COLLECTING VWP FINGERPRINTS IN IRELAND

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 DUBLIN 000073

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CMGT PREL CVIS EAIR CVIS
SUBJECT: COLLECTING VWP FINGERPRINTS IN IRELAND

REF: STATE 3517

1.Despite Ireland's relatively small population, long-
standing ties to the U.S. and ease of travel make Ireland
one of the top ten beneficiaries of the Visa Waiver Program.
Because of this, any modification in the program would be
followed closely both by the Irish government and by the
general public. Post's responses are keyed to reftel:


A. I. There are two major international airports in
Ireland (Dublin and Shannon) and both of these airports
currently house a dedicated area for U.S. immigration pre-
inspection facilities, which are staffed by USCBP personnel.
While not all flights are pre-cleared, the majority is, and
presumably it would be most efficient to have the
fingerprinting function remain with USCBP in those cases.
In the case of those flights that are not pre-cleared,
arrangements would have to be made to dedicate a portion of
the space available for a stand-alone type of operation,
although this could be problematic during times when post-
clearance of flights is due to a delay in processing.

II. While the number fluctuates according to the
season, there are an average of 15 flights daily that
leave either Dublin or Shannon for the U.S.

III. Cons Chief spoke with Ray Bassett, Assistant
Secretary for Consular Affairs at the Irish Department
of Foreign Affairs on January 13th, and according to
A/S Bassett, the agreements in place that allow USCBP
to fingerprint travelers set the precedent for such
procedures. If the ten-prints were gathered in the
same or similar context, he did not foresee any
problems.

IV. If ten-prints were gathered as a normal part of
USCBP operations, additional space would not be
necessary, although the delays due to the longer period
of time necessary for fingerprint collection might
result in more flights being forced to post-clear. If
"after-hours" flights needed this service, presumably
the USCBP space could be used for those flights as
well, if additional staffing is provided. There would
be space concerns, however, for those flights that are
post-cleared during the workday due to the lack of
space available to process them. This is especially
the case in Dublin where occasional logjams necessitate
post-clearance of a particular flight. In those cases,
there would be no possibility of giving access to ten-
print services. While the airport in Dublin is
currently undergoing an expansion, present space
concerns and traffic routing would not suggest a
logical place, other than USCBP facilities to place a
fingerprint collection point.


V. If fingerprinting were done through Dublin and
Shannon USCBP facilities, then fingerprinting
capability could be quickly established, subject to the
caveats outlined in Paragraph IV. If it were decided
that USCBP would do all ten-print collection in
Ireland, then there may be the need for additional
USBCP personnel.

VI. There would be no additional rental costs if USCBP
space were used, but there could be additional costs if
it were decided to expand the USCBP Dublin-Shannon
operation.

VII. Host government raised no objection in principle
to the expansion of our fingerprinting operation. See
Paragraph III.

VIII. If USCBP facilities were used for the collection
of fingerprints, the feasibility is high, subject to
additional staffing for peak periods and "after-hours"
collection.


B. I. Post currently is in the process of expanding
waiting room facilities to
accommodate current workflow. Once that is
accomplished, we are confident that we will be able to
manage our visa workload for the foreseeable future,
assuming the VWP remains in place for Ireland.
However, we are not in a position to provide a place
for enrollment for VWP travelers at post, absent buying
or leasing new property in Dublin for that purpose, a
very expensive proposition in what is one of Europe's
most expensive housing markets (it should be noted that
in the years immediately preceding Ireland's accession
to the VWP, the Consular Section here was in fact
located in a separate building).

II. This is difficult to assess, as it would depend
largely on the press coverage given the program and
traveler's overall evaluation of the benefits
associated with enrollment. Since most of the
population of Ireland lives outside of Dublin, there
would be significant costs associated with coming to
the Embassy in order to enroll - in short, very similar
to applying for a visa without any of the benefits.

III. In that the Embassy does not currently have the
space to process a meaningful number of VWP enrollees,
additional space would be required. As nearly 360,000
alien passengers traveled from Ireland to the U.S. via
Dublin and Shannon airports in calendar year 2005, the
vast majority of whom were VWP participants, it can be
assumed that this would be the number we would need to
plan for in considering possible spaces for enrollment,
especially since tourism to America from Ireland is on
the rise (many Irish choose to fly from ports of entry
outside of the Republic of Ireland, so if the number of
flights to the U.S. from Ireland increases, we can
anticipate significant growth in these numbers). Post
was able to accommodate some 19,000 NIV applicants in
calendar year 2005 with a waiting area of 82 square
feet. If we round the numbers up to allow for space
necessary to install the appropriate security checks,
we would need to find an office space of at least 2000
square feet, and that does not take into consideration
any space for offices or other equipment. At current
rates, that would cost the U.S. government
approximately $100,000 per year (if a 25-30 year lease
is signed),excluding costs for one American and one
Foreign Service National employee. Alternately, post
could run an appointment system, similar to that used
for visa applicants, but this would negatively impact
both VWP travelers and visa applicants alike by
generating a backlog that would negate the positive
effects of VWP travel. This in turn would probably
have a negative impact on travel to the U.S. from
Ireland, reducing not only the number of tourists, but
also the amount of investment in the U.S. by Irish
companies (and vice versa),as business executives
would find it more difficult to travel on short notice.

IV. The host government would likely react very
negatively to such a proposal. Post did raise this
question with host government interlocutors, but they
provided no response, as they considered it too absurd
to be within the realm of the possible, especially
given the existence of USCBP pre-inspection facilities
at Dublin and Shannon airports.


V. The overall estimate of the feasibility of VWP
fingerprint collection at post would therefore be low
to zero.


C. Responses to the questions in section C of reftel would
be identical to those in
section B, since an additional facility would be
necessary should there be a mandate to collect VWP
fingerprints at post.


D. Provided that ten-print enrollment was performed as
part of the USCBP pre-
inspection procedure, host government would not
consider that to be a de facto termination of the VWP
and would be unlikely to reciprocate and impose any
additional requirements on the one million or more
Americans who visit Ireland each year.


2. This cable was cleared by USCBP Port Director Dublin.

KENNY