T5 B65 Gao Visa Docs 6 Of 6 Fdr- May 97 Dos Cable Re Visa Lookout Accountability Procedures

POL 4 1501481 MAY 97

FM SECSTATE WASUDC TO ALI DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS AMEMBASSY SARAJEVO

VISAS INFORM CONSULS E.0.1238$: NIA TAGS: CVIS, CMGT, AADP, ASEC, PTER SUBJECT- VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY PROCEDURES REF: (A) 96 STATE 163725, (B) 96 STATE 89433 (C) 96 STATE 69153 (D) 96 STATE 256744 (NOTAL) E) STATE 39224 1. THIS MESSAGE RESTATES GUIDANCE PROVIDED IN REFTELS WHICH WERE SENT TO

ALL POSTS IN 1996 TO EXPLAIN VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY (VLA) PROCEDURES. VLA IS A PERMANENT, ON-GOING REQUIREMENT WITH WHICH ALL VISA ISSUING

OFFICERS MUST COMPLY. ALL SUPERVISORS OF VISA ISSUING OFFICERS ARE REQUESTED TO REVIEW THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES AND DISCUSS THEM WITH ALL VISA ISSUING OFFICERS. POSTS SHOULD REPORT THEIR COMPLIANCE WITH VLA PROCEDURES TO CA/VO/F/P WITHIN 45 DAYS OR RECEIPT OF THIS MESSAGE. WHILE COMPLIANCE WITH VLA PROCEDURES IS ESSENTIAL, VO NOTES THAT NO LEVEL OF PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS OR RECORD-KEEPING WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF THE OFFICER WHO IGNORES A "HIT" AND ISSUES A'VISA. OFFICERS MUST PROPERLY RESOLVE VALID HITS BEFORE VISA ISSUANCE. END SUMMARY. 2. SECTION 140(C) OF P.L. 103-236 (FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FY-94 AND 95, AS AMENDED) WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE APRIL 30,1996 STATES THE FOLLOWING: QUOTE (C) PROCESSING OF VISAS FOR ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES. (1XA) WHENEVER A UNITED STATES CONSULAR OFFICER ISSUES A VISA FOR ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES, THAT OFFICIAL SHALL CERTIFY, IN WRITING, THAT A CHECK OF THE AUTOMATED VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM OR ANY OTHER SYSTEM OR LIST WHICH MAINTAINS INFORMATION ABOUT THE EXCLUDABILITY OF ALIENS UNDER THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT HAS BEEN MADE AND THAT THERE IS NO BASIS UNDER SUCH SYSTEM FOR THE EXCLUSION OF SUCH ALIEN.

- (B) IF, AT THE TIME AN ALIEN APPLIES FOR AN IMMIGRANT OR NONIMMIGRANT VISA, THE ALIEN'S NAME IS INCLUDED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE'S VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM AND THE CONSULAR OFFICER TO WHOM THE APPLICATION IS MADE FAILS TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES IN PROCESSING THE APPLICATION REQUIRED BY THE INCLUSION OF THE ALIEN'S NAME IN SUCH SYSTEM, THE CONSULAR OFFICER'S FAILURE SHALL BE MADE A MATTER OF RECORD AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS A SERIOUS NEGATIVE FACTOR IN THE OFFICER'S ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION. (2) IF AN ALIEN TO WHOM A VISA WAS ISSUED AS A RESULT OF A FAILURE DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH (1XB) IS ADMITTED TO THE UNITED STATES AND THERE IS THEREAFTER PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE ALIEN WAS A PARTICIPANT IN A TERRORIST ACT CAUSING SERIOUS INJURY, LOSS OF LIFE OR SIGNIFICANT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY IN THE UNITED STATES, THE SECRETARY OF STATE SHALL CONVENE AN ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEW BOARD UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF TITLE III OF THE OMNIBUS DIPLOMATIC SECURITY AND ANTITERROR1SM ACT OF 1986 UNQUOTE. 2. MEETING VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY (VLA) REQUIREMENT:

,- 130

' / l ^ ( t> J)

GENERAL RULE, POSTS SHOULD NOT ENTER 212(A)(6)(C)S INTO CLASS ABSENT AN ACTUAL ADJUDICATION. POSTS CAN ONLY MAKE INELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF. APPLICATIONS OR REVOCATIONS. POSTS SHOULD ONCE THE ALIEN HAS ENTERED THE U.S., HE IS JURISDICTION OF THE INS. AT THAT POINT, A2**A)(6)(C) FINDING WILL BE UNLIKELY TO HAVE ANY PJKCTICAL EFFECT ON THE ALIEN AND WILL RARELY BE WORTH/HE POST AND DEPARTMENT RESOURCES REQUIRED^OR SUCH A FINDING. POST SHOULD RESERVE ACTION FOR OMIW THOSE CASES IN WHICH THE ALIEN IS LIKELY TO LEAVE THEIRS?AND ATTEMPT TO REUSE THE VISA OR REAPPLY FOR>rtEW VISA. 13. THE DEPARTMENT BKCOURAGES OFFICERS TO USE 214(B) TO ITS FULL POTENTIALS AN EFFECTIVE AND EXPEDIENT GROUNDS OF REFUSAL AND^NTI-FRAUD TOOL RESERVE 212(A)(6)(C) DETERMINATIONS FOR ONLY THOSE CASES THAT MEET THE CRITERIA q/§ FAM 40.63, WHICH ARE ALSO DESCRIBED IN REFTEL. ALBRIGb BT

