USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

Liquids, Part 2

Archived Content

Please note that older content is archived for public record. This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.

If you have questions about policies or procedures, please contact the TSA Contact Center.

Members of the news media may contact TSA Public Affairs.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous on

Why is it that there is never an answer to the issues raised concerning tossing "hazardous" items in a common bin next to passengers in line, challenging TSA to prove that liquids are, in fact, hazardous, and the other issues people have raised here. Instead, every so often a TSA employee pipes in with "come on people, follow the rules" or "these rules have been in place for a couple of years." We know that. The point is the rules are silly and baseless. Nagging us to follow them, rather than providing some rationale for them, is precisely why the public is fed up with TSA.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Where's "Liquids, Part 1.5", where Kip explained how the TSA scientists can't mix liquid bombs under laboratory conditions?

Submitted by Anonymous on

In response to the TSA restrictions on liquids in carry-on luggage, a padded, zip-sealed travel bag is now offered to protect bottles when transported inside checked luggage. The bag, Wine Mummy, is a durable double layer polybag with layers of bubble padding. It holds a wine, spirit or champagne bottle and can easily be stored inside suitcases of all sizes. I used in on a flight to Canada.

Submitted by Ayn R Key on

And yet the blog authors still fail to address the scientific impossibility of their rule. These comments are merely collecting complaints, and are not action items.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I have one word on liquid carry on's

"LUSH"

They have solid everything. Easy to use and purchase and TSA will let you take as much as you want with you. Also it makes my wife's hair shinny and soft.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"LUSH"

Thought spam was prohibited?

Submitted by Anonymous on
Thought spam was prohibited?

Depends on who is doing the screening and if they happen to like Spam.
Submitted by Anonymous on

I fly out of RRWNA about every 2-3 weeks on short hops along the East Coast. Usually I carry on and therefore take liquids through security. I have noticed over the past several months that while I have no problem in DC with the size & amount of liquids going thru security, on my return (particularly from Boston, Providence & Nassau Bahamas) that a liquid that is cleared in DC is confiscated at these other airports, usually for being "too much".

Why the inconsistancies? Certainly all of our lives would be made easier if TSA screeners were at least consistant in the implementation of the policy.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I just do not get the liquid thing. If I have a 6 oz toothpaste container, everybody is an uproar. If somebody as a 10 oz water bottle in their pocket, they can walk right through security with no problem. Why is this?

(yea, I know they are not supposed to, but since they can, what is the point of wasting time checking for the little baggies)

Submitted by Anonymous on

I am a breastfeeding mom, and feel that the liquid rule needs to be changed to specifically address breastmilk. I frequently travel away from my child, but continue to pump breastmilk while I'm away to take back home with me. Since I don't have a child travelling with me, I am required to check this precious liquid. If my bag is lost, my milk will be ruined by the time the airline locates it. Breastmilk is not like shampoo or Diet Coke- it is an irreplaceble resource and should be treated as such.

Submitted by Shawn Hearn on

The rules due seem extreme in some areas. I am sure they have been in place long enough now to know what areas can be adjusted.

Shawn A Hearn

Submitted by Anonymous on

Dear "Lush" advertiser:

Do they sell solid toothpaste? I can travel without shampoo or conditioner on board (since I won´t have a shower either), but I think traveling 24 hours (long international flights + connections) without toothpaste is inhumane.

Submitted by Anonymous on
Dear "Lush" advertiser:

Do they sell solid toothpaste? I can travel without shampoo or conditioner on board (since I won´t have a shower either), but I think traveling 24 hours (long international flights + connections) without toothpaste is inhumane.

They do sell tooth powder
Submitted by Anonymous on

Tooth powder! Sounds like a great idea! Where can I get that outside the US? Can I be assured no one will think it is an illicit drug and confiscate it?

Submitted by Anonymous on
Tooth powder! Sounds like a great idea! Where can I get that outside the US? Can I be assured no one will think it is an illicit drug and confiscate it?

