From One Bud to Another

I wrote this message on behalf of Mr. Rich.  I also wrote to the company that manufactured the contact lens solution. I thought I would be fair and allow a reasonable amount of time to receive a response from the TSA Ombudsman. As you can see, it was written on 2-6-2011. If by chance I do receive a response either before or after this posting, I will advise of the date received.

Reply |Accounts to me

show details Feb 6 (6 days ago)

Thank you for your inquiry to the Transportation Security Administration submitted on 2/6/2011 at 12:15 AM. We have forwarded your email to the appropriate group for response.

Name: safe traveler

Email:safetraveler@gmail.com

Brief Description of Inquiry: prescription liquid medications

Comments:

On your page titled “Travelers with Disabilities and Medical Conditions”, as well as the linked memo (http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/special_needs_memo.pdf) dated 9 -25-2006, you clearly state:

Additionally, we are continuing to permit prescription liquid medications and other liquids needed by persons with disabilities and medical conditions. This includes:

• All prescription and over-the-counter medications (liquids, gels, and aerosols) including petroleum jelly, eye drops, and saline solution for medical purposes;

It is also stated in this section that

However, if the liquid medications are in volumes larger than 3.4 ounces (100ml) each, they may not be placed in the quart-size bag and must be declared to the Transportation Security Officer. A declaration can be made verbally, in writing, or by a person's companion, caregiver, interpreter, or family member.

I believe it is reasonable to infer from these specifics that

a.)    Containers of contact lens solutions are allowed to brought aboard an airliner as “carry   on”.

b.)    Such containers that exceed 3 ounces are allowed as “carry on” but must be packaged separate from the “3-1-1 quart bags” and must be declared.

Is this correct? If an individual then finds that this policy is not adhered to at a particular airport, what remedies are offered? Is there any possibility of reimbursement? If this policy is not outdated, could you please address this on your TSA page? I believe accurate information reduces confusion at our airports.

As the TSA Ombudsman, I hope that you address this concern and respond accordingly.

I await your reply.

safetraveler@gmail.com




Help us keep the dignity. Offer some comments. Email any experiences you had simply because you chose to fly.

Seeing Clearly Now

Acting on behalf of Mr. Rich  "Following Directions" ,  it took less than 2 days to receive a response from the folks at Ciba Vision. They must have read the post about the basics of being an Ombudsman. I took the liberty of deleting the particular chemical compound from the letter. Not that it’s what might be considered dangerous or toxic; I just don't want to unknowingly upset the TSA. I  did correspond with the TSA Ombudsman around the same time. I would love to receive a reply but, like our first traveler Mr. Rich, I wouldn't hold my breath.



Hello,

Thank you for contacting CIBA VISION regarding our solutions in reference to current air travel carry-on restrictions.  We are always pleased to be made aware of our consumers' interests and appreciate the opportunity to be of assistance.

Clear Care® contains  (  deleted  )  which is on the list of TSA banned solutions; however, contact lens solutions are exempt and should be allowed for carry on.  Although our Clear Care travel size is TSA compliant, it is at the discretion of the individual TSA agent to allow the product to pass.  Unfortunately, some airports and agents are more strict than others, and will not allow the solution to be carried on the plane.

Again, we appreciate your taking the time to contact us and your support of CIBA VISION.
Regards,

Jennifer COA, NCLC-AC
Senior Product Consultant
CIBA Vision Corporation
North American Division



I am certain that had the TSA responded accordingly, Mr. Rich may have been disappointed about the loss of the lens solution, but he certainly would have understood the rationale behind it. Apparently Jennifer has been led to believe that each airport interprets or follows the TSA policy and procedure a little differently.

This worries me. Policies and procedures typically provide litigated reasoning to ensure proper behavior and protocol by an organization and its employees. Can you imagine the chaos if each police department was allowed to create or interpret its own state statutes?  Yes, someone probably would create a law entitled "enhanced".

As long as they can allow us to maintain our dignity, I guess it wouldn't be so bad.






(Jennifer, If you are reading this .... Thank you!)

Paging Miss Nomer

In criminal law, the phrase ‘pat down’ originated from a case called Terry v. Ohio. The litigation not only created a new word but defined allowable behavior of a police officer.


No, the new word is not enhanced.


It is simply a pat down or frisk. Most of us have seen it. A police officer briefly stops a suspect. If the Officer believes the suspect might be armed and poses a risk of danger to anyone, including the officer, the officer is allowed to conduct a limited search for weapons. This is sometimes referred to as a frisk. It is not designed to discover evidence but to quickly ascertain whether the suspect is carrying a weapon.

We have all seen the cop standing a suspect up against a wall. It’s a pat down or a frisk or a terry stop.  It’s not enhanced or special or improved. Just a pat down. I admit that even with police officers, some are better than others in the art of performing the pat down or frisk. It’s a very quick patting or light slapping (without the hurt) of the hands against the suspects body. Just enough to feel an object like a gun or knife. Not to the point of knowing what they had for dinner.

So what are we really doing at the airport? Do we really want to know?

Many years ago when I was no longer termed a “rookie”, I was involved in the undercover narcotics operations. Some things I wish I could forget. But the education aspect still sticks to me. If you are going to testify in court, make sure you followed the law. Is it really worth it to stick your hands down suspect’s pants to find a nickel bag? I say not. Because If you go ahead and remove or even just rearrange some clothing on a person which likely will permit a visual inspection of a person’s private areas or undergarments, you have just performed a strip search. Toward the end of my law enforcement career, I was the official who had to approve these. I can say with pride that at least we took the fourth amendment very seriously.

Just remember what courts of law have said about strip searches:

“They represent a significant invasion of privacy and are often a humiliating, degrading and traumatic experience for individuals subject to them. Clearly, the negative effects of a strip search can be minimized by the way in which they are carried out, but even the most sensitively conducted strip search is highly intrusive."

So what are the TSA officers actually doing to us? (Don’t you dare say enhanced.) 

Administrative Search. Nothing else and nothing new.