USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

Spring Forward With TSA’s 2015 Spring Break Travel Tips

Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Suitcase on a beach.

It’s St. Patrick’s Day, and not only are people celebrating, many are gearing up for spring break travel! Below are tips and links to information on some of the most common travel-related questions. While your hotel accommodations might be all inclusive, this list is not, but you can find a wealth of information at our Traveler Information page. If you can’t find it there, you can reach out to the TSA Contact Center.

Passenger Support: Call TSA Cares toll free at 1-855-787-2227 if you or a family member has a disability or medical condition with questions about screening policies, procedures and what to expect at the security checkpoint 72 hours prior to traveling.

TSAprecheck logo.

Expedited Screening: TSA continues to expand TSA Pre✓®, which expedites checkpoint screening for known travelers and active duty service members, with similar benefits for passengers 12 and under and 75 and older. TSA Pre✓® is currently available at 132 airports. Remember, entering incorrect information in your reservations can lead to not being selected for TSA Pre✓®. Visit DHS.gov to learn more about trusted traveler programs that offer expedited screening.

Zip-top bag with a few bottles of travel liquid items

Liquids, Gels & Aerosols: If you’re checking a bag, make things simple by packing liquids in your checked baggage. That way, you don’t have to worry about the liquids rules. If you’re concerned about them leaking, place them in a zip-top bag. However, I know that doesn’t work if you’re only bringing a carry-on bag. If you have to take liquids in your carry-on, please read the liquids rule for more details: each passenger is allowed to take as many 3.4 ounce or less sized containers that will fit in one sealed clear quart-sized zip-top bag – and one bag per person. Make sure you take the zip-top bag out of your carry-on prior to sending it through the X-ray.

  • Deodorant: Stick deodorant is not limited to 3.4 oz or less, but gel or spray deodorant is.
  • Suntan and Sun Block Lotion: Lotions and aerosol spray lotions fall under the 3-1-1 liquids guidelines. Sunblock sticks do not fall under this rule.
  • Makeup: Any liquid makeup cosmetics such as eyeliner, nail polish, liquid foundation, etc. should be placed in the zip-top bag. That goes for perfume as well. Powder makeup is fine.
  • Beverages: Wine, liquor, beer, and all of your other favorite beverages are permitted in your checked baggage. You can alsobring beverages packaged in 3.4 oz or less bottles in your carry-on bags in the zip-top bag.

Shaving Razors: In brief, all razors are permitted in checked bags. Disposable razors are permitted in carry-on bags, and safety razors with removable blades are not. Check out the blog post for pictures of examples and more information.

Various sporting goods items.

Sporting Goods: Golf clubs, baseball bats (including the mini slugger bats), cricket bats, bows and arrows, hockey sticks, scuba knives, spear guns, etc. are all prohibited from being carried onto the plane. However, you can place them in your checked baggage.

Jewelry: Read about the best practices when going through security with your jewelry. There are a few different choices that you can make based on what kind of jewelry it is.

The MyTSA App: Want TSA information anywhere, anytime?Use the MyTSA app.In addition to other helpful tools, travelers can use the“Can I Bring My…” tool to determine if items are prohibited or not. There is also a web based version of the “Can I Bring My…” tool.

Scuba gear in suitcase.

Scuba Diving: Traveling with diving gear this spring? Read about tips on how to pack your scuba gear from our resident diving expert.

Lost or Forgotten IDs: We’ve gotten many calls from people who’ve had a wallet stolen or lost on a trip and have no ID for their return trip. Don’t worry, if this happens to you, you’llstill be permitted to fly as long as you help us verify you are who you say you are by answering a few questions. It’s wise to get to the airport a little earlier just to be safe.

Lose Something? Contact the airport lost and found. Tape your business card or contact info to your valuable electronics. Not only does this help us contact you if you lose your items, but it prevents travelers from grabbing the wrong item by mistake.

Follow @TSA on Twitter and Instagram!

Bob Burns
TSA Blog Team

If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact us by clicking here.

Comments

Submitted by RB on

Since you're talking about travel tips perhaps you can tell us when the "TSA CAN I TAKE MY" tool will return a responsive answer to queries if "Medical Nitroglycerin" is permitted or not.

