She can speak to the enhancements to strengthen the Visa Waiver Program. John wagner the Deputy Assistant commissioner for u. S. Customs and Border Protection at the u. S. Department of Homeland Security. He can speak of options and considerations of the waiver program. He will discuss the benefits of preclearance operations. Next witness will be mr. Jussen siberal. Im really bad. Not even 50 . He is the deputy coordinator for the Counterterrorism Bureau at the department of state. He can speak to the existing sharing agreements the u. S. Has with Visa Waiver Program countries. Mr. Mark frey, senior director and former director of the Visa Waiver Program from 2007 to 2010. As former director mr. Frey can speak to the need to enhance the Visa Waiver Program in a sensible way to maintain the benefits of the program at the same time enable dhs. Mr. Frey did provide testimony. It is probably the most succinct summary of the Visa Waiver Program. It would be nice if you could go through in a bullet Point Fashion what testimony you provided and talk about really why the Visa Waiver Program does improve our security and why we should be certainly looking to strengthen it, addressing some of the vulnerabilities, but we dont want to weaken it. We had a hearing on the syrian refugee situation. The reason we are having this roundtable is because one of the outcomes of that, we did lay out there is a pretty strong vetting process. From my standpoint im a little concerned this administration wanting to increase refugees by 21 the first year, 43 the next there might be managerial pressure to cut corners on the certification process. In the hearing we heard there are concerns about the vulnerabilities and weaknesses in the Visa Waiver Program. I want to explore those. If there are holes that need to be plugged, i think we need to plug those holes. The purpose of this roundtable. I come from a manufacturing background. Solve problems, laying out reality, acknowledging reality and setting achievable goals. This is about laying on the reality. By yammering on i have given dr. Frey time to prepare. Can you summarize your testimony and lay out the case for the Visa Waiver Program. Thank you, chairman johnson. I cheated in the assessment because you may have recognized what i provided was an updated version of what i submitted to this committee in march when i testified on the Visa Waiver Program. And so i dont want to makemy my fellow panelists feel bad they didnt get a chance to give testimony. It just wasnt that much work. I like first efficiency. Exactly. Roundtables like this, the hearing you held last spring are all important. The v. W. P. Program needs education and awareness. There remains, despite a lot of efforts, a misunderstanding of what the program is and what the program isnt. There seems to be this perception because the word waiver is in the title somehow security requirements are waived. That is precisely the opposite. Im happy to talk about the four key security components of the v. W. P. It is entirely fitting and appropriate roundtables like this, hearings and the legislation your committee introduced the other day are being talked about. The v. W. P. Like all good Security Programs needs to evolve in light of the current threat involvement. The history of the Visa Waiver Program since 9 11, it predates that before that, but since 9 11 it became a Security Program there has been a history of reforms. Some administratively, some legislatively done. It makes sense and worth doing. We have a couple of colleagues who have joined us. I want this a free flowing discussion. While dr. Frey is talking about this, if you have a question about a particular subject bring it up. Say the same thing about the witnesses. Thank you. So to get into briefly the four main security components of the v. W. P. And why it is a security enhancing program. The first is individualized screening of Visa Waiver Program travelers. The perception that somehow you can you have a european passport and you wave it at the gate agent and show up in dulles or paris is not true. There is an individual vetting system that goes on which is overseen by c. B. T. That, in fact, was part of the last major legislative reform as part of the implementing the recommendations of the 9 11 Commission Act in 2007. We set up the system that requires data from individual travelers and cdp and others in the u. S. Government can run that data against watch lists and watch list date abases and terrorism daysa bases. Is that is same with the fiance visa . Yes. It is the same biographic checks occur. State departments, lookout support systems, class, interpols, database, so it is Law Enforcement, the terrorism screening database. Does it include recent travel . And how far back does it include . Months or years or days . Do you want to talk about that, travel history. What im trying to flesh out how thorough is the individual screening and do we need to take a look at things we need to do. What i will say and john is probably the best person to handle it, there is some screening that goes on through the Visa Waiver Program that is identical to the vetting that goes on for visas. That complements another set of screening protocols that c. B. P. Does on all travelers whether they are visa waiver or visa. So the Visa Waiver Program fits into a larger Border Security framework. How far back does that travel history go . If they travel to the United States no. Im speaking of traveling to iran and iraq or syria. We would not routinely have access to that information. If there is not a nexus to the United States, we wouldnt have that. Regardless of a visa. Some information sharing agreements that gives us access to travel itineraries, some information we get through the Intelligence Community or Law Enforcement networks. We dont have visibility on the entire world. Im sorry. If it would help, i mean, as mark was just starting out say ing, a starting place is edge kaeding what it is. If we can talk about exactly what the program is, get through those. I personally think we it might help inform the questions. That is what i was trying to do. Thank you so much. If there is a better way, you are welcome. No. Im very comfortable with mark as well as myself. Hold your questions until mark goes through. No. This is what i want. I want this a relaxed atmosphere. Go through it as quickly as possible. Dont