NNNN

o 129

UNDER SECTION 140(C) WHENEVER A CONSULAR OFFICER ISSUES A VISA, S/HE MUST CERTIFY IN WRITING THAT A CHECK OF LOOKOUTS HAS BEEN MADE AND THERE IS NO BASIS FOR EXCLUSION. THIS CABLE EXPLAINS VLA PROCEDURES AND THE PROVISION FOR RETENTION OF CLASS RECORDS AND VLA CERTIFICATIONS VIA PAPER FILES AND/OR ARCHIVED MRV AND IVACS RECORDS. 4. WHO IS THE ISSUER? SECTION 140(C) SPEAKS IN TERMS OF THE CONSULAR OFFICER WHO "ISSUES" A VISA. FOR THE PURPOSES OF VLA, THE OFFICER WHO CHECKS THE LOOKOUTS AND AUTHORIZES THE PRINTING OF THE VISA IS THE "ISSUING" OFFICER. THE OFFICER WHO EXAMINES THE APPLICATION AND MAKES THE PRELIMINARY DECISION TO ISSUE OR DENY A VISA IS THE "ADJUDICATING " OFFICER. AT MANY POSTS, THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER MAY NOT BE THE SAME PERSON AS THE ISSUING OFFICER, IN THE FEW INSTANCES WHEN ' BURROUGHS VISAS ARE ISSUED UNDER EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERS THE BURROUGHS ADJUDICATING OFFICER (WHO ALSO AUTHORIZES PRINTING) TO BE THE "ISSUING " OFFICER UNDER SECTION 140(C), AND THEREFORE THE PERSON WHO SHOULD MAKE THE 140(C) CERTIFICATION. PLEASE NOTE THAT AMERICAN PIT EMPLOYEES AND AFMS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN DESIGNATED CONSULAR OFFICERS FOR VISA PURPOSES (COVP) ARE NOT/NOT CONSIDERED ISSUING OFFICERS AND CANNOT MAKE THE 149(C) CERTIFICATION. UNDER CERTAIN LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES (SEE PARA 6) AMERICAN CLERICAL PITS OR AFMS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN DESIGNATED AS COVPS MAY BE PERMITTED TO AUTHORIZE PRINTING OF VISAS AFTER CHECKING THE SYSTEM AND ASCERTAINING THAT THERE ARE NO CAT 1 HITS. A COMMISSIONED CONSULAR OFFICER OR COVP (BOTH NECESSARILY AMERICAN CITIZENS) MUST RETAIN RESPONSIBILITY FOR VISA ISSUANCE IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, HOWEVER, AND MAKE THE REQUIRED CERTIFICATION. THIS IS BECAUSE COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 140(C) REQUIRES THAT THE CERTIFICATION BE DONE BY THE "CONSULAR OFFICER" WHO "ISSUES" THE VISAS. THE TERM "CONSULAR OFFICER" INDICATES THAT THE CERTIFICATION MUST BE DONE ONLY BY PERSONS FULLY EMPOWERED TO ADJUDICATE AND ISSUE VISAS. 5. VLA PROCEDURES: (A) THE DEPARTMENT UNDERSTANDS SEC. 140(C) TO MANDATE A CHECK OF THE DEPARTMENTS VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM (CLASS OR DNC) BEFORE A VISA CAN E ISSUED. THE CLASS/DNC SYSTEM ALSO INCLUDES LOOKOUTS PROVIDED BY OTHER AGENCIES TO WHICH OFFICERS MUST GIVE THE SAME CONSIDERATION AS DEPARTMENT-ORIGINATED CLASS I HITS. THE PROCESS DESCRIBED BELOW FOCUSES ON SERIOUS, CATEGORY I ("CAT I") INADMISSIBILITIES. WHILE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE SEC. 140(C) REQUIREMENT TO CERTIFY THAT THERE IS "NO BASIS" UNDER THE LOOKOUT SYSTEM FOR THE EXCLUSION OF THE ALIEN ARE AMBIGUOUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS REQUIRES CHECKING AND RESOLVING ALL CAI HITS BEFORE THE CERTIFICATION IS MADE AND A VISA CAN BE ISSUED. THUS, THE MRV AND IVACS SYSTEMS ARE BEING PROGRAMMED TO ENSURE THAT NO VISA CAN BE PRINTED UNTIL AN OFFICER HAS CHECKED THE CAT I HITS, AND DOCUMENTS THE REASON A VISA WILL BE ISSUED (WAIVER, SAO RESPONSE, NOT SAME PERSON, ETC.) • WHETHER THE STATUTE REACHES CAT II HITS IS LESS CLEAR; WHILE A CAT II HIT MAY PROVIDE AN OFFICER WITH INFORMATION THAT COULD LEAD TO A FINDING OF INADMISSIBILITY, CAT II HITS REFLECT PRIOR DECISIONS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELEVANT OR BINDING ON THE OFFICER HANDLING THE NEW APPLICATION. THUS, THEY DO NOT ON THEIR OWN, WITHOUT FURTHER INQUIRY, PROVIDE A BASIS FOR REFUSAL. MOREOVER, CAT II HITS DO NOT INDICATE THE KINDS OF SECURITY-RELATED BASES FOR