Currently the response only discusses larger amounts of LGA's.

Submitted by SSSS For Some Reason on

"...each passenger is allowed to take as many 3.4 ounce or less sized containers that will fit in one sealed clear quart-sized zip-top bag "

So the picture you have next to this travel tip shows five items in the magic zippy bag. That would be a maximum of 17 ounces based on the 100 ml limit each.

So tell us again how 17 ounces separated into five 100ml bottles is safe but one 16 ounce bottle of water is not.

And if the one 16 ounce bottle of water is so dangerous then why are they routinely tossed into a simple rubbish bin right next to the security line?

Submitted by Anonymous on

and add this: do not carry a larger jar of Vaseline. Plus no security little boxes, those two items will slow down your check security. It happened to me.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I'm glad we can contact the "TSA Cares" line for information about carry-on restrictions.

Who do we contact for information about dealing with TSA supervisors who commit perjury on the TSA's dime, as happened at PHL? Because that seems to be an issue where the TSA's policy is unclear-- the felony perjurer still seems to be on the TSA payroll.

Care to elucidate, Bobby?

Submitted by Anonymous on

some additional suggestions for TSA to make our travel and security experience as convenient as possible:

1) eliminate TSA and return to pre-911 screening. the TSA makes things no more secure, and arguably less secure, since the last red team results made available to the public indicate that TSA is allowing 70% of prohibited items through, as opposed to 60% or lower in testing of the old systems. in addition, the 911 attacks focused on 2 gaps in security: unsecured cockpit doors, and the training of flight crews and passengers to be compliant. both of those are now corrected - no one is going to take over an airliner with a penknife.

2) full and total transparency of all DHS and TSA regulations, rules, procedures, and watch/no-fly lists, as well as public comment periods for new rules, and an independent appeal process for those placed on no fly or terrorist watch lists (as ordered by the federal courts).

3) eliminate the Pre-Bribe, er, Pre-Check program. it is a waste of taxpayer dollars as well as flat out insulting to be required to pay to have a background check done in order to be screened in a semi-sane way, when I hold a security clearance and a concealed weapons permit, both of which require a more thorough background check than TSA is likely to do.

4) eliminate ID requirements. it is unConstitutional (freedom to travel domestically is not guaranteed only if the govt can ID you), and it contributes nothing to security. what does it matter if you know my name, if I am carrying a bomb? why is my name any damn business of yours if I am not carrying a bomb or
intending some kind of threat?

Submitted by Anonymous on

I continue to wait for some justification for active duty military being included in pre-check, but not retired military or holders of current DoD or LE background investigations. military retirees have at least 20 years documented service to this Nation, pretty much proving their lack of risk. both DoD and LE background investigations should reveal any risk factors. active duty military do not, necessarily, have a background check or any significant length of service. neither citizenship nor a background investigation is required to enlist in the military, in fact there are likely illegal immigrants serving. if it is really about safety, then why are potentially unscreened non-citizens allowed through? sounds like it is just pandering to an admirable group to get PR, not adjusting the rules to ease screening on those who present a lower likelihood of threat.
Let me be clear: pre-911 screening should be the norm. it is all that is required, now that cockpit doors have been reinforced and locked, and flight crews and passengers know that the rules have changed and passivity=death. however, if we are going to continue this massive waste of tax dollars on security theatre, at least have _some_ of the rules make sense. now you're even allowing college kids (kaydets) to endure more reasonable screening, but those who served and sacrificed for 20+ have to take their bloody shoes and belts off!!

Submitted by Anonymous on
and start the rediculous complaints and whinning in 3...2..1... Susan, SSSS....ready for your "expert opinions"
Submitted by Anonymous on

PreCheck is a scam to placate influential people who might otherwise oppose further expansion of the TSA's empire building. There is nothing in a background check that is a good signal for whether someone is more or less of a threat to aviation.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous at 8:01, why are you so bothered by legitimate critiques and questions about TSA's many failures and foolish policies?

Submitted by Anonymous on

SSSS said, "And if the one 16 ounce bottle of water is so dangerous then why are they routinely tossed into a simple rubbish bin right next to the security line?"

and, "So tell us again how 17 ounces separated into five 100ml bottles is safe but one 16 ounce bottle of water is not."

