Page 2 of 2   <      

FBI Name Check Cited In Naturalization Delays

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

The backlog started growing after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when investigators determined that a failure to properly process immigration applications contributed to the hijackers' ability to enter and stay in the country. U.S. authorities responded by broadly expanding background checks.

FBI name checks, in particular, were intensified after errors and a lack of cooperation between the FBI and immigration authorities in Newark led to the October 2002 naturalization of a man suspected of ties to Hezbollah, which is designated a terrorist group. A policy decision was made to check applicants' names not only against the list of individuals under investigation by the FBI but also against the list of those named in investigative files for any reason.

The result was tumultuous. At the end of 2002, immigration authorities resubmitted 2.7 million names of applicants to the FBI for additional scrutiny. More than five years later, the FBI is only now emerging from that huge load, with about 5,800 names left to be rechecked.

But FBI officials say a heavy workload is not the only problem. They also blame inadequate staffing and technology, as well as a decentralized, paper-based process of status review.

About 90 percent of name checks, officials say, emerge with no matches within three months, after an automated search of databases. But the remaining 10 percent can take months or years, as 30 analysts and assistants must coordinate with 56 field offices and retrieve files stored in 265 locations nationwide.

As a result, the FBI has fallen further behind on the 1.5 million new names it receives each year from USCIS. Of about 329,000 cases pending as of May, 64 percent were stalled for more than 90 days, 32 percent for more than one year and 17 percent for more than two years.

"No one is happy with the status quo," said USCIS Deputy Director Jonathan "Jock" Scharfen. "We share the public's unhappiness with this, and we're committed to improving the process."

"We're trying to automate this as much as possible," said Michael Cannon, head of the FBI's National Name Check Program. He said the section's disruptive move from Washington to Frederick County, Va., also hindered work in 2006.

Cannon said the completion of a new Central Records System and progress toward a long-delayed, $600 million FBI computerized case-management system will help. "I can't give you a date certain when all this is going to come to fruition. My best guess is 2010," he said.

USCIS officials say they are reviewing their procedures but remain committed to detailed checks, which they call an effective tool in identifying security threats and verifying eligibility for citizenship. Even just a few terrorists can wreak havoc, the program's supporters note.

While USCIS declined to provide the number or percentage of annual name checks that result in denials, the FBI has reported that less than 1 percent of 1.5 million names are ultimately tied to potentially damaging information.

The backlog appears likely to get worse, because a USCIS fee increase -- slated to take effect in July -- has prompted a 50 percent rise in new naturalization applications so far this year. If a new immigration bill is enacted, millions of undocumented immigrants would also apply for legalization.

Frustrations among applicants have helped stoke a fourfold increase in litigation against USCIS since the middle of 2006. Critics emphasize that applicants for naturalization, by definition, are longtime residents who have lived and worked in the United States with few restrictions.

Khatri, in his June 11 report, said that given other automated security checks, "the protection the FBI name check provides, the cost of government resources used, and mental and actual hardships to applicants and their families, USCIS should reassess the continuation of its policy."

For now, tens of thousands of legal residents remain in limbo, exacting a toll on them and their employers. Pavel Kroupnik, a Russian economist who came to the United States in 1991 and sought citizenship three years ago, works at the nuclear energy firm USEC Inc. in Bethesda and directs the conversion of weapons-grade uranium from Russian nuclear warheads into fuel for commercial nuclear power plants -- a key U.S.-Russian nonproliferation effort.

But Kroupnik, 46, a Rockville resident, has been unable to get a security clearance and fuller responsibilities because he is not a citizen, even though his employer had conducted its own two-year investigation of his background before hiring him. "When immigration said we need to do a background check, I said, 'Guys, check your own [files].' The CIA, the FBI, the KGB -- they all know who I am and what I'm doing," Kroupnik said.

Adriana Rivera, a Mexican-born housecleaner living in Woodbridge, has been stymied in a different way: She cannot see her elderly parents in Veracruz, Mexico, because she holds a temporary work permit and would be unable to return if she left the United States while awaiting the background check she needs to become a legal permanent resident.

Her husband sailed through his background check and obtained a green card nearly two years ago even though he applied at the same time as Rivera.

"Every time my husband goes back to visit Mexico, I cry because I can't go with him," Rivera said. "I miss my family so much. It's a feeling of desperation."


<       2


© 2007 The Washington Post Company