131

REFUSAL THAT WERE THE FOCUS OF CONGRESSIONAL CONCERN IN ENACTING SEC. 140(C). MRV AND IVACS THEREFORE HAVE NOT BEEN PROGRAMMED TO REQUIRE THAT AN OFFICER CHECK ALL CAT II HITS BEFORE A VISA MAY BE PRINTED, AND ISSUING OFFICERS ARE PERMITTED TO CERTIFY THAT THERE IS "NO BASIS UNDER (THE LOOKOUT SYSTEM) FOR THE EXCLUSION OF THE APPLICANT WITHOUT DOCUMENTING THE REASON FOR ISSUANCE IN THE SYSTEM FOR EVERY CAT II HIT. HOWEVER, ALL CAT II HITS SHOULD BE REVIEWED AND RESOLVED BEFORE ISSUANCE. THUS THE ISSUING OFFICER SHOULD NOT AUTHORIZE ANY CASE FOR PRINTING UNLESS S/HE IS IN A POSITION TO CONFIRM THAT THE LOOKOUT SYSTEM WAS N FACT CHECKED AND THAT ALL CAT I AND CAT II HITS WERE DEALT WITH APPROPRIATELY. (B) IN GENERAL, COMPLIANCE WITH THE VLA REQUIREMENT IS BEING IMPLEMENTED BY ADDING A VLA MODULE TO CURRENT MRV AND IVACS SOFTWARE. THE REVISED SOFTWARE REQUIRES AN OFFICER, "WHEN CHECKING A CSE'S LOOKOUTS, TO VIEW ANY CAT I HITS BEFORE BEING ALLOWED TO AUTHORIZE THE VISA FOR PRINTING. THE OFFICER WILL HAVE TO RESPOND TO AN ON-SCREEN PROMPT WITH A REASON FOR OVERCOMING THE CAT I HIT. AS IN THE PAST, THE ACT OF AUTHORIZING THE VISA FOR PRINTING SIGNIFIES THE OFFICER'S DETERMINATION THAT NO RELEVANT HITS WERE FOUND. THIS RECORD ALONG WITH THE NAME OF THE OFFICER WHO AUTHORIZED THE VISA FOR PRINTING WILL BE RETAINED IN THE MRV CASE HISTORY FILE AND CONSTITUTE THE WRITTEN CERTIFICATION FOR VLA PURPOSES. ALL ISSUING OFFICERS AT POST SHOULD BE APPRISED THAT THEY WILL E CONSIDERED TO HAVE MADE THE SEC. 140c) CERTIFICATION WHEN THEY AUTHORIZE MRV OR IVACS PRINTING. (THIS WILL ALSO BE INCORPORATED INTO FSI'S CONSULAR TRAINING AND INTO 9 FAM PART II.) REFUSALS ARE NOT AFFECTED BY VLA. PROCEDURE: (C) PROCEDURES USED AT EACH POST TO DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE WILL DEPEND ON WHAT VERSION OF NTV AND IV SOFTWARE POST IS USING. THE FOLLOWING EXPLAINS BRIEFLY WHAT EACH OF THE CURRENT VERSIONS OF NIV AND IV SYSTEMS DOES TO DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE WITH VLA REQUIREMENTS, AND WHAT INTERIM MEASURES POSTS THAT HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED VLA MODULES WILL NEED TO TAKE. (D) NONIMMIGRANT VISAS: THE FULL VLA MODULE WORKS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: BEFORE A VISA CAN BE AUTHORIZED FOR PRINTING, AN OFFICER MUST: (1) VIEW EACH SCREEN SHOWING ANY CAT I HITS, AND (2) CHOOSE ONE OR MORE COMMENTS FROM A LIST OF STANDARDIZED COMMENTS TO EXPLAIN WHY THE VISA IS BEING ISSUED DESPITE THE HIT (S). THE SYSTEM THEN STORES A RECORD OF THE CAT I HITS, THE NAME OF THE OFFICER AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND THE OFFICER'S COMMENTS. THE ENTIRE RECORD IS ARCHIVED BY POST AND WILL BE RETAINED FOR A MINIMUM OF 11 YEARS. THE VERSIONS OF NIV PROCESSING CAN BE GROUPED AS SHOWN BELOW: (1) VS MRV POSTS: ALL VS POSTS RECEIVED THE FULL VLA MODULE IN APRIL 1996. (2) MODERNIZED MRV: THE MODERNIZED NIV AND IV PROCESSING SYSTEMS WERE DESIGNED FROM THE START WITH VLA CONSIDERATIONS IN MIND. COMPLETE TRAINING AND DOCUMENTATION WILL BE PROVIDED TO CONSULAR OFFICERS AT POST AS THESE APPLICATIONS ARE INSTALLED WORLDWIDE OVER THE NEXT TWO-AND-A HALF YEARS.

132

(3) PC-LAN: THE VLA MODULE HAS NOT YET BEEN INSTALLED IN THE PC-LAN VERSIONS OF THE MRV. REVISED SOFTWARE WITH A FULL VLA FEATURE AS DESCRIBED ABOVE IS EXPECTED TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO PC-LAN POSTS BEGINNING IN JULY 1997. PC-LAN POSTS SHOULD FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS IN (5) BELOW. (4) BACK-UP VISA ISSUANCE PROCEDURES: THE DEPARTMENT IS NOW REVIEWING PROCEDURES FOR EMERGENCY PROCEDURES AND BACK-UP VISA ISSUANCE. ANY TIME BURROUGHS OR OTHER BACK-UP VISA ISSUANCE PROCEDURES ARE INVOKED, EVEN IF ONLY FOR A VERY BRIEF PERIOD, POSTS ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR ISSUANCE AND RETENTION OF PAPER RECORDS LISTED IN (5) BELOW. (5) POSTS WITHOUT A VLA FEATURE GUIDANCE:

THIS SECTION IS A CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS

POSTS THAT DO NOT HAVE MRV WITH A VLA FEATURE SHOULD MAKE A PRINTOUT OF ALL CLASS OR DNC NAMECHECK RESULTS. THE PRINTOUTS SHOULD BE DIVIDED BY BATCH. ANY GIVEN PRINTOUT (BATCH) COULD INCLUDE CASES WITH NO RECORD (NR), CAT I AND/OR CAT II HITS. THE ISSUING OFFICER SHOULD ANNOTATE ANY CAT I HITS ON THE PRINTOUT WITH A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF WHY THE HITS ARE IRRELEVANT. FOR MOST CASES WITH MULTIPLE CAT I HITS, ONLY ONE COMMENT WILL BE NECESSARY (I.E. "NOT THE SAME PERSON", "INS WAIVER OBTAINED," "SAO PER STATE XXX ETC.). NR AND CAT II HITS DO NOT REQUIRE SEPARATE ANNOTATIONS. EACH PAGE OF THE PRINTOUT SHOULD THEN BE RUBBER STAMPED WITH A VLA CERTIFICATION WHICH CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE: "I CERTIFY THAT A CHECK OF THE DEPARTMENTS VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM HAS BEEN MADE AND THERE IS NO BASIS UNDER THIS SYSTEM FOR THE EXCLUSION OF THESE ALIENS." (PLEASE NOTE THE CHANGE FROM THE PREVIOUS LANGUAGE.) THIS ISSUING OFFICER'S NAME STAMP SHOULD ALSO BE APPLIED AN INITIALED. ALL of-156 FORMS AND THE CLASS/DNC PRINTOUT MUST BE RETAINED AT POST FOR 1 1 YEARS. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO "CUT AND PASTE" PRINTOUTS WITH INDIVIDUAL OF-156 FORMS. HOWEVER, THE DAILY PRINTOUTS AND OF-1S6S SHOULD BE STORED TOGETHER FOR EASY RETRIEVAL. WHEN POSTS CONVERT TO THE VLA MODULE LATER THIS YEAR, THE RETENTION OF VLA RECORDS WELL BE DONE ELECTRONICALLY. OF-156 PORMS RECEIVED AFTER THAT DATE SHOULD BE RETAINED ONLY FOR THE STANDARD 1 YEAR, WHY THE CHANGES?

