Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

Washington - TSA Advising Travelers To Book Airline Tickets Using Full Real Names

Published on:   June 8, 2009 03:33 PM
Change text size Text Size  
Bookmark and Share
A customs officer examining passports at Miami International Airport. A customs officer examining passports at Miami International Airport.

Washington - The Transportation Security Administration is getting ready to take over responsibility from the airlines for checking passengers’ names against terrorist watch lists, and is advising travelers to start booking airline tickets using their full name as it appears on their driver’s license or passport.

Later this summer, the agency will also begin requiring airlines to ask passengers for their birth date and gender during the ticketing process, information the carriers will then transfer to the T.S.A. The goal is to help make the watch list matching process more accurate.

But it turns out that what’s in a name is more complicated than many reservation systems are currently prepared to handle. So the airlines are telling passengers not to worry if there is no place to enter a middle name when purchasing a ticket, or no field for a date of birth.

Advertisement:

“I think the most important thing for passengers to know is that when their airline is ready to ask for that information, they’ll ask for it,” said Tim Wagner, a spokesman for American Airlines — advice that was echoed by other carriers.

While the T.S.A. has announced Aug. 15 as a target date for the airlines to begin asking for each passenger’s full name, gender and date of birth, and has already begun publicizing the program, called Secure Flight, the agency acknowledged that it would go into effect in phases as the airlines update their systems.

“What we’re trying to do is make the public aware that these changes are coming,” said Paul Leyh, the agency’s director for Secure Flight. “If your name is Jonathan Smith and you travel as John Smith and your license says Johnny Smith — get all those things aligned.”

The government’s aim is to streamline the process of checking travelers’ names against its watch lists — a task currently handled separately by each airline — and to collect more detailed information so passengers with names similar to those on the watch list are less likely to be mistakenly detained.

Asking for a birth date, for instance, decreases the likelihood that a child with a name close to one on the list would be subject to an additional search — one example of a false match that has led to complaints.

As part of the Secure Flight program, travelers who have gotten caught up in some type of name problem and go through the process to get their identity cleared will be assigned a “redress number” that they can then enter when booking a flight.

This number, along with the other passenger information, will be sent to the T.S.A., which will check it against terrorist watch lists and tell the airline whether the traveler is cleared to get a boarding pass, should be subject to an additional search or is not allowed to fly.

“Secure Flight is going to allow us to clear over 99 percent of passengers,” Mr. Leyh said.

For travelers who are cleared, the T.S.A. will keep passenger information on file for seven days. For those who are a potential match, it will be kept for seven years and for confirmed matches, it will be stored for 99 years.

Concerns about data storage and privacy were among the issues that held up the transfer of name-matching duties from the airlines to the government, which was mandated by Congress in 2004.

While many of those objections have been addressed by narrowing the scope of the information collected, there are still concerns about the quality of the watch list data.

“To be precise, we support the fact that the government is now trying to make its matches more accurate,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which has been advocating for stronger privacy protections since Secure Flight’s inception.

“The problem with Secure Flight is that there’s still not adequate transparency or redress for people who are placed on the list,” Mr. Rotenberg said. “As we know from the latest report from the inspector general, the list is riddled with errors.”

The change will probably also create frustrations for people who go by different names and have to standardize the name listed on their passport, driver’s license and possibly frequent-flier accounts.

“I’ve got Francis on my passport but I’ve always gone by Frank — my state I.D. and all of my frequent-flier accounts are Frank,” said Frank Ritchotte, who handles logistics for an audio and visual equipment manufacturer and flies about 150,000 miles a year.

“Now I have to go back and change everything to Francis, which is going to be a pain,” he said.

Complicating matters, he said, “I’m a ‘Jr.’ as well. None of my documentation says ‘Jr.’ except my passport.”

Mr. Ritchotte said he heard about the coming change through his company’s travel department, but felt the information released by the T.S.A. so far had been confusing.

“There hasn’t been a clear message about what you have to do and exactly when you have to do it,” he said. “It’s another thing that’s a hassle.”

