When  names of suspected terrorists are added to TIPOFF, this information may  originate from the FBI. Initial Actions Taken to Address Weaknesses Were Inadequate

Following our June 2003 report, State and DHS took some actions to  address weaknesses we identified in the visa revocation process, but these  actions did not adequately address all of the weaknesses we found. Finally,  outstanding legal and policy issues continue to exist regarding the removal  of individuals based solely on their visa revocation. We attempted to  determine how long it took Consular Affairs to revoke visas after receiving  a recommendation to do so for our sample of 35. However, this  information only existed for 6 of the 35 cases. CBP’s primary responsibility is to post  lookouts to prevent individuals from entering the country. ICE May Not Have Been Informed of Aliens with Revoked Visas Who May Be in the Country

Once they receive notification of a visa revocation from State, DHS  personnel at CBP should notify ICE if they determine that the individual  whose visa was revoked may be in the country. ICE Initiated Field Investigations More Than 2 Months after Receiving Notification of Visa Revocation

Our review of 35 visa revocations on terrorism grounds from October  through December 2003 shows that ICE forwarded requests for field  offices to initiate investigations of individuals who may be in the United  States more than 2 months after receiving notification of the visa  revocation. Recent Actions Taken to Address Identified Weaknesses in the Visa Revocation Process

Since we initiated our inquiry in January 2004, State and DHS have taken  additional actions to address identified weaknesses in the process. In  addition, in mid-April, TSC identified visa revocations as a potential  vulnerability that could compromise homeland security and developed an  informal process for coordinating actions and sharing information relating  to visa revocations. However, we identified some weaknesses that still  need to be addressed. State Revised Its Procedures and Formalized Its System for Tracking Cases

In April and May 2004, State took several actions to improve its  performance in the visa revocation process, including revising its  procedures and formalizing its tracking of visa revocations. State’s and DHS’s written procedures also lack specific time frames for  completing individual steps in the process. DHS and  State believe that these actions will avoid the delays that were  experienced in the past. Recommendations for Executive Action

To strengthen and improve the visa revocation process as an antiterrorism  tool, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security work jointly  with the Secretary of State and other appropriate agencies to take the  following two actions:    Develop a written governmentwide policy that clearly defines the roles  and responsibilities of the agencies involved in the visa revocation  process, including TSC. It should incorporate performance standards  (e.g., time frames for completing each step in the process) and periodic  interagency assessments to determine whether information is being shared  among the agencies involved and appropriate follow-up action is being  taken and to reconcile data differences if they occur; and   Address outstanding legal and policy issues regarding the status of aliens  with visas revoked on national security grounds who are in the United  States at the time of the revocation. In addition, we interviewed officials from State, DHS, the Terrorist  Screening Center (TSC), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security

The following are GAO’s comments on the Department of Homeland  Security’s letter dated June 17, 2004. 3. We acknowledge that the Department of State should appropriately  deliberate over visa revocation cases. 3. This report includes a review of all 330+ visas revoked on terrorism  grounds from October through December 2003, including a detailed  review of a random sample of 35 cases.
Why GAO Did This Study

The National Strategy for Homeland Security calls for preventing foreign terrorists from entering our country and using all legal means to identify; halt; and where appropriate, prosecute or bring immigration or other civil charges against terrorists in the United States. GAO reported in June 2003 that the visa revocation process needed to be strengthened as an antiterrorism tool and recommended that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in conjunction with the Departments of State (State) and Justice, develop specific policies and procedures to ensure that appropriate agencies are notified of revocations based on terrorism grounds and take proper actions. GAO examined whether weaknesses in the visa revocation process identified in its June 2003 report were addressed.

What GAO Found

GAO's analysis shows that the Departments of State and Homeland Security took some actions in the summer of 2003 to address weaknesses in the visa revocation process identified in its June 2003 report. However, GAO's review of visas revoked from October to December 2003, including a detailed review of a random sample of 35 cases, showed that weaknesses remained in the implementation of the revocation process, especially in the timely transmission of information among federal agencies. For example, delays existed in matching names of suspected terrorists with names of visa holders and in forwarding necessary information to State. In at least 3 of the 35 cases, it took State 6 months or more to revoke visas after receiving a recommendation to do so. In 3 cases, State took a week or longer after deciding to revoke visas to post a lookout or notify DHS. Without these notifications, DHS may not know to investigate those individuals who may be in the country. In 10 cases, DHS either failed to notify or took several months to notify immigration investigators that individuals with revoked visas may be in the country. It then took over 2 months for immigration investigators to request field investigations of these individuals. After GAO initiated its inquiry for this report in January 2004, additional actions were taken to improve the process, including revising procedures and reassessing the process. DHS and State believe these actions will help avoid the delays experienced in the past. In April and May, State revised its procedures and formalized its tracking system for visa revocation cases. In March, DHS developed new written procedures and acted to ensure that immigration investigators are aware of all individuals with revoked visas who may be in the country. State and DHS also took some steps to address legal and policy issues related to visa revocations. In April, the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), an interagency group organized under the FBI, identified the visa revocation process as a potential homeland security vulnerability and developed an informal process for TSC to handle visa revocation cases. However, weaknesses remain. For example, State's and DHS's procedures are not fully coordinated and lack performance standards, such as specific time frames, for completing each step of the process. Outstanding legal and policy issues continue to exist regarding the removal of individuals based solely on their visa revocation.