can't.
December 22, 2009 11:57 AM
Jannis said...
Thanks (sarcastically) to all the jokers who slow done security lines by using as many bins as possible and putting their shoes and other belongings back on right in front of the x-ray. It’s too bad you are not smart enough to realize this does nothing to “get back at” TSA. All you do is slow down the security lines for the hundreds of other passengers trying to come thru after you. When I see you in the airport, holding up the line in front of me, I will let you know exactly what I think of your behavior that delays me.
********
Your welcome. The only country in the world that engages in this stupidity is the United States. Unless your flight is going to the USA. Even England, where Richard Reid flew out of, does not make passengers take off their shoes.
December 22, 2009 12:00 PM
Bob,
Is the blog team taking a two week long nap? - Or are the blog update computers the same ones that the staff in ATL play games on when they are on break - great use of tax money!
December 24, 2009 2:03 PM
Why hasn't the TSA Acting Administrator made a public statement about this event? It seems like the TSA is one to not be trusted.
December 24, 2009 6:04 PM
ANON SAID...
-I always try to use as many bins as possible. One for shoes. One for keys, and wallet and a couple misc items I'll take out of my carry on and throw in there to take up room and make it looks like I do need that extra bin, one for the carry on, etc.
TSA makes me play the shoe carnival, I make them play the bin and new gloves carnival.
..................
Thats really mature... I really dont care how many bins you use your just screwing the people behind you out of bins they may actually NEED... and anyways your making it easier for the xray operator to see everything in your bags cuz the more spread out it is, the easier it is to see thru everything...soo THANKX!!!... we get paid no matter how long it takes you to get thru and were there for 10 or 8 or however many hours a day sooo take your time the longer you take using up all the bins and putting your shoes on directly in front of the xray tunnel is actually less i have to do in a day cuz your holding up the line... your the one flying your the one whos guna be late for your flight because you feel the need to play stupid games with bins while your in line... so keep up the good work thanks!!! :-)
word verifer: stupidity.. how absolutely appropriate
December 26, 2009 9:24 AM
heres a way to solve all the problems.... NO CARRY ON LUGGAGE PERIOD and from ive heard from the flight crews the some of the airlines arent allowing anyone to get anything out of their bags or do anything in their seats...((play with laptops, games, ipods, books, etc..)) while in the air anyways in response to the attack that happened xmas day
December 26, 2009 8:57 PM
AVXO Wrote:
I'm pretty sure all those TSOs had signed the same document as well. And yet, despite the signature they did not understand it.
My cynical conspiracy theory is that they don't all get the same rule book. That is why the leaked version is not a great security concern: every version is different. It also explains why the rules are different at every airport: it is by design. The TSA wants the rules to be unpredictable.
By making small changes to grammar (meaning) and amounts (like 3.0 vs 3.4), photocopied leaks can be traced to the individual airport or employee: even after being transcribed.
I have not read the apparently secret documents, but there are probably a few lines like: "The Manager may, at their discretion, enact new policies to reflect local conditions." So Britney may be allowed ice at LAX on a hot summer's day, but not in the winter when it is cooler.
All speculation of course.
December 26, 2009 10:46 PM
Hey Javon,
If you're going to quote me, please let people know you're quoting me. Using my exact words so you can get a commercial link to your website snuck in is not very polite.
December 27, 2009 10:31 PM
The public knows the TSA is a joke.
The Maddening Stupidity of the TSA Security Burlesque
http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/12/the_maddening_stupidity_of_the.php
December 27, 2009 11:51 PM
Just an "Outdated, Unclassified Version", eh?
BUT WAIT...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/30/ap/cabstatepent/main6039641.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody
"As the government reviews how an alleged terrorist was able to bring a bomb onto a U.S.-bound plane and try to blow it up on Christmas Day, the Transportation Security Administration is going after bloggers who wrote about a directive to increase security after the incident.
TSA special agents served subpoenas to travel bloggers Steve Frischling and Chris Elliott, demanding that they reveal who leaked the security directive to them. The government says the directive was not supposed to be disclosed to the public."
You boobs at the TSA can't even get your stories straight. When are you going to pull the mask off and admit the War on Terror" was just a big joke at our expense?
December 30, 2009 11:25 PM
I read a news story recently that said that the TSA is backing off from the "no leaving your seat" rule, and are instead leaving it to the dicretion of aircrtaft captains, based on the public backlash to this ridiculous directive. Is this true?
December 31, 2009 11:16 PM
Please correct that to "discretion". I apologize.
December 31, 2009 11:18 PM
The information there was sensitive and shouldn't have been made public. the security is getting weaker and weaker day by day..
January 12, 2010 2:38 PM
I'd just like to throw out there that I recently flew from Canada to the U.S. and had nothing but positive experiences with TSA and Homeland Security. These folks are trying to do their jobs.
January 14, 2010 8:34 AM
Phil said...
I'd just like to throw out there that I recently flew from Canada to the U.S. and had nothing but positive experiences with TSA and Homeland Security. These folks are trying to do their jobs.
January 14, 2010 8:34 AM
...............
“Do or do not... there is no try.”
January 15, 2010 10:56 AM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home