o

THIS IS A CHANGE FROM EXISTING PROCEDURES. PREVIOUS GUIDANCE TREATED CAT I AND NON-CAT I HITS SEPARATELY, REQUIRING THE CERTIFICATION TO BE ON THE PRINTOUT OF LOOKOUT RESULTS FOR CAT I HITS AND ON THE OF-156 FOR NR OR CAT II HITS. ALL VLA CERTIFICATION SHOULD NOW BE RECORDED ON THE PRINTOUT AND NOT/NOT ON THE OF-156. (THE OF-156 MUST STILL BE RETAINED WITH THE PRINTOUT IN ALL CASES, HOWEVER,) THE PURPOSE OF RETAINING VLA RECORDS IS TWO-FOLD. THE CERTIFICATION SHOWS THAT AN OFFICER HAS REVIEWED ALL CAT I HITS AND FOUND NO INELIGIBILITYS. THE PRINTOUT ALSO SHOWS THE LOOKOUT RESULTS AVAILABLE TO THE CERTIFYING OFFICER AT THE TIME OF ISSUANCE. MAINTAINING TFHS DATA EVEN FOR CASES INVOLVING WILL BE USEFUL IF QUESTIONS SUBSEQUENTLY ARISE, E.G., IF CAT I DATA ON THE APPLICANT IS LATER ENTERED INTO THE SYSTEM. ALSO BY APPLYING THE CERTIFICATION TO THE PRINTOUT IN ALL CASES, THE VLA RECORD IS

133

MORE UNIFORMLY KEPT IN ONE DOCUMENT. THIS STEP SHOULD ALSO SAVE OFFICER TIME BY NOT REQUIRING INITIALING AND NAME STAMPING OF INDIVIDUAL OF-156S. THE NEW GUIDANCE REQUIRES POSTS TO STAMP EACH PAGE OF THE PRINTOUT. PREVIOUS GUIDANCE REQUIRED A CERTIFICATION STAMP FOR EACH CASE WITH CAT I HITS. THIS IS A SIMPLE LABOR -SAVING STEP WHICH ALLOWS OFFICERS TO APPLY ONLY ONE STAMP PER PAGE. IT DOES NOT/NOT REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN OFFICER TO ANNOTATE EVERY CASE WHICH HAS A CAT I HIT. BY REQUIRING THAT EACH PAGE OF THE PRINTOUT BE STAMPED, THE POSSIBILITY OF CASES WITH CAT I HITS BEING INADVERTENTLY OVERLOOKED IS MINIMIZED. IN ADDITION, IT ENSURES THAT THE CERTIFICATION STAMP WILL ALWAYS BE VISIBLE AND EASILY FOUND ON THE SAME PAGE AS THE CASE (S) TO WHICH IT RELATES. THIS WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE DEPARTMENT TO DOCUMENT THAT THE REQUIRED CERTIFICATION WAS MADE, SHOULD QUESTIONS EVER ARISE. THIS STEP DOES REQUIRE MODIFICATION OF THE CERTIFICATION STAMP LANGUAGE, HOWEVER. IN ORDER TO INCLUDE ALL CASES LISTED ON THE PAGE. POSTS ARE REQUESTED TO ORDER NEW STAMPS AND MUST MAKE PEN AND INK CHANGES TO THE EXISTING CERTIFICATION IN THE INTERIM. POSTS SHOULD NOTE THAT UNTIL THE VLA SOFTWARE IS INSTALLED, THE PAPER CERTIFICATION/RETENTION PROCEDURES WILL BE THE ONLY RECORD THAT VLA NAMECHECK/ISSUANCE PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED. WHILE CLASS AND DNC NAMECHECKS GENERALLY HAVE PROVEN TO BE RELIABLE, TECHNICAL ANOMALIES DO OCCUR. THE BEST PROTECTION FOR THE CONSULAR OFFICER IS TO ENSURE THAT THE PAPER RECORD IS PROPERLY MAINTAINED. VO RECOGNIZES THAT LONG-TERM RETENTION OF OF-156S AND CLASS/DNC PRINTOUTS WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR SOME POSTS AND WE WILL WORK WITH POSTS TO RESOLVE STORAGE PROBLEMS. THOSE POSTS WHICH DO NOT HAVE ADEQUATE STORAGE FACILITIES SHOULD NOTIFY CA/VO/F/P BY CABLE OR E-MAIL WITH AN ESTIMATE OF THE NUMBER OF RECORDS TO BE STORED (NUMBER OF BOXES, CUBIC FOOTAGE, ETC.) BY THE DEPARTMENT. (E) RETENTION OF AUTOMATED FILES: VLA RECORDS ARE TO BE MAINTAINED FOR 11 YEARS AFTER ISSUANCE (REF E) NIV POSTS WERE ADVISED IN REFTEL D NOT TO DELETE ANY AUTOMATED NTVCAPS FILES THAT ARE USED FOR VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING FILE RETENTION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO CA/EX/CSD. (F) IMMIGRANT VISAS (EXCEPT DV): (1) ALL IV POSTS: THE FBI NCIC CHECK IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE A LOOKOUT SYSTEM WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 140(C), ALTHOUGH FBI DATA ON SPECIFIC CASES I SOMETIMES REFLECTED IN THE CLASS SYSTEM AS A DOUBLE ZERO OR OTHER CATEGORY I HIT. NEVERTHELESS, WHEN DEPARTMENT PROCEDURES REQUIRE AN NCIC CHECK, WHETHER AS A MATTER OF POLICY OR BECAUSE MANDATED BY STATUTE, FBI NCIC NAMECHECKS WITH A STATUS OF "AP (ADVERSE) SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME AS A CLASS CAT I HIT FOR VLA PURPOSES AND AN OFFICER MUST PERSONALLY REVIEW THE CHECKS. (2) IVACS POSTS: IVACS POSTS RECEIVED THE IVACS VLA MODULE IN DECEMBER 1996. INSTRUCTIONS WERE INCLUDED WITH THAT RELEASE. THE MODULE REQUIRES AN OFFICER TO REVIEW