Wow - you really this explained to you!?!

Submitted by Susan Richart on

"Anonymous said...

and start the rediculous complaints and whinning in 3...2..1... Susan, SSSS....ready for your "expert opinions"

March 18, 2015 at 8:01 AM"

I thought you didn't like editorial comments. Do as I say, not as I do. Sounds like a TSA employee to me. :-)

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Submitted by Anonymous on

RB said...
Since you're talking about travel tips perhaps you can tell us when the "TSA CAN I TAKE MY" tool will return a responsive answer to queries if "Medical Nitroglycerin" is permitted or not.

======================================================================================================

I don't know why you will not understand the answer that was given to you over and over again.

FOR THE LAST TIME!!!!!!
"Medical Nitroglycerin" is permitted!!!!!! It's medication!!!!!
Get on with your life and leave the blog alone for a while!!!!!!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Why are individual liquid bottles limited in size? The quart size bag limits the total amount of liquid that can be taken through security. Why does it matter if that bag contains one or two larger bottles versus 5 or 6 smaller bottles? It is the same volume of liquid in either case.

Submitted by Lisa Simeone on
"Jewelry: Read about the best practices when going through security with your jewelry. There are a few different choices that you can make based on what kind of jewelry it is."

Yes, it depends whether your jewelry is expensive or cheap. If the former, it will probably be stolen. If the latter -- wait a minute -- it will also likely be stolen. Gee, I guess it doesn't matter which kind you wear after all. The TSA is an equal-opportunity thief!
Submitted by Anonymous on

To the anonymous complaining about having to take his shoes and belt off at the screening point while members of the armed services are still in harm's way--I answer from one of my favorite lines from the movie Stripes: "lighten up Francis." Those that you mentioned still have a chain of command monitoring them while you do not. Are you a retiree that has either full facial hair or a ponytail? Here's the bottom line--it didn't look good when you where on leave while still on active duty, and it definitely doesn't look good now. I will gladly take my shoes and belt off and allow them to keep theirs on--its the least I can do given the risk they take.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"...each passenger is allowed to take as many 3.4 ounce or less sized containers that will fit in one sealed clear quart-sized zip-top bag "

So the picture you have next to this travel tip shows five items in the magic zippy bag. That would be a maximum of 17 ounces based on the 100 ml limit each.

So tell us again how 17 ounces separated into five 100ml bottles is safe but one 16 ounce bottle of water is not.

And if the one 16 ounce bottle of water is so dangerous then why are they routinely tossed into a simple rubbish bin right next to the security line?

Really? you cant figuer this out on your own?
Let me help with the obvious...
Lets use a firecracker as an example. If you have 10 firecrackers, each one on its own his pretty harmless. However, if you take the powder out of the firecrackers and put the powder from 10 firecrackers into one larger firecracker, it becomes one single very dangerous firecracker. Wheeew, that was easy. Why doesnt TSA allow larger liquids into the checkpoint but throws them into a trash can? Again, Ill get the easy ones. The option is to allow any size liquid. We know they can be used to make explosives. The oprion is to allow them and test every single bottle of water that come through a checkpoint. They do not have the staff nor the time to check 18,000,000 bottle of water a day. Nor the budget. The best way to reduce that, ban liquids. They are smart enough to know that 99.9999999% of liquids that come through a checkpoint are safe. but iin order to catch the .0000001% that arent, they would have to test them all. Anything else I can help you with?

Submitted by Anonymous on
I'm sorry I can't help it

I don't have spell check...
Submitted by SSSS For Some Reason on

"... Anonymous said...
and start the rediculous complaints and whinning in 3...2..1..."

You know, you could just skip over them if they bother you so much. No one is forcing you to read the comments around here.

Unless......

It is your job to read the comments.

If that is the case, too bad for you, this is advertised as an open forum with only a few administrative rules and a comment policy that mostly gets followed.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Any comment on the TSA letting a "convicted felon and former member of a domestic terrorist group" ( convictions for murder and explosives offenses!) waltz through the Pre-check lane ??

The kicker: "A security officer at the airport recognized the felon and alerted his supervisor, but was told to "take no action" and allow the passenger through..."