Make your own with some baking soda, salt, and if you want a mint flavoring to cut the taste of salt.
Submitted by Anonymous on

About Liquids, for Screening Officers and for Passengers
There is one good rule of thumb;
If it:
POURS…SPREADS…SQUEEZES..or.. SPRAYS
Then it IS a liquid, paste, creme, lotion, gel or aerosol.

Jelly Bellies, grapes and crème-filled chocolates are ARE NOT liquids,
Yogurt IS.

Once you determine if it is considered a liquid, then 'at least two' regulations do apply:
1- the 3.4 oz rule (that is per item and per the label, not how much is in the container)
2- (Non-medication) liquids must be in a 1-quart zip top bag for your carry on.
Anything larger than 3.4 oz per the label, must to go in checked bags except medicine, check with a supervisor.
If you have liquid medication, it is best to take it out of the carry on and place it in a bin to be x-rayed separately.
If you have questions, you may ask for a supervisor at any time.
The Liquids guidelines are posted on the TSA Website at www.tsa.gov and on signs or flyers at the airports.
Pepper spray and mace are NOT allowed in carry on!
TSO Lori

Submitted by Anonymous on

Tooth powder = baking soda. Sounds very "middle ages", but just might work, unless of course someone thinks it is another form of white powder. Now all I have to find out is how to get hold of solid contact lens solution...

Submitted by Anonymous on

Sorry about that folks. Tooth powder is forbidden as being a liquid (it pours). I tried.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Recently I flew out of O'hare to Seattle and my boyfriend forgot to remove a 8.5 oz bottle of mouthwash from his carry on. Security didn't find it and we didn't even realize it was in his bag until we were emptying our luggage at home. If liquids are so dangerous why were we able to get this through security? Shouldn't TSA do a better job of ensuring liquids don't get through.

Submitted by Anonymous on

It's time to get rid of the liquids ban already. This is way, way past ridiculous. That would go a long way to improving your public image.

Submitted by Anonymous on

An anonymous poster wrote in "Gripes":

"I'm confused by the "squeeze and smear" comment. I can squeeze a block of cheese or a bean bag. I can squeeze my backpack. I can squeeze an empty plastic bottle. I can smear crayons and pencils onto paper -- that's how they work!"

I am confused too - and I am a Chemistry professor! I think the liquid rule changes with the mood of the screener.

I sure hope chocolate and cheese are not considered liquids. Hard to travel without in these food deprived airline days...

Submitted by Aerospace Sales Guy on

The TSA suffers from poor leadership and a government which thinks "if I can scare you, I can control you" hope for better leadership in the near future and they will ahve the wisdom to abolish this agency

Submitted by Anonymous on

After reading through the liquid guidelines again, I still don't see anyplace that the 3.4 oz or less bottles have to be original commercial bottles, rather than unlabeled bottles you have put a travel amount of product in. Why then do these unlabeled travel bottles, clearly less than three ounces, get confiscated sometimes and not other times? It is frustrating to follow the rules and still have stuff taken away. And why is solid lipstick sometimes allowed, sometimes not?

Submitted by TRAVLR on

This has probably been asked before, but why is it I can put 5 or 6 3.4 oz bottles in a bag and it's ok. But if I put 1 6 oz bottle in the bag it's not. It's ok to carry 20 oz of liquid as long as it's in separate bottles, but not one bottle that is 6 oz.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I wish all the airports/employees would actually follow the rules... and its not just the airports that almost have an excuse with being very busy; smaller airports are also lax about the rules. I have my "liquid bag" that I've been flying with that has remained unchanged for the past 6 months (gone through security with it 8 different times) and didn't have any problems until this last trip. Apparently my lotion bottle was actually 4oz and I had to take it out. You would have thought someone would have noticed and said something one of the previous 8 times I took it through security.

Submitted by Pnwsun on

Hi,
I think this blog is a good idea to improve communication but I can't find any responses to the many questions about why the TSA has the prohibition on liquids. I have seen the video and a couple of posts but these really just replay the rules. The question everyone is asking is WHY? What is the justification for the rules? We can put a man [or woman] in space; I can't believe we can tell when a liquid is water. Or some non-lethal substance.