134

ALL CAT I HITS AND MAKE A VLA STATEMENT EXPLAINING WHY THE ISSUANCE IS BEING AUTHORIZED IN SPITE OF THE HIT(S). A RECORD OF THE CAT I HITS AND THE OFFICER'S COMMENTS ARE STORED ELECTRONICALLY. THE ENTIRE RECORD IS ARCHIVED BY POST AND RETAINED FOR A MINIMUM OF 11 YEARS. QUESTIONS REGARDING IVACS FILE RETENTION SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO CA/EX/CSD. (3) NON-IVACS POSTS: POSTS THAT DO NOT HAVE IVACS SHOULD MAKE A PRINTOUT OF EACH CASE'S NAMECHECK RESULTS. IF THERE ARE CAT I HITS, AN OFFICER MUST NOTE VERY BRIEFLY ON THE PRINTOUT WHY THE HITS ARE IRRELEVANT, RUBBER-STAMP THE PRINTOUT WITH THE VLA CERTIFICATION ("I CERTIFY THAT A CHECK OF THE DEPARTMENTS VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM HAS BEEN MADE AND THERE IS NOT BASIS UNDER THIS SYSTEM FOR THE EXCLUSION OF THE ALIEN.") APPLY HIS/HER NAME STAMP AND INITIALS AND' STAPLE THE PRINTOUT TO THE APPLICATION. THE APPLICATION, WITH VLA CERTIFICATION SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE IV ENVELOPE FOR.EVENTUAL INCLUSION IN THE INS "A" FILE FOR LONG TERM STORAGE. (4) IV (DV) CASES: THE IV (DV) PROGRAM HAS A VLA FEATURE. IF A POST IS UNABLE TO USE THIS FEATURE, IT WILL HAVE TO USE THE SAME PROCEDURES AS FOR NON-IVACS CASES. (G)CLASSVS.DNC-IVANDNIV:

'

(1) WHEN CLASS IS AVAILABLE, POSTS MUST REPEAT MUST PERFORM NAMECHECKS ON THE CLASS SYSTEM. WHEN CLASS IS TEMPORARILY DOWN, DNC NAMECHECKS SUFFICE FOR VLA PURPOSES. POSTS SHOULD MAINTAIN CLEAR RECORDS OF DATES DNC WAS USED AND NOTE THE DNC RELEASE DATE. THE RELEASE DATE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ESTABLISH WHETHER HIT INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE TO THE CONSULAR OFFICER OR COVP AT THE TIME OF VISA ISSUANCE. THAT INFORMATION SHOULD BE RETAINED AT POST FOR 11 YEARS AFTER ISSUANCE. (2) IF THE TC CONNECTION TO CLASS GOES DOWN, IT OFTEN FIRST BECOMES APPARENT WHEN THE NIV UNIT NOTICES THAT NTV CASES ARE RECEIVING A "D" OR "DEF" IN THE CLASS COLUMN. THE PC-LAN SYSTEM AND MODERNIZED SYSTEMS WILL AUTOMATICALLY SWITCH TO DNC WHEN THE TC LINE IS NOT OPERATIONAL. THE VSMRV SYSTEM DOES NOT SWITCH TO DNC UNLESS THE SYSTEM OFFICE MANUALLY SWITCHES IT, GENERALLY UPON REQUEST OF AND WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE VISA UNIT. THE -D" OR "DEF" ENTRY INDICATES THAT A COMPLETE CHECK HAS NOT BEEN DONE AND VISAS SHOULD NOT BE ISSUED OVER THAT ENTRY. VISA OFFICERS AND SUPERVISORS SHOULD NOT/NOT OVERRIDE A "D" OR "DEF" ENTRY. RATHER THE NAME SHOULD BE RUN AGAIN AGAINST DNC, OR WATT FOR THE CLASS RESPONSE WHENEVER THE TC LINE GOES BACK UP. (3) SINCE ALL POSTS NOW HAVE ACCESS TO CLASS WITH DNC AS A BACKUP, POSTS ARE NO LONGER AUTHORIZED TO USE MICROFICHE FOR NAMECHECKS. MICROFICHE NAMECHECKS DO NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF VLA. (H) VISA ANNOTATIONS - NIV AND IV

o

IF CLASS OR DNC DISPLAYS A CAT I HIT WITH A NAME THAT IS THE SAME OR VERY SIMILAR TO AN APPLICANTS NAME, BUT THE POST DETERMINES IT IS NOT THE SAME PERSON, THE VISA SHOULD BE ANNOTATED "NOT THE SAME AS CLASS ENTRY." WAIVERS GRANTED BY INS MUST ALSO BE ANNOTATED ON THE VISA. IF POST SUBMITS AN AO OR

