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. ' / l ^ ( t> J)
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
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 THIS SECTION IS A CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS
GUIDANCE:

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?

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

o 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 VS-
MRV 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

IF CLASS OR DNC DISPLAYS A CAT I HIT WITH A NAME THAT IS THE SAME OR VERY

o 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 SPOT-
CHECKING 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, (C) 96 STATE

89423, (D)96 STATE 69153

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

c
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
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

c
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
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