Questions for GAO Interviews on U.S.

Embassy
Non-Immigrant Visas (NIV) Policies and Procedures (as of 4/17/02)

: Name: Kenneth Durkin

09-
Date: April 19, 2002 Post: Casablanca

1) Has your post made any of the following changes to the NIV application and approval process
since September 11, 2001? (Check all that apply)

. Yes No N/A
a. Strengthened anti-fraud programs * ' v X
b. Instituted new or changed existing standards on how closely an X
applicant's name and date of birth most match the name and date
of birth returned by CLASS (before consular officers subiaifc^ii «
requests for a Security Advisory Opinion) ,
c. Reduced the availability of personal appearance waiver X
programs . / .'-..
d. Increased the percentage of MV applicants who are X
interviewed - :
e. Other (please specify)

f. Other (please specify)

Please provide additional comments, if any.

Post interviews virtually all applicants which is a problem for us. One of my priorities as a
consular manager is to introduce some personal appearance waiver programs.
2) About what percent of NIV applicants were interviewed at your post (a) in the 12 months
prior to September 11, 2001, and (b) since September 11, 2001?

a. 12 months prior to September 11,2001

b. Since September 11, 2001

Please provide additional comments, if any.

See answer number to number 1.

3) In your opinion, to what extent, if any, do the following security procedures and requirements
help your post's consular officers identify potential terrorists?
(Please check one box in each row.)

Great extent Some extent No extent Not sure No basis to judge

a) Security Advisory X
Opinion for selected
individuals from States
Sponsoring International
Terrorism (see State
109933)
b) Visas Viper Committees X
c) CLASS name check s X

d) The 20-day waiting X

period for selected
applicants (see State
196355)
e) Requirement that X
applicants provide
information on the DS-157
form
f) The Visas Condor X
process (see State 015702)

Please provide additional comments, if any.

We have yet to uncover a "potential terrorist" from any of the new procedures implemented
after Sept. 11.
4) For your post, to what extent, if any, would the following proposed changes to the NIV
application process help identify potential terrorists? (Please check one box in each row.)

Veiy,i Some-what Not ••« "«t

helpful helpiul helpftil Not SOK'-J-
a. Interview a greater percentage of all applicants X
(If you check very or somewhat helpful, please ^ :
indicate the percentage %)
b. Interview all applicants X
c. Fingerprint a percentage of all applicants (If you
check very or somewhat helpful, please indicate the
percentage %)
d. Fingerprint all applicants
e. Improve training for consular officers io identifying ;
suspected terrorists, cooperating with other agencies/ VV
international organizations, and cultural sensitivity i
g. Make the visa process a law enforcement
function (If you check yes, please elaborate in the >
coms^^sec^ca':onhowth^'^fM€t^e;^^ :"f\ ,.\ e.g., should the function remain
within State or be moved to another agency)
h. Other (please specify) . ,^«
L Other (please specify) :.

Please provide additional comments, if any.

5) How feasible would it be for your post to implement the following proposed changes to the
NIV process? (Please check one box in each row.)

Very Some- Not ' ,'t Not }

feasible what feasible feasible sure - <

a. Interview a greater percentage of all applicants (If X

you check very or somewhat helpful, please indicate
the percentage 96)
b. Interview all applicants
c. Fingerprint a percentage of all applicants (If you X
check very or somewhat helpful, please Indicate the
percentage %) . , "?
d. Fingerprint all applicants f; ^ X
e. Improve training for consular officers in identifying X
suspected terrorists, cooperating with other agencies/
international organizations, and cultural sensitivity
f. Make the visa process a law enforcement funetion X
g. Institute a secure travel document that incorporates a X
biometric such as fingerprints " , j* ? *
h. Other (please specify) 4;
i. Other (please specify)

Please provide additional comments, if any.

We currently interview almost all applicants which we are trying to move away from.
Fingerprinting applicants is labor intensive and will result in longer lines and further delays in
visa issuance. And then there is the question of what purpose do the prints serve? Are we to
send them to FBI for comparision, or or you talking about incorporating it at post in a biometric
visa. If it's the latter, Department should prepare posts with necessary hardware, additional
staffing positions, and adequate space to implement the procedure. We are already working in
cramped quarters and despite OIG recommendations for more space and improved layout, we are
not likely to see any physical improvements for three or four years.

6) Would any of the following factors make it difficult for your post to fully implement the
proposed changes listed in questions 4 and 5? (Please check one box in each row.)

Yes, to a great extent Yes, to some extent No Not sure

a. Consular staffing shortages X
b. Lack of space, facilities X
c. An adverse effect on U.S. interests X
in the host country (please elaborate
in comments section)
d. Host country would require same X
of U.S. citizens (reciprocity)
e. Other (please specify)

Please provide additional comments, if any.