135

SAO AND DETERMINES THAT THE APPLICANT IS EITHER NOT THE SAME AS THE NAME IN THE HIT OR IS AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE A VISA UNDER APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATIONS, AN ANNOTATION IS ALSO REQUIRED, CITING THE CABLE NUMBER. FOR EXAMPLE: "VISA ISSUED PURSUANT TO 97 STATE XXXX7 VO RECOGNIZES THAT ANNOTATIONS ARE TIME CONSUMING, BUT MANY TRAVELERS ARE HELD UP AT PORTS OF ENTRY WHILE INS OFFICERS ATTEMPT TO VERIFY WHETHER THE LOOKOUT WAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE CONSULAR OFFICER WHO ISSUED THE VISA. THE VISA OFFICE, AND VO DUTY OFFICER, RECEIVE FREQUENT CALLS FROM INS OFFICERS ABOUT INADEQUATELY ANNOTATED IVS AND NIV'S. IF THE LOOKOUT ENTRY IS SERIOUS IN NATURE AND INS CANNOT CONTACT POST OR OTHERWISE RESOLVE THE ISSUE, THE APPLICANT COULD BE DENIED ENTRY AND SENT BACK TO THE ISSUING POST FOR A NEW VISA. 6. USE OF AMERICAN PITS TO CHECK AND AUTHORIZE PRINTING OF VISAS: (A) COVPS: PITS DESIGNATED AS CONSULAR OFFICERS FOR VISA PURPOSES (COVP) ARE CONSIDERED CONSULAR OFFICERS FOR VLA PURPOSES AND MAY/MAY MAKE A VLA CERTIFICATION. COVPS WILL EITHER BE IN PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATE OR CONSULAR ASSOCIATE POSITIONS. COVP DESIGNATION CAN ONLY BE ACCORDED BY CA/EX. ALTHOUGH COVP DESIGNATION CAN BE GRANTED ONLY TO AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED THE BASIC CONSULAR COURSE, THE MERE FACT OF COMPLETION OF THE CONSULAR COURSE DOES NOT IN ITSELF CONFER COVP STATUS ON ANY INDIVIDUAL. (B) AFM OR AMERICAN/AMERICAN CLERICAL PITS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN DESIGNATED COVPS: POSTS MAY, WHEN NECESSARY, CONTINUE TO ALLOW NON-COVP AMERICAN CITIZEN PITS AND AFMS TO PRINT-AUTHORIZE VISAS AFTER CHECKING THE SYSTEM AND CONFIRMING THAT THERE ARE NO CAT I HITS. (ANY CASE WITH CAT I HITS MUST BE PASSED TO THE ADJUDICATING CONSULAR OFFICER OR COVP FOR ISSUANCE.) THIS SHOULD BE DONE ONLY WHEN REQUIRED BY WORKLOAD AND PERSONNEL CONSIDERATIONS. MOREOVER, WHEN AMERICAN CITIZEN CLERICAL PITS OR AFMS ARE GIVEN THIS AUTHORITY, POST MUST ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND SUPERVISORY OVERSIGHT SUFFICIENTLY RIGOROUS TO PERMIT THE CONSULAR OFFICER OR COVP RESPONSIBLE FOR ADJUDICATION AND ISSUANCE OF THE VISA TO MAKE THE REQUIRED CERTIFICATION THAT THE SYSTEM WAS CHECKED AND PROVIDED NO BASIS FOR EXCLUSION. ONCE THE CONSULAR OFFICER/COVP IS SATISFIED THAT ALL NECESSARY CHECKS HAVE BEEN DONE, S/HE SHOULD APPLY THE CERTIFICATION STAMP, HIS/HER NAME STAMP AND INITIALS TO EACH PAGE OF THE PRINTOUT OF LOOKOUT RESULTS. IF THE PRINTOUT ALSO CONTAINS CAT I HITS, THE SAME OFFICER/COVP BECOMES THE ISSUING/CERTIFYING OFFICER FOR THOSE CASES. POSTS THAT WISH TO FOLLOW THIS PROCEDURE MUST NOTIFY DEPARTMENT (CA/VO/F/P) OF THEIR IMPLEMENTATION PLANS. 7. SUPERVISOR'S DUTIES: (A) THE CONSULAR SECTION CHIEF AT EACH POST MUST SUBMIT TO THE DEPARTMENT (CA/VO/F/P BY CABLE A STATEMENT THAT S/HE HAS REVIEWED THE SECTION'S VLA PROCEDURES AND THAT THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENTS INSTRUCTIONS. THE CABLE MUST PROVIDE THE NAME OF THE SECTION CHIEF.

136

(B) IT IS A PERMANENT OBLIGATION OF EACH NEW CONSULAR SECTION CHIEF TO SUBMIT SUCH A STATEMENT TO THE DEPARTMENT WITHIN 45 DAYS OF ARRIVING AT POST. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO 9 FAM. (C) SUPERVISORS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT ALL ISSUING OFFICERS AND COVP'S FULLY UNDERSTAND THE PROVISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF VLA, AS WELL AS THE CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH VLA PROCEDURES. (DEPT WILL BE PROVIDING FURTHER GUIDANCE ON THE LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENT TO MAKE VLA VIOLATIONS A MATTER OF RECORD AND TO CONSIDER THEM AS SERIOUS NEGATIVE FACTORS IN PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS.) VLA TRAINING SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO ALL ISSUING OFFICERS CURRENTLY AT POST AS WELL AS TO ALL FUTURE LINE OFFICERS BEFORE THEY ASSUME ISSUING RESPONSIBILITIES. (D) TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH SEC 149 (C) (1) (B), OFFICERS RESPONSIBLE FOR SPOTCHECKING ISSUED VISAS SHOULD ALSO CONFIRM THAT ISSUING OFFICERS HAVE COMPLIED WITH VLA REQUIREMENTS, I.E. THAT THEY ARE CHECKING THE LOOKOUT SYSTEM, ISSUING VISAS ONLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING CAT I HITS, AND ARE CERTIFYING TO PERFORMANCE OF THESE DUTIES. A SUPERVISOR CAN MOST EASILY SPOT CHECK A CONOFFS VLA CHECKS BY ACCESSING SOME CASES WITH CAT I HITS IN THE MRV SYSTEM AND VERIFYING THAT CAT I HITS WERE HANDLED APPROPRIATELY. THE FREQUENCY AND NUMBER OF SPOT CHECKS SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE CONSULAR SECTION CHIEF. NEW VICE CONSULS AND COVPS SHOULD BE MONITORED CLOSELY UNTIL THE SUPERVISOR IS CONFIDENT THAT VLA PROCEDURES ARE FULLY UNDERSTOOD. 8. NON-COMPLIANCE SEVERAL CASES OF NON-COMPLIANCE HAVE COME TO THE DEPARTMENTS ATTENTION. WHEN APPLICANTS WITH CAT ONE HITS ARRIVE AT PORT OF ENTRY WITH NO ANNOTATION OR WAIVER IN THE VISA, INS ROUTINELY CONTACTS VO OR THE POST FOR AN EXPLANATION OF THE HIT. VO CONTACTS THE POST IN THOSE CASES WHICH APPEAR TO INVOLVE INSTANCE OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH VLA PROCEDURES. VO, L/CA AND PER/PE ARE DEVISING PROCEDURES TO PROCESS CASES OF POSSIBLE VLA VIOLATIONS. VO WILL REPORT ON THOSE PROCEDURES WHEN FINALIZED IN SEPTEL. 9. MINIMIZE CONSIDERED. ALBRIGHT

137

1998 SECSTATE 132298 VZCZCFS0857 RR RUEHFSI DE RUEHC #2298/01 2021900 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 211857Z JUL 98 FM SECSTATE WASHDC TO ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS SPECIAL EMBASSY PROGRAM ZEN/BUJUMBURA POUCH ZEN/ASMARA POUCH BT UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 STATE 132298 E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: CMGT, CVIS SUBJECT: VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY:

AN UPDATE

REF: (A) 97 STATE 91105, (B) 97 STATE 49747, 89423, (D)96 STATE 69153

(C) 96 STATE

1. SUMMARY: VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY (VLA) LEGISLATION BECAME EFFECTIVE APRIL 30, 1996. AS VLA ENTERS ITS THIRD YEAR, DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THE EFFECT OF THE LEGISLATION ON CONSULAR OPERATIONS AND PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON HOW VLA REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED. END SUMMARY THE LAW