Another 'Good job', TSA!

Submitted by Anonymous on

The firecracker analogy doesn't explain why you can't have one large bottle of liquid while several small bottles are safe. It's the same concept. One large firecracker can contain as much explosive as several small ones. The several small ones can be combined so they have the same explosive material as the larger one.

The same thing goes for liquids. One large bottle of liquid can fit inside a quart bag. Several smaller bottles containing the same amount of liquids can also fit inside a quart bag. Either way, it is the same volume of liquid. Nothing is stopping people from combining liquids past security. Even multiple people could combine their liquids.

The TSA can test liquids. The testing has been written about in this blog. They wouldn't need to test every bottle. They would just need to test when there is suspicion and test random passengers. It would be just like when people randomly get swabbed for explosive residue.

Submitted by SSSS For Some Reason on

Anonymous said...
SSSS said, "And if the one 16 ounce bottle of water is so dangerous then why are they routinely tossed into a simple rubbish bin right next to the security line?"

and, "So tell us again how 17 ounces separated into five 100ml bottles is safe but one 16 ounce bottle of water is not."

Wow - you really this explained to you!?!

Yes. Yes I do need it explained.

How is five measures of 3.4 ounces safe , without any inspection of what is in the 3.4 ounce bottles, but one measure of 17 ounces is not safe enough to let through security but safe enough to just toss in a rubbish bin.

Explain please.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous at March 19, 2015 at 2:04 PM:

You compare being able to combine the powder of 10 "harmless" firecrackers into "one single very dangerous firecracker" as an analogy for why the TSA only allows small bottles of liquid.

But you missed the point. The TSA allows empty bottles (of any size) through the checkpoint, and bottles (of many sizes) are available at stores after you pass through the checkpoint (at marked-up prices. I wonder how much kickback the TSA gets for that?). So, it is extremely simple for an evul terrist to pour their evul liquid into 5 3oz bottles, then re-pour them into the empty 16oz bottle they waltzed through 'security' with.

To use your analogy, it's like the TSA allows you to carry 10 small firecrackers, and an empty shell of one big firecracker through the 'security' line.

AND, of course, nothing you said addresses the point that they KNOW these confiscated liquids are NOT dangerous, or they wouldn't just drop them in an ordinary trash can right next to them.

Submitted by SSSS For Some Reason on

Bold Posting Anonymous said "...Let me help with the obvious...
Lets use a firecracker as an example. If you have 10 firecrackers, each one on its own his pretty harmless. However, if you take the powder out of the firecrackers and put the powder from 10 firecrackers into one larger firecracker, it becomes one single very dangerous firecracker."

So you say the same thing I do but use firecrackers as your example. OK, fine, firecrackers it is....

How is one large firecracker dangerous, but putting the same amount of powder in smaller containers suddenly safe? It is a zippy bag, hardly a barrier to me reassembling the smaller containers into one larger one after I board the aircraft.

Lets go a step further and add in one of your other favorite claims.... multiple terrorists testing security.

If the goal is to prevent a binary liquid explosive you are doing it wrong. Horribly, dangerously, wrong.

Terrorist 1 takes Part A and pours it into five 100ml containers and puts those bottles into the magic zippy bag.

Terrorist 2 takes Part B and pours it into five 100ml containers and puts them into the magic zippy bag.

Once on board the aircraft, you now have a liter of binary explosive and two people willing to end their lives in deploying it.

But there is an even easier way to deploy this bomb.... first terrorist tossed their water bottle of Part A into the rubbish bin. A little while later a different terrorist, or even the same one, tossed their water bottle of part B in the rubbish bin. Sometime a bit later, the two parts have mixed in the bottom of the can and Blamo! No more security line.

No, your idea to prevent the .0000001% percent chance is outlandish at every level.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Lisa Simeone worries about theft - too funny; you were fired from Soundprint why?

No credibility here. Go away.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"I will gladly take my shoes and belt off and allow them to keep theirs on--its the least I can do given the risk they take."

