You are on page 1of 4

OBJECTIVE

To determine if management and security controls are in place on Travel Agent Referral
Programs (TARP) and other Personal Appearance Waiver programs (PAW) in certain
selected NTV processing posts with higher probability of applications from terrorists
seeking to attack the United States directly.

REFERENCES

State 145525 - Review and certification of consular management controls. State 145515
- Enhanced border security and visa reform act ALD AC # 4. State 015702 -Visas
Condor procedures. Consular Management Handbook (CMH). Volume 9 Foreign Affairs
Manual (9 FAM). The Immigration and Nationality Act.

CRITERIA

1. Mission management, consular management, and working-level staff are all aware of
and complying with security advisory opinion and name check requirements for NTVs
issued through the TARP and PAW programs.
2. Mission management, consular management, and working-level staff members are all
aware of and complying with internal control requirements for NTVs issued through
TARP and PAW programs.

Suggested Inspection Techniques

In the course of this inspection Inspectors should take great care to formally document
the results of the interviews, the data collected at post, and any conclusions reached
before leaving post. Inspectors should use the OIG memorandum of conversation
template and the findings worksheet to document both information collected and
findings.

Interview the following people at post: The COM, DCM, Consul General, NTV
adjudicating officers and equivalents and senior FSNs in the NTV section to elicit the
information in 1 A through L under TARP and 1 A through I under PAW.

Examine documents and check procedures in the consular sections to confirm or


disconfirm data collected in the interviews as noted in 2 under TARP and PAW below.

TARP
f

1. If the mission has a travel agent referral program (TARP) currently operating, the
following information should be gathered from the interviews. If it has had a program in
the past but ended it after 9/11/01, the same data should be collected, plus the date the
program was ended. If there has not been a TARP since before 9/11/01, please determine
why the program was never instituted.
A. Who are assigned to prescreen and adjudicate TARP cases?
B. What are these persons' instructions?
C. How is this activity supervised?
D. How does the mission insure that all TARP cases are CLASS-clear?
E. How does the mission determine which TARP cases should be interviewed?
F. Does the mission "batch" these cases for adjudication?
G. Has the mission ever conducted a validation study of TARP cases?
H. Do consular or post managers review TARP issuances and denials?
1. Has anyone or any organization attempted to influence visa decisions in a TARP
case?
J. Are management and staff aware of and complying with the regulations and
instructions on name checks and advisory opinion requirements in TARP cases?
K. Are TARP cases processed differently than other NTV cases?
L. Is there a quality control process for TARP cases?

2. As part of the review of TARP, the inspectors should examine NIV issuances and
denials to validate the interview data. In addition they should determine post policy
on requiring photographs of veiled women for NTVs. If INS "blue sheets" are
available, inspectors should see if any TARP cases are included. If hijackers received
visas at the post, their applications should be examined to determine if they were
processed according to regulations.

Personal Appearance Waiver (PAW)

1. Inspectors should interview to obtain the following information:

A. What programs does the mission have that would permit a PAW? These may
include the visa referral program and officer discretion in drop box cases, cases
arriving through remote payment locations, and walk-ins.
B. Who can authorize a PAW?
C. Does section or post management review PAW decisions?
D. Does the section have a written PAW policy?
E. How does the mission insure that all PAW cases are CLASS-clear?
F. Has the mission ever conducted a validation study of PAW cases?
G. Has anyone or any organization attempted to obtain PAW status for an applicant?
H. Are PAW cases processed differently than other NIV cases?
I. Is there a quality control process for PAW cases?

2. As part of the review of PAW, the inspectors should examine NIV issuances and
denials to validate the interview data. Inspectors should determine if CLASS checks are
being performed on PAW cases. In addition, they should determine if the criteria for
PAW are clear and are being applied consistently by all adjudicators and processors.
Interview
COM
DCM
Consul General
NTV and IV Officers and equivalents
Senior FSNs in NIV and IV sections

1. Are they aware of and complying with the following instructions?

A. STATE 145525 - REVIEW AND CERTIFICATION OF CONSULAR


MANAGEMENT CONTROLS

B. STATE 145515 - ENHANCED BORDER SECURITY AND VISA REFORM ACT


ALDAC#4

C. State 015702 - Visas Condor procedures

TARP

1. If the mission has a travel agent referral program (TARP) currently operating, the
following information should be gathered from the interviews. If it has had a program in
the past but ended it after 9/11/01, the same data should be collected, plus the date the
program was ended. If there has not been a TARP since before 9/11/01, please determine
why the program was never instituted.

A. Who are assigned to prescreen and adjudicate TARP cases?


B. What are these persons' instructions?
C. How is this activity supervised?
D. How does the mission insure that all TARP cases are CLASS-clear?
E. How does the mission determine which TARP cases should be interviewed?
F. Does the mission "batch" these cases for adjudication?
G. Has the mission ever conducted a validation study of TARP cases?
H. Do consular or post managers review TARP issuances and denials?
I. Has anyone or any organization attempted to influence visa decisions in a TARP
case?

2. As part of the review of TARP, the inspectors should examine NIV issuances and
denials to validate the interview data. They should also examine IV cases to insure that
the post is performing appropriate name and security checks. In addition they should
determine post policy on requiring photographs of veiled women for NTVs and IVs. If
INS "blue sheets" are available, inspectors should see if any TARP cases are included. If
hijackers received visas at the post, their applications should be examined to determine if
they were processed according to regulations.
Personal Appearance Waiver

Interview
COM
DCM
Consul General
NIV Officers and equivalents
Senior FSNs in NIV section

1. Inspectors should interview to obtain the following information:

A. What programs does the mission have that would permit a PAW? These may
include the visa referral program and officer discretion in drop box cases, cases
arriving through remote payment locations, and walk-ins.
B. Who can authorize a PAW?
C. Does section or post management review PAW decisions?
D. Does the section have a written PAW policy?
E. How does the mission insure that all PAW cases are CLASS-clear?
F. Has the mission ever conducted a validation study of PAW cases?
G. Has anyone or any organization attempted to obtain PAW status for an applicant?

2. As part of the review of PAW, the inspectors should examine NIV issuances and
denials to validate the interview data. If INS "blue sheets" are available, inspectors
should see if any PAW cases are included. Inspectors should determine if CLASS checks
are being performed and if the criteria for PAW are clear and are being applied
consistently by all adjudicators and processors. ij ' - _ .

You might also like