2. VLA REQUIREMENTS ARE CONTAINED IN SECTION 140(C) OF P.I. 103-236 (FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FY-94 AND 95, AS. AMENDED BY P.L. 103-415) AND BECAME EFFECTIVE APRIL 30, 1996. REF A CONTAINS THE AMENDED TEXT OF THE LAW AND THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF DEPARTMENT'S EXTENSIVE GUIDANCE ON PROCEDURES. (THE ORIGINAL GUIDANCE WAS IN REF D, WHICH DID NOT REFLECT P.I. 103-415 AMENDMENTS). THE MOST CRITICAL ELEMENT OF THE LAW FOR CONSULAR OFFICERS IS THE PROVISION THAT, SHOULD A CONSULAR OFFICER FAIL TO FOLLOW PROCEDURES REQUIRED BY THE INCLUSION OF AN ALIEN'S NAME IN THE DEPARTMENT'S VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM, SUCH FAILURE "SHALL BE MADE A MATTER OF RECORD AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS A SERIOUS NEGATIVE FACTOR IN THE OFFICER'S ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION." HANDLING VIOLATIONS

3. POSTS HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED THAT SUPERVISORS SHOULD CONSIDER VLA VIOLATIONS "AS A SERIOUS NEGATIVE FACTOR IN THE OFFICER'S ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION" SINCE VLA TOOK EFFECT. IN ADDITION, THE DEPARTMENT RECENTLY FINALIZED PROCEDURES FOR ENSURING THAT VLA VIOLATIONS ARE MADE A MATTER OF RECORD. THIS WILL BE DONE PURSUANT TO EXISTING DISCIPLINARY CHANNELS. MOST VLA VIOLATIONS ARE BROUGHT TO THE DEPARTMENT'S ATTENTION BY INS INSPECTORS AT PORTS-OF-

138

c

ENTRY WHEN CONFRONTED BY AN ALIEN WHOSE NAME APPEARS IN THE LOOKOUT SYSTEM BUT WHOSE VISA BEARS NO INDICATION OF A WAIVER AUTHORIZATION OR NO EXPLANATORY ANNOTATION. CA/VO INVESTIGATES ALL ALLEGATIONS OF A POTENTIAL VLA VIOLATION THAT COME TO ITS ATTENTION WITH THE RELEVANT POST AND, IF CA/VO DETERMINES THAT A VIOLATION DID INDEED TAKE PLACE, NOTIFIES POST BY A FRONT CHANNEL CABLE. THE RESPONSIBLE CONSULAR OFFICER'S SUPERVISOR WILL THEN BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE AND SIGN A VISA LOOKOUT ACCOUNTABILITY RECORD OF VIOLATION (FORM DS-L980). THE SUPERVISOR WILL CERTIFY CA/VO'S FINDINGS AND MAY PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS. WITHIN FIVE WORKING DAYS OF RECEIPT OF CA/VO'S FINDINGS, THE SUPERVISOR SHOULD PROVIDE THE SIGNED FORM TO THE RESPONSIBLE CONSULAR OFFICER, WHO WILL THEN HAVE TEN WORKING DAYS TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS ON THE FORM. THE FORM MUST THEN BE RETURNED TO THE SUPERVISOR WHO WILL SEND IT TO CA/VO/F/P, WHERE THE FORM WILL BE REVIEWED FOR COMPLETENESS AND FORWARDED TO THE OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS (PER/ER) UNTIL FORM DS-L9BO IS AVAILABLE TO THE FIELD, CA/VO WILL MAIL THE FORM TO THE RESPONSIBLE SUPERVISOR ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE CABLE REPORTING CA/VO'S FINDINGS. THE SUPERVISOR SHOULD THEN ENSURE THAT THE FORM IS COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO CA/VO WITHIN THE TIME FRAME MENTIONED ABOVE (I.E., WITHIN FIFTEEN WORKING DAYS). THE ROLE OF CA/VO 4. CA/VO AND POST ARE RESPONSIBLE FAR IDENTIFYING AND INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE VLA VIOLATIONS. CA/VO WILL MAKE THE DETERMINATION AN WHETHER OR NOT A VIOLATION OCCURRED, BASED ON THE RESULT OF POST'S INVESTIGATION. CA/VA AND POSTS MUST ENSURE THAT INVESTIGATIONS ARE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH 3 FAM 4322.3. CA/VO WILL NOT MENTION THE AFFECTED EMPLOYEE'S NAME IN ANY FRONT CHANNEL COMMUNICATION NOR WILL CA/VA FILE RECORDS OF VLA VIOLATIONS IN EMPLOYEE-SPECIFIC FILES OR UNDER THE NAME OF THE RELEVANT EMPLOYEE (S) . CA/VO FILES AN VLA VIOLATIONS WILL INSTEAD BE KEPT UNDER THE NAME OF THE ALIEN TO WHOM THE VISA WAS ISSUED OR IN GENERAL SUBJECT MATTER FILES. 5. CA/VO'S ROLE IS LIMITED TO MAKING THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER A VLA VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED. CA/VO/F/P SHOULD BE CONTACTED WITH RESPECT TO ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING PROCEDURES RELATED TO VISA ISSUANCE, BUT QUESTIONS REGARDING THE EMPLOYEE'S RIGHT TO APPEAL A DETERMINATION MUST BE DIRECTED TO PER/ER. THE ROLE OF PER/ER

6. ONCE CA/VO HAS RECEIVED A COMPLETED AND SIGNED DS-L980, IT WILL FORWARD THE COMPLETED FARM UNDER -COVER OF A MEMORANDUM TO PER/ER. A CASE FILE WILL BE OPENED BY THE CONDUCT, SUITABILITY AND DISCIPLINE STAFF. EACH CASE WILL BE CONSIDERED ON ITS AWN MERITS. APPLICABLE CASE LAW AND PERTINENT MITIGATING FACTORS, IF ANY, WILL BE TAKEN INTO