Why are you glad to take off your shoes and belt at all, since neither has anything to do with security? No other country has TSA's shoe carnival, but we don't see shoe bombings on other countries. And TSA doesn't even pretend belts are dangerous - it's just that their slow, ineffective, and invasive naked body scanners can't handle belts. So TSA's decided that instead of improving the naked body scanners, they'll just add another ritual undressing to every passenger's screening. Pathetic.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
Lisa Simeone worries about theft - too funny; you were fired from Soundprint why?

No credibility here. Go away.

March 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM

.................
Seems Anon is making a personal attack against Lisa. Are you really implying that Lisa was fired for theft?

I suggest that unless you have proof you might want to consult a lawyer pretty soon.

Submitted by Lisa Simeone on
Anonymous said...
Lisa Simeone worries about theft - too funny; you were fired from Soundprint why?
No credibility here. Go away.
March 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM

Well, unlike Anonymous, I'm not afraid to write under my own name.

Yes, sweet pea, I was fired by Soundprint in October 2011, though not for theft, as any Google search will show you in about .002 seconds (Google is your friend, but only if you have a basic level of reading comprehension). I was fired for my involvement in the Occupy movement. Soundprint was a independently produced, nationally syndicated radio documentary program.

To head off more ignorance at the pass, I wasn't fired by NPR, though that bit of false information keeps getting repeated. I couldn't be fired by NPR because I wasn't an NPR employee and wasn't getting a dime from them. I still host the nationally syndicated World of Opera and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra series. And I still write for Style Magazine. And I still do freelance voiceover work. None of those employers have been bothered by my Big Scary Involvement in a social justice movement.

It's sweet of you to imply that I somehow stole from Soundprint, but it's false. I guess I have to take a screenshot of this comment, sigh, in case the mods decide not to allow it to post.
Submitted by Anonymous on

"rst terrorist tossed their water bottle of Part A into the rubbish bin. A little while later a different terrorist, or even the same one, tossed their water bottle of part B in the rubbish bin. Sometime a bit later, the two parts have mixed in the bottom of the can and Blamo! No more security line."

I don't blame you for not understanding binary explosives as you're not an explosives expert.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"No other country has TSA's shoe carnival"

Obviously you never properly researched foreign air security. Next.

Submitted by Anonymous on

 Anonymous said..

.Lisa Simeone worries about theft - too funny; you were fired from Soundprint why?
No credibility here. Go away.
March 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM

Slander, good job Anon.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Lisa Simeone worries about theft - too funny; you were fired from Soundprint why?

No credibility here. Go away.

March 22, 2015 at 5:04 PM

.................
Seems Anon is making a personal attack against Lisa. Are you
really implying that Lisa was fired for theft?

I suggest that unless you have proof you might want to consult a lawyer pretty soon.

Let me see if I got this right...Anon is complaining because Anon is making false claims. So Anon if threating legal action agianst Anon..
You cant make this stuff up.

Submitted by Leese on

When boarding in April I will have 3 or 4 bottles of Medications in Pill Form from a Liscensed Dr. With my name on the bottles in my Carry on ! Will this be a issue?

Submitted by Leese on

When boarding in April I will have three or four bottles of Medications in pill form from a licensed Doctor will this be an issue when carrying onto an airplane in my carry on

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Obviously you never properly researched foreign air security"

Care to name the countries that, like TSA, make every passenger remove their shoes for screening? I'll be waiting right here.

Submitted by Susan Richart on

" Anonymous said...

"No other country has TSA's shoe carnival"

Obviously you never properly researched foreign air security. Next.

March 23, 2015 at 5:56 PM"

Please provide us a list of those foreign airports that require removal of shoes.

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Submitted by Susan Richart on

" Anonymous said...

"rst terrorist tossed their water bottle of Part A into the rubbish bin. A little while later a different terrorist, or even the same one, tossed their water bottle of part B in the rubbish bin. Sometime a bit later, the two parts have mixed in the bottom of the can and Blamo! No more security line."

I don't blame you for not understanding binary explosives as you're not an explosives expert.

March 23, 2015 at 5:52 PM"

And you are? Please stop with the trolling.

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Submitted by Anonymous on

I still don't see this question answered. If the quart size bag limits the total volume of liquid, why does the individual container size matter?

If I have 21 oz of liquids, why does it matter if it is in one 21 oz bottle, three 7 oz bottles, or seven 3 oz bottles? As long as the bottle(s) fits in the quart bag, the same amount of liquid is being transported. The liquids could be combined later anyway.