Submitted by Anonymous on

does anyone know if i can bring something to keep breast milk cold?

Submitted by Anonymous on

My husband and I live in Japan due to being in the military and the Japanese have an interesting machine that scans bottles with liquids to determine if they are safe or not. Why not consider implementing the use of these machines in the US?

Submitted by Anonymous on

How many plastic water bottles are added to the garbage everyday through this policy? We buy them, throw them out full, then turn around the corner and buy another. Simply make us take a few big drinks, talk to us to ensure that it is swallowed and be done with it. Is every single bottle of water that comes through the back door for resale inspected? The idea that water could be tampered with prior to delivery is real. Do you make them throw it out too?

A baggie full of 3 oz liquids. Hmmmm.. Just how hard would it be to empty the contents of those little bottles and fill up a dozen of them with gasoline or other explosive/flammable materials? The contents of those little bottles are never checked. But, again, throw the easiest thing to verify out, water. Ridiculous.

These policys were made in a hasty moment, understandably. Now that time has passed and the system has had time to be reviewed, make some modificiations that actually make sense.

I understand the need for scrutiny, but make it based on intelligent discovery and revamp the process accordingly.

Finally, when given the directive of having to throw a knife or bottle of expensive perfume out, why not have a postal office near the security center and give people the option of retaining their belongings. Right then and there, time allowing, have the people go to the postal center, buy the packaging necessary and mail it to their home. Then, go through security again. EASY SOLUTION!!! Use your heads people......

Submitted by Anonymous on

My main confusion is the discrepancy between TSA agents at different airports- Some airport Screeners enforce a strict 3.0 oz rule, while others announce they are looking for 3.4 oz and below. (The equivalent of 100 cc). I assume the TSA believes the average american has no clue what 100 cc is, and chose 3 oz because it fits a nice mnemonic (eg 3-3-1). I jsut wish ALL the airports would pick one or the other and let us know so we don't lose our stuff half way through our trip.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Sorry if this is off topic, but I couldn't find a good place for it. I support the TSA mission, but it seems that there is a problem with thinking ahead of the potential terror threats.
It seems that new security measures are only developed after a terror threat is uncovered by the media. First there is the 'shoe bomber' plot; then our shoes are screened. Next, there is the 'liquid bombing' plot; now we can't bring a bottled water onto the plane.
It seems like we are only using stopgap measures to cover old plots rather than trying to find real solutions. Shouldn't we have people thinking about potential threats, analyzing which could be the most damaging,and generating potential solutions for those threats?
My biggest fear is that somebody tries to smuggle a plastic explosive on board inside their large intestine. I dread what TSA's response to that would be.

Submitted by Anonymous on

To be honest I think this may have started out as a security issue and then became an employee perk. I have a friend, who has a friend who works at an airport. When I go visit my friend he gives me all kinds of stuff from the airport that they have taken from passengers. I have about 20 cans of shaving cream in a closet right now. I've got Paul Mitchell shampoo. It's crazy how much stuff they have, and they don't throw it away, they take it home and give it to friends and family. I think this has given TSA too much of a reason to hold on to this liquid rule.

It should be referred to as the 3-1-1 employee perk.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I wish I'd known about this site earlier, after flying out of Santa Barbara and having my entire bag of makeup, lipstick, moisturizer, all of it, confiscated. I had packed at my friend's house, and unfortunately she didn't have the one quart size Ziploc. She gave me the larger, one gallon size. I put my items in it, no more than would have fit into the one quart size. The agent, clearly infused with a sense of his own power, took everything out of the bag and kept it, with the exception of a small bottle of contact lens solution. His level of rudeness was unforgiveable, made moreso by the fact that it was 5:15 a.m.
Carolyn A.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Don't worry guys, it's not like ALL of your stuff gets wasted. Most unopened liquids get split up among the other airport employees!

