Questions for GAO Interviews on U.S.

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

Name: Roberto Powers

Date: 4/21/02 Post: Damascus

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)

•:••',:' - -;r'". .-.^ - '.' Yes No N/A

a. Strengthened anti-fraud programs X
b. Instituted new or changed existing standards off bow closely an X
applicant's name and date of birth must match tine name and date
of birth returned by CLASS (before consular officers submit
requests fora Security Advisory Opinion)
c. Reduced the availability of personal appearance waiver • X
programs -.,»„ .-;
d. Increased the percentage of NIV applicants who are X
interviewed
e. Other (please specify)

f. Other (please specify) .... "

Please provide additional comments, if any.

hi view of Condor requirements, we are now much more insistent upon full and complete
applications. This often means that applicants must have a personal interview, for many of them
fail to answer thoroughly all questions on the supplemental form.
2) About what percent of NTV 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 slightly less than 75%

b. Since September 11, 2001 slightly more than 75%

Please provide additional comments, if any.

Applicants 60 years and older are able to use a dropbox, along with applicants who have traveled
to the USA within the past ten years and who have proof of having done so. An increasing
number of applicants able to use the dropbox now prefer to have an interview since this reduces
the period of uncertainty as to whether they are going to get the visa or not.
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.

To my knowledge, we have had no applicants identified during the 20-day waiting period, nor
any derogatory information following Visas Condor submissions.
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.)

Very - - « Some-what Not

helpful helpful helpftiK- Not sure
a Interview a greater percentage of all applicants X
(If you check very or somewhat helpful, please;-
indicate the percentage 96)
b. Interview all applicants , '„y X
c. Fingerprint a percentage of all applicants (If you • X
check very or somewhat helpful, please indicate the
percentage %)
d. Fingerprint all applicants •> . X
e. Improve training for consular officers in identifying s X
suspected terrorists, cooperating with other agencies/
international organizations, and cultural sensitivity
g. Make the visa process a law enforcement . X
function (If you check yes, please elaborate Jta flie ,r '
comments section on how this should be
accomplished, e.g., should the function remain
within State or be moved to another agency)
h. Other (please specify)

i. Other (please specify) >T*

Please provide additional comments, if any.

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

Very Some- Not , '_, . Not'; •_ '•

feasible what feasible feasible sure ,-»i
« .
a. Interview a greater percentage of all applicants (If X
you check very or somewhat helpful, please indicate
the percentage 100 96)
b. Interview all applicants X
c. Fingerprint a percentage of all applicants (If you X
check very or somewhat helpful, please indicate the
percentage %} .- ,"'*-, " '* ,^: ' •
d. Fingerprint all applicants r ;;?-- , » 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 function X
g. Institute a secure travel document that incorporates a X
biometric such as fingerprints 'z , i*9:.
h. Other (please specify)
./y*v-*'"'.
i. Other (please specify) ; ^,

Please provide additional comments, if any.

Although this would create an additional challenge for post, it would not be impossible for us to
simply interview all applicants. Those that currently qualify for use of the dropbox would
simply remain fairly quick issuances. Consequently, there is nothing to gain by interviewing all
applicants. Most of our applications are either quick issuances or quick refusals.
 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.

Space is our major impediment. We do not have adequate space to interview all applicants.