Among the concerns raised by fliers are names with hyphens, foreign characters, spaces or just initials and people who have two middle names or have not fully adopted a married name.

“Nicknames are going to be one of the bigger issues,” conceded Paul Flanigan, a spokesman for Southwest, which aims to start collecting the Secure Flight data in October.

Currently, many airlines do not offer a place to supply a middle name when booking online, but for now, the message seems to be: If we don’t ask for it, you don’t have to tell us.

“We’re telling customers, do business with us as you’ve always done,” said Kent Landers, a Delta spokesman. “When the systems are ready to accept the data, we’ll advise passengers.”
Sign in to Recommend Next Article in Business (1 of 40) »


More of today's headlines

Washington - Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has temporarily delayed Chrysler's sale to Fiat. Ginsburg says in an order Monday that the sale is "stayed... Albany, NY - Governor Paterson has begun attacking for mer Gov. Mario Cuomo in private because of an "obsessive fear" of a primary challenge by his son, Attorney General...

 

Total10

Read Comments (10)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Jun 08, 2009 at 03:05 PM married name Says:

good advice for any married woman- be consistent with all your documents. i got my driver's license 8 months after marrying, and put it in my married name, but then i was too lazy to change my passport until a year and a half, and there were just various other documents with different names, and it caused a lot of headaches. whether you keep your maiden name on legal documents, or change to your married name, always make sure to be consistent and have just one name on all documents.

2

 Jun 08, 2009 at 04:50 PM rebbetzin hockstein Says:

Reply to #1  
married name Says:

good advice for any married woman- be consistent with all your documents. i got my driver's license 8 months after marrying, and put it in my married name, but then i was too lazy to change my passport until a year and a half, and there were just various other documents with different names, and it caused a lot of headaches. whether you keep your maiden name on legal documents, or change to your married name, always make sure to be consistent and have just one name on all documents.

I agree with #1, above. Best thing to do is what I did almost 30 years ago. I kept my first name, added my maiden name as a middle name, and then added my married name. All my legal documents now read: Shprintza Kuchleffel Hockstein. I dropped the "Zelda" which is my real middle name for legal purposes, but this keeps everything nice and neat, and there is no legal question, everyone knows that Shprintza Kuchleffel and Shprintza Hockstein are one and the same! Of course, my kesubah reads Shprintza Zelda and when my husband made misheberach after childbirth, etc. he gives my name as Shprintza Zelda since that's my name, too. Good advice for all married women, I wholeheartedly agree.

3

 Jun 08, 2009 at 05:03 PM Anonymous Says:

Please someone explain to me why the government maintains a "do not fly" list which prohibits people, who haven't been convicted of any crime, from flying?

And if the Feds believe these people are a risk, then why aren't they charged with something or another? As it is they're treated as guilty and have their lives turned upside down, for no good reason whatsoever. And this paranoia costs all of us time, effort, hassle, and our liberties.

(While we're at it, what exactly are they scared someone on the "do not fly" list might do on board a plane anyway?)

4

 Jun 08, 2009 at 05:45 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #3  
Anonymous Says:

Please someone explain to me why the government maintains a "do not fly" list which prohibits people, who haven't been convicted of any crime, from flying?

And if the Feds believe these people are a risk, then why aren't they charged with something or another? As it is they're treated as guilty and have their lives turned upside down, for no good reason whatsoever. And this paranoia costs all of us time, effort, hassle, and our liberties.

(While we're at it, what exactly are they scared someone on the "do not fly" list might do on board a plane anyway?)

Don't be more of an idiot than your defective genes absolutely compel you to be. Do you really think that the standard of evidence required for keeping someone off a plane should be the same as that required for a criminal conviction? Do you think everybody has the right to be allowed to board an airliner unless they can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, using only legally admissible evidence, to have committed a crime?