Submitted by Anonymous on

All you have to do to get your liquids through is be a flight attendant or other flight crew. They get to bring their coffee and whatever other kind of dangerous liquid they want.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Where did the 3.4oz requirement come from (as in, why is it 3.4 and not 4oz or 5 oz)? If going on a long trip, 3.4oz of conditioner, shampoo, etc. is just not enough to last. I shouldn't have to buy extra to replenish the 3.4oz bottle every time I travel. Also, last time I traveled, one woman was allowed 2 quart-sized bags' worth of liquids. Why was that allowed? We need to eliminate the inconsistencies.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I really, really don't see what purpose the 3-1-1 rule serves. If I can cram that one, one quart bag full of three ounce containers full of some sort of hazardous materials, what difference does it make whether I have a 3 oz. or 4 oz. container? I'll just split it up between several smaller ones if I really need to. A girl I travelled with recently made a really good point as well - what am I going to do, attack someone with 3 oz. of shampoo?

Get real - this is absured and everyone's ticked off about it. Do something better with your time; invest in some medical help. I saw a woman having a seizure in a customs line in TX and one of the members of my party was a EMT. He quickly went and helped out and I was through customs and airport medical help STILL hadn't shown up.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Better training is needed. I have traveled multiple times taking 2 different types of contact solution with me. Unfortunately I happen to be allergic to ingredients of those cleaning solutions that are made in sizes allowed as a normal carry on. One is a cleaning solution one is a saline. They were being carried as allowed per instructions under the exception of medical necessity. The last time I carried they were almost thrown away except there happened to be a "new" contact wearer in the security group who understood why I was carrying 2 different contact products. International travel (cancun to Denver) back to the US is a whole other item of concern. Things I know are allowed (nail clipper) in carry on and the contact solution were trashed. I realize not as much control with this kind of situation but better communication in regards to updated policies may keep $15.00+ items from being thrown away.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Remember the good `ol days when flying used to be fun? When there was this sense of glamour that came with going to the airport and flying across the country or around the world? I know, I know… those days are gone and the world has changed. Flying lost that allure once airlines cut back everything from food to pillows to general service. So, if we have to sit in misery for hours on an airplane, can’t we make the process of getting to the airplane easier to deal with? i.e. getting through security with your insanity still intact.

First of all, let’s get to the root of the overall problem… this department of the TSA is something that’s NEEDS to be privatized and not run by the government. Haven’t they screwed enough things up over the past 8 years? That being said, and knowing that will most likely never happen… there are ways to make things better.
I find it amazing that when traveling to other countries, the security lines all seem to move much faster and more smoothly than any lines I’ve waited in this country. But why? Can the TSA not look at the way other places are run and adopt some of those rules? When I went to London last year, the line moved so fast and smooth that when I approached the screening area I started to take off my shoes (standard procedure here in the US) and the guy looked at me and said “What are you doing? You don’t have to take off your shoes.” WHAT? Unbelieveable! Someone finally gets it! Someone realized what a waste of time and effort in taking off people’s shoes. Bravo to the British, who, by the way, have been dealing with the threat of terrorism much longer than we have. So why can’t we learn from them instead of making up our own inane rules? Just like the liquid ban. Can’t anyone figure out that as soon as one of these rules goes into effect, the terrorists have moved on to something else. Why do we waste our time being retroactive?
Most of the stuff we’re forced to do in security lines is a waste of time. I’m all for screening, whether its x-ray, or metal detector, etc. But let’s be realistic, the more time wasted the more it leads to delays, long lines and an airport full of angry frustrated passengers. Can’t we make this system work better? I think we can.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I understand the threat of brining liquids on board, but don't they serve liquids on board? I can't bring on a diet coke but they can serve me one? Makes no sense to me.