139

CONSIDERATION. THE RANGE OF ACTIONS AVAILABLE UNDER 3 FAM 4300 ENCOMPASS THE FOLLOWING: 1) LETTER OF ADMONISHMENT: COPY RETAINED IN THE CASE FILE IN PER/ER, 2) LETTER OF REPRIMAND: COPY PLACED IN OFFICER'S OFFICIAL PERSONNEL FILE (OFF) FAR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, TO INCLUDE REVIEW BY ONE SELECTION BOARD, 3) SUSPENSION: COPY OF SUSPENSION NOTICE PLACED IN OFFICER'S OFFICIAL PERSONNEL FILE FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS, TO INCLUDE REVIEW BY TWO SELECTION BOARDS, AND 4) SEPARATION FOR CAUSE. PER/ER WILL NOTIFY AFFECTED EMPLOYEES OF ANY ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION PROPOSED AGAINST THEM. THE EMPLOYEE WILL THEN HAVE 30 DAYS TO RESPOND BEFORE THE CASE IS PRESENTED TO THE DECIDING OFFICIAL FAR A DECISION. RESPONSES MAY BE PRESENTED ORALLY AND/AR IN WRITING. EMPLOYEES ARE NOTIFIED OF THE FINAL DECISION IN WRITING. FAR ALL ACTIONS EXCEPT SEPARATION, THE FINAL DECIDING OFFICIAL WILL BE THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PERSONNEL. VLA VIOLATIONS TO DATE

7. SINCE THE VLA LEGISLATION TOOK EFFECT ON APRIL 30, 1996, CA/VO HAS OPENED 30 VLA INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING 28 DIFFERENT POSTS. TWO OF THESE CASES ARE STILL PENDING. OF THE REMAINING 28 CASES, ELEVEN WERE DETERMINED TO INVOLVE A VLA VIOLATION AND HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE REFERRED TO PER/ER FOR ACTION. IN ONLY ONE CASE, INVOLVING ISSUANCE OF AN IMMIGRANT VISA, WAS THE VLA VIOLATION THE RESUIT OF A CONSUIAR OFFICER OVERLOOKING A CLASS I HIT. IN THE REMAINING TEN CASES, THE VLA VIOLATION RESULTED FROM CONSULAR OFFICERS FAILING TO FOLLOW PROPER PROCEDURES REQUIRED FOR ISSUANCE OF A VISA TO AN INDIVIDUAL WHOSE NAME APPEARS IN THE AUTOMATED VISA LOOKOUT SYSTEM (CLASS OR DNC) . 8. THE GOOD NEWS: THE ALMOST TOTAL ABSENCE OF "INADVERTENT" ISSUANCES OVER A CAT I HIT, I.E., WHERE THE CONSULAR OFFICER FAILED TO NOTICE THE HIT, UNDERSCORES THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE VLA MODULES BUILT INTO OUR AUTOMATED VISA ISSUANCE SYSTEMS TO PREVENT CONSULAR OFFICERS FROM INADVERTENTLY ISSUING VISAS TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE A CAT I HIT. 9. THE BAD NEWS: THE BAD NEWS IS THAT THERE ARE STILL CONSULAR OFFICERS IN THE FIELD WHO FAIL TO REACT TO CAT I HITS APPROPRIATELY. IN MOST CASES, THE ISSUING OFFICER WAS AWARE OF THE HIT, BUT CONCLUDED THAT THE UNDERLYING BASIS OF THE HIT DID NOT APPLY OR THAT THE HIT COULD BE IGNORED. CONSULAR OFFICERS DO NOT/NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO IGNORE SUCH HITS SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE WITH THE BASIS FOR THE ENTRY. IN CASES WHERE THE ENTRY IS KNOWN TO BE INVALID (E.G., POST ENTERED THE NAME OR INELIGIBILITY CODE INCORRECTLY) , THE CONSULAR OFFICER CAN ISSUE OVER THE HIT ONLY IF HE/SHE ANNOTATES THE VISA TO SHOW THAT THE CLASS ENTRY DOES NOT APPLY AND SUBMITS A "VISAS CLOK" REQUEST TO THE DEPARTMENT REQUESTING DELETION. IF THE CONSULAR OFFICER MERELY DISAGREES WITH THE UNDERLYING BASIS FOR THE

140

c

CLASS ENTRY, HOWEVER, HE/SHE MAY NOT ISSUE A VISA UNTIL AND UNLESS THE POST OR AGENCY THAT MADE THE ENTRY AND/OR THE DEPARTMENT CONCURS AND A REQUEST FOR DELETION FROM CLASS HAS BEEN MADE. AGAIN, THE VISA MUST BE PROPERLY ANNOTATED, BECAUSE THE NAME MAY REMAIN IN CLASS OR NAILS FOR A SHORT TIME AFTER THE ALIEN BEGINS TRAVEL. 10. AN IMPORTANT REASON FOR THESE PROCEDURES EVEN IN CASES WHERE A POST KNOWS THAT AN ENTRY IS IN ERROR IS THAT, WHILE POSTS CAN ENTER NAMES INTO CLASS, THEY CANNOT DELETE NAMES. FOR THIS REASON, SUBMISSION OF A "VISAS CLOK" REQUEST FOR DELETION IS ESSENTIAL TO PRECLUDE. A VISA RECIPIENT WHOSE NAME ERRONEOUSLY REMAINS IN CLASS FROM BEING EXCLUDED OR DETAINED AT THE PORT-OF-ENTRY. MOST VLA VIOLATIONS HAVE COME TO OUR ATTENTION BECAUSE THE INS STOPPED THE ALIEN AT GREAT INCONVENIENCE TO ALL CONCERNED. FOLLOWING PROPER PROCEDURES WOULD HAVE AVOIDED THIS RESULT. LOOKING AHEAD

11. CA/VO'S GOAL IS TO ENSURE THAT ALL CONSULAR OFFICERS AND CONSULAR ASSOCIATES ARE SPARED ANY VLA VIOLATIONS. WE BELIEVE WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS THROUGH AUTOMATED SAFEGUARDS AND TRAINING. CONSULAR SUPERVISORS ARE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THAT THEIR PROCEDURES COMPLY WITH VLA REQUIREMENTS AND MUST SO CERTIFY TO CA/VO/F/P IN WRITING WITHIN 45 DAYS OF ASSUMING DUTIES. IN THE MEANTIME, NEARLY ALL VLA VIOLATIONS CAN BE PREVENTED IF CONSULAR OFFICERS THINK TWICE BEFORE ISSUING A VISA OVER A CAT I HIT. WHEN IN DOUBT, ASK. ALBRIGHT BT

141