5

 Jun 08, 2009 at 07:42 PM Totosha Says:

Come on, the state - which is notoriously prone to screwups in the area of maintenance of digital records, and which is known to harass those it doesn't like using all kinds of irrelevant "lists" such as this one - should be required to at least explain to the person why is it exactly that he's not allowed to board a flight and what exactly can he do to either get off the list permanently, or be charged with some sort of a crime and fight it out at trial. I don't think there exists a category of people who can't be indicted or charged with anything and yet are likely to blow up a plane mid-air.

6

 Jun 08, 2009 at 08:01 PM AH Says:

Reply to #5  
Totosha Says:

Come on, the state - which is notoriously prone to screwups in the area of maintenance of digital records, and which is known to harass those it doesn't like using all kinds of irrelevant "lists" such as this one - should be required to at least explain to the person why is it exactly that he's not allowed to board a flight and what exactly can he do to either get off the list permanently, or be charged with some sort of a crime and fight it out at trial. I don't think there exists a category of people who can't be indicted or charged with anything and yet are likely to blow up a plane mid-air.

Then pray tell, what might the Sept. 11 hijackers have been indicted or charged with before they committed their terrorist acts? Same thing with the "shoe bomber"?

7

 Jun 08, 2009 at 08:34 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #5  
Totosha Says:

Come on, the state - which is notoriously prone to screwups in the area of maintenance of digital records, and which is known to harass those it doesn't like using all kinds of irrelevant "lists" such as this one - should be required to at least explain to the person why is it exactly that he's not allowed to board a flight and what exactly can he do to either get off the list permanently, or be charged with some sort of a crime and fight it out at trial. I don't think there exists a category of people who can't be indicted or charged with anything and yet are likely to blow up a plane mid-air.

If you really didn't think such a category exists then you'd be incapable of thinking at all, or of having written that comment. The fact that you're able to write coherent and correctly spelled English sentences (unlike half the commenters here) gives the lie to that. Therefore you know very well that such a category does and must exist, and your claim otherwise is disingenuous.

8

 Jun 08, 2009 at 09:02 PM Aron Says:

Reply to #4  
Milhouse Says:

Don't be more of an idiot than your defective genes absolutely compel you to be. Do you really think that the standard of evidence required for keeping someone off a plane should be the same as that required for a criminal conviction? Do you think everybody has the right to be allowed to board an airliner unless they can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, using only legally admissible evidence, to have committed a crime?

Mr. Milhouse, why do you feel compelled to insult others and belittle their comments? Do you not have confidence in your own intellect and the veracity of your comments?

9

 Jun 08, 2009 at 11:07 PM Milhouse Says:

Reply to #8  
Aron Says:

Mr. Milhouse, why do you feel compelled to insult others and belittle their comments? Do you not have confidence in your own intellect and the veracity of your comments?

Compelled? I'm not compelled to do anything. If people don't want to be insulted they shouldn't make such moronic comments. I don't insult comments that don't positively invite insults. You can't tell me the comments I attacked in this thread are sensible.

I have every confidence in my own comments, and my confidence is well-placed, because not a single one of them has been refuted.

10

 Jun 09, 2009 at 07:11 AM Aron Says:

Reply to #9  
Milhouse Says:

Compelled? I'm not compelled to do anything. If people don't want to be insulted they shouldn't make such moronic comments. I don't insult comments that don't positively invite insults. You can't tell me the comments I attacked in this thread are sensible.

I have every confidence in my own comments, and my confidence is well-placed, because not a single one of them has been refuted.

I just reread the comments of post #3 (who you not only called an "idiot", but you claim to have intimate knowledge that his/her "idiocy" is to be blamed on his/her "defective genes").
Commenter #3 actually didn't make a direct comment. He/she asked politely for someone to explain a few questions he/she had. Those questions were at best legitimate; at worst, sophomoric. Moronic? I don't think so.
I believe you owe commenter #3 (& many others) an apology.
Personally, I don't think your ego would allow that to happen. It would probably "compel" you to insult me and/or my comment (or ignore it altogether if you can't civilly defend yourself).

11

Sign-in to post a comment

Scroll Up
Advertisements:

Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!