VZCZCXRO8635
RR RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHNEH
DE RUEHNE #0007/01 0021052
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 021052Z JAN 09
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4911
INFO RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 4086
RUEHNEH/AMCONSUL HYDERABAD 0090
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 3330
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 3153
RUEHBK/AMEMBASSY BANGKOK 7159
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 1807
RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 2270

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000007 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
CA/FPP FOR JILL NYSTROM, PLEASE PASS TO DHS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KFRD CVIS CMGT ASEC IN BT
SUBJECT: VALIDATION STUDY OF BHUTANESE NIV APPLICANTS 
 
REF: 08 NEW DELHI 3190 
 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  In response to concerns raised by smuggling of Bhutanese 
applicants (reftel), Embassy New Delhi has completed a three-part 
validation study of Bhutanese non-immigrant visa (NIV) applicants. 
The study reviews (1) Bhutanese students issued F, M or J visas 
between FY 2006 and FY 2008, (2) all other NIV classes for FY 2007, 
and (3) all other NIV classes for a portion of FY 2008.  The 
Embassy's validation study of Bhutanese students shows broad 
compliance with the law and overstay rates less than one half of one 
percent.  However, validation of the other NIV applicant categories 
reveals apparent non-compliance rates of over 16% and 9% in FY 2007 
and FY 2008 respectively.  It also highlighted the need to obtain 
more accurate applicant contact information in all future 
adjudications.  End Summary. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
STUDENTS ARE STUDYING 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  Embassy New Delhi validated 100% of the 174 Bhutanese 
students issued visas in FY 2006, FY 2007, and FY 2008: 174 in 
total.  Of these, SEVIS checks revealed only one applicant in 
"deactivated" status whose departure from the United States could 
not be confirmed via ADIS or other checks.  Post's FPU called the 
applicant using the contact information provided at interview and 
additional numbers as provided by those at that address, but has 
been unable to reach the applicant or his family members. 
Nonetheless, these results speak well for Bhutanese student visa 
recipients' appropriate use of their visas. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
FY 2007: MANY HAVE STAYED 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Post validated 100% of all NIVs issued to Bhutanese 
nationals in categories other than F, J, M and K1 for FY 2007; 334 
in total.  To do so, Post pulled all NIV issuance records from the 
CCD for FY 2007 for ADIS analysis.  Post then removed any applicant 
records that showed a departure or extension/adjustment of status. 
FPU made calls to each of the remaining 59 applicants, using the 
contact information provided at time of interview. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Of the group, 22 were confirmed to be overstays, 
representing 6.5% of New Delhi's FY 2007 NIV Bhutanese issuances. 
Calls attempted for 33 applicants revealed that the contact 
information provided on the DS156 applications was incorrect, a 
further 9.8% of issuances.  Some listed the Embassy of Bhutan in New 
Delhi as their contact information, others listed non-working 
numbers, and others listed numbers answered by people who claimed 
not to know the applicant. 
 
¶5. Assuming those applicants who provided incorrect contact 
information did so intentionally because they intended to stay/are 
staying in the United States currently, that would represent an 
overstay rate of 16% of all of Post's FY 2007 NIV Bhutanese 
issuances.  Also worthy of note, 14 (4%) of the 334 have filed to 
adjust to LPR status and 20 (5.9%) have filed to adjust/extend their 
NIV status.  Thus, it appears over 20% of FY 2007 visa recipients 
remain in the United States. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
FY 2008: MIXED RESULTS 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Post also reviewed the 549 NIVs issued to Bhutanese 
nationals in categories other than F, J, M and K1 from October 
2007-August 2008.  Removing all applicant records that showed a 
departure or extension/adjustment of status or in which the 
applicant was still in status (assuming a six-month stay), left 72 
records for follow-up.  FPU made calls to each of these remaining 
applicants, using the contact information provided at time of 
interview. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Of this group, 25 recipients were confirmed to be 
overstays, representing 4.5% of the total.  Calls attempted for 27 
applicants revealed that the contact information provided on the 
DS156 applications was incorrect, a further 4.9% of issuances. 
Assuming those applicants who provided incorrect contact information 
 
NEW DELHI 00000007  002 OF 002 
 
 
did so intentionally because they intended to stay/are staying in 
the US currently, that would represent an overstay rate of 9% of all 
this FY 2008 sample.  One other applicant has filed to adjust to LPR 
status, and five others have filed to adjust/extend their NIV 
status. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Of particular note, of 131 applicants (primarily 
craftspeople) issued A2 visas to participate in the 2008 Smithsonian 
Folklife Festival, only one was identified as an overstay. 
 
¶9. (SBU) COMMENT:  The relatively large numbers of Bhutanese 
travelers who remain in the United States gives cause for greater 
scrutiny of their NIV applications.  In particular, post will 
undertake to verify contact information before issuing visas to 
these applicants.  Post has discussed the use of the Bhutan 
Embassy's contact details with the Bhutanese Deputy Chief of 
Mission; he confirmed his Embassy has no official role in these visa 
applications.  END COMMENT. 
 
Mulford