Submitted by Anonymous on

It is obvious that TSA will not ever get rid of the bans. Once they start enforcing them, they have a continuous need to justify them, and eventually that becomes reason in itself to keep the bans going.
Of course the liquid ban is fundamentally ridiculous, as has been pointed out here many times, if the stuff was truly a hazmat risk, would the inept TSA flunky blithely toss it over his shoulder into a common bin, to later be wheeled out to the dumpster? The answer is obvious.
But if they were to stop doing it now, it is a tacit admission that the whole thing was in fact "Security Theater" and in no way was any danger ever posed by the mythological amateur chemist mixing up something in the lav.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I am a mother of a 9 month old baby boy. I have been flying with him since he was a week and a half old as my in-laws live in WA, and we live in PA. His father is also Military, so we travel a lot for that reason as well. My main concern with liquids relates to traveling with my son. I think the policy on traveling with children needs to be clarified. From reading the TSA website, it leads me to believe that I am able to travel with more water than would normally be allowed because it is for my son as long as I declare it at security. I have done this and depending on which airport I am at, have had to either empty all of his water from his bottles, had to mix formula into all of it (which formula once mixed only is good for up to two hours unrefrigerated), or I was able to go through with no problem. I feel that this rule should be clarified and should be enforced consistently throughout each airport. I never know what I can take for him, including baby food, juice, water, and formula. And when traveling with a small child, it is much harder to just empty out all of these items or throw them away while trying to balance him, a carry on, and his diaper bag let alone if we are traveling with a stroller or car seat.

Submitted by Anonymous on

The whole aiport security thing reminds me of the old adage that "Generals are always preparing for the LAST war".

We all (should) know that an aircraft is a vulnerable target.
If someone really wants to take it out badly enough to die in it, he will likely succeed. Though we all want to minimize it, we are willingly accepting this risk every time we board a flight.

If a bottle of shampoo or tube of toothpaste can take out an aircraft, so can a solid. Most explosives are, in fact, solids.

Liquids are just the "last war" that was won. Before that was the "shoe" war and the "knife" war.

I don't believe anyone will ever again take over a paasenger aircraft with a knife. Bowie knives could be allowed aboard and still the mass of passengers would fight.
We need, and I hope this IS happening, a contingency team at TSA. A group of people who would take on the question the terrorists face, "How could we take over and aircraft?". Then, develop the counter to the threat that hasn't yet been exposed. This would be a much better use of people's time and resources than re-fighting past events.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I understand and am pleased with most of the services that are provided by TSA for the safety of the travelers in America's skies. I do have a problem though with the liquids restrictions. My 2 year old son is allergic to cow milk and on a recent trip we were not allowed to carry a 4 ounce container of goats milk with us. I also have a problem with the stores inside the "safe" zones of the airports across America charging at least double for a simple bottle of water. The we can't bring snacks and drinks with us but we can be charged double for them inside, that is not right.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I'm so glad to finally have a place to voice my frustration! The ridiculous rules on liquids have made traveler's lives miserable long enough -- and serve no purpose in increasing security. The policies are reactionary and baseless. I am not going to blow up a plane with lipstick, contact lens solution or toothpaste --so why I can't just have my toiletries and be comfortable and clean on my trip?

I've started avoided flying in any way I can because TSA has made it even more miserable than the airlines themselves have made it. I'm going to Hawaii for my honeymoon this August -- I sure wish I could drive!

Submitted by Anonymous on

I like how its okay to have liquids if they are in a "clear plastic bag."
Like the zip lock bag is going to contain the explosion of some liquid bomb.
Its so stupid, they keep taking my toothpaste and other items I forget to put in a zip lock.
Either do it all the way and allow NOTHING liquid or lets just forget it.

I could bring frikkin gasoline in a 3 ounce bottle as long as its a zip lock and i can bring on matches so whats the point of all is?
WHat a waste of tax dollars.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Is there a limit on the number of 3 ounce containers one is allowed to have?

Submitted by Dunstan on

"Where did the 3.4oz requirement come from (as in, why is it 3.4 and not 4oz or 5 oz)? If going on a long trip, 3.4oz of conditioner, shampoo, etc. is just not enough to last."

3.4 oz is the same as 100ml.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Is there a risk of someone making a molotov cocktail from items fund at post-security duty free shops?

Submitted by Anonymous on

I am a frequent flier and am tired of the TSA rules re: liquids. I believe that the regulations also state that only one zip lock bag may be carried on. Stop making us hostages to imagined threats by wasting perfectly good cosmetics and personal hygene items. If TSA could improve the speed and open more lines on busy times, perhaps we could have time to check the questioned items.

Pages