Submitted by SSSS For Some Reason on

"... Anonymous said...
"rst terrorist tossed their water bottle of Part A into the rubbish bin. A little while later a different terrorist, or even the same one, tossed their water bottle of part B in the rubbish bin. Sometime a bit later, the two parts have mixed in the bottom of the can and Blamo! No more security line."

I don't blame you for not understanding binary explosives as you're not an explosives expert."

OK, Mr or Mrs Explosives Expert..... What part did I get wrong?

I can get seven 100ml bottles into a zippy bag without straining the bag. That would be 23 ounces of potential danger. Someone else could do the same and now we have 46 ounces of danger. Add a third conspirator, or a fourth, there is a lot of potential for danger here with just a few people.

So what part keeps us safe by rendering this plan useless?

The 100ml bottles?

Or the Zippy Bag?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Leese, you will have no trouble carrying that on.

Submitted by RB on

 Leese said...When boarding in April I will have 3 or 4 bottles of Medications in Pill Form from a Liscensed Dr. With my name on the bottles in my Carry on ! Will this be a issue?March 24, 2015 at 8:52 PM
......................................
If one of those meds is medical nitroglycerin you might have a problem.

The TSA tool "CAN I TAKE MY" does not give a positive answer to this question regardless of what the blog team may say and the blog team has refused to address this issue with their chain of command. The fact of the matter is that a poster here has had their medical nitro confiscated by TSA without cause or apology.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Shoe removal is mandatory for all US bound flights from any foreign departing airport.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Anonymous said...

Shoe removal is mandatory for all US bound flights from any foreign departing airport.

March 27, 2015 at 10:37 PM"

I didn't have to remove my shoes on my most recent flight to the US from overseas.

Submitted by Mike Toreno on

"Shoe removal is mandatory for all US bound flights from any foreign departing airport."

Never been out of the United States, have you? See, this is why nobody respects the TSA.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
Shoe removal is mandatory for all US bound flights from any foreign departing airport.

And yet it ISN'T mandatory for flights to any other part of the world.

TSA! Protecting you from the last threat for Eight Billion Dollars a year plus an additional $5.60 per leg of your flight.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Why are personal attacks being allowed through moderation when they are in violation of blog policy?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
To the anonymous complaining about having to take his shoes and belt off at the screening point while members of the armed services are still in harm's way--I answer from one of my favorite lines from the movie Stripes: "lighten up Francis." Those that you mentioned still have a chain of command monitoring them while you do not. Are you a retiree that has either full facial hair or a ponytail? Here's the bottom line--it didn't look good when you where on leave while still on active duty, and it definitely doesn't look good now. I will gladly take my shoes and belt off and allow them to keep theirs on--its the least I can do given the risk they take.

March 19, 2015 at 1:02 PM
----------------------------------
all this time and still you miss the point. the complaint is not about having to take off belt and shoes, it is the arbitrary criteria that TSA wrongly claims is "risk-based" to determine who must do so. the best answer, of course, is no one, since it contributes absolutely nothing to security. however, if some must do it, and TSA is claiming to use risk-based practices, they need to align those practices to actual risk profiles. new enlistees and academy cadets have little track record as to their risk level, but military retirees and those who subject to current DoD or LE background checks have little risk by the nature of those investigations. those that the TSA has magically decided to grant pre-check are therefore likely decided by PR and emotional criteria to appeal to folks like yourself who acknowledge the sacrifice the troops make, rather than the risk-based criteria that TSA claims. it is dishonest and a poor security practice to let PR and politics override properly conducted risk assessment.

Submitted by Anonymous on

It frightens me that you hold a security clearance (if in fact that's true).

Submitted by Anonymous on

Personal Experience with shoe removal

Japan to US
No shoe removal
(in a country that removes shoes to enter house)

Canada to US
Shoes removed

Thailand to US
No shoe removal

Singapore to US
No shoe removal

Submitted by Rreed87139 on

Don't throw your water bottle away. Just pour out what you didn't drink, and fill it up at the water fountain on the other side. You can take your empty plastic water bottle through security. Some airports even have bottle filling stations.

Pages