go into such great detail. Thank you, senator. We talked about esta, the individual and current screening of travelers. Doesnt mean you have one today necessarily means you will have one tomorrow if derogatory information comes up. The second piece of the Visa Waiver Program itself is information sharing to v. W. P. Countries that participate are required to share information with the United States effectively on citizens or passengers who may be a security risk, known suspected terrorists or serious criminals. And related to that is requirement to share lost and stolen passport data with interpol with is used in screening for all flights coming into the United States. There is information sharing piece. Those two pieces Work Together because the information we get from the v. W. P. Feeds nesta to make the u. S. Database. Including that information sharing, would that have travel from france into iraq or syria . Is it robust enough to figure that out . As i said, the esta system hits against certain databases and is informed by derogatory information on individuals provided by our partners. For example, if there is travel history provides that gives rise to concern from a partner and raises to where a person is a known and suspected terrorist, that individuals name will be given to us and the esta vetting will catch that. As a rule the vetting doesnt hit travel without u. S. Nexus. It relies on the quality of information of the Visa Waiver Program country, right . It relies on the reliability of that. It is not all uniform. It is not all reliability. I would argue it is better than not having the information sharing, ok. Mr. Wagner. Just that it is going to be contingent on does that country collect the information, how long do they store it for and are they allowed to share it with us. If it is not, say, an identified National Security reason can they give us bulk information or bulk data. There are standards under the program that require a certain threshold of information to be shared, correct . Maybe we can get into that in greater detail. Just an example of the folks in the paris talk who were e. U. Citizens. Are you comfortable knowing the folks engaged in that attack, would they have been stopped at the boarder of the United States based on what we have now . Have we looked at that, whether or not the system would have prevented it . Yes. And some of them would have been prevented from traveling here. Some not all . Prefer to discuss more of the details in a classified setting. It has been reported some of them were identified to governments as being National Security risks already. That would have been in the database. There is information we would have received from their travel details that were confident we would have identified had they booked travel to the United States. Without the Visa Waiver Program they would have ended in an embassy. Would they have better or worse information from the Visa Waiver Program and automatic database. The embassy is going to have the same information. It is the same database we check, the same information we check on a visa application or esta application for traveller. Points of contact and a few data fields. We run it against the same types of derogatory databases. We come to the same result. But would a Visa Waiver Program in the information sharing, intelligence sharing requirements of the Visa Waiver Program, would there, you know, again, im trying to compare it. The Visa Waiver Program gives us the structure to exchange that information and provides a platform to share it. If the information exists. That is always the case. As a result of the information sharing, they have shared 9,000 known or suspected terrorists we are using in our vetting. We wouldnt have that if it wasnt for the v. W. P. Program. That is a security of the program. Under the hapd 6 agreement, known and suspected terrorists and identity data, we used that as a requirement for the program. Therefore, being a member of the Program Requires you pass that information to us. In that regard, if you didnt have the Visa Waiver Program, you might not have the incentive or disincentive to not provoid that information. It helps us to push governments to share the information. Nonperformance could be problematic of that country remaining a member of the program. There are several bills that have been dropped in that deal with the Visa Waiver Program. One is to require that if a person from europe for example has been traveling to syria that that information would be automatically transferred. Let me ask you from the opposite side. If we require that of them, they are going to require that of us, which i dont have any problem with. The question is do we have that information and two, can we legally share it with them . We are taking steps to add to enhance esta further, that was part of an announcement from the white house on november 30. We are already in the process of making those additional changes. That wasnt my question. If we have a Visa Waiver Program person who is an american who has been to syria, do we have that information and can we share it with the country they are going to . Say they are going to france. Can we legally do that . I have to go back and check the legal piece. It is a reciprocal program, any new requirement we put on they will consider and put on to us. Similarly, we are sharing our extracts of our terrorist watch list including a foreign fighter extract with all of our v. W. P. Countries and others. Because we want countries to screen against this data. This is a global Security Program considering beyond just a visa. This is true of any database, you start out with a basic database. It is imperfect. The beauty is you can continue to add to it, improve it. That is part of the attempt here, we have a certain database. There is holes in the data we want to fill. So over time to beauty of technology is it builds upon itself and gets better and better and better. That is certainly you were talking about in your testimony. The information required under the Visa Waiver Program incentivize ds or sometimes the threat of potential punishment can make sure countries are sharing what they should be and if not we are aware and can address it. By definition Visa Waiver Program countries are strong allies to begin with. I dont want to overstate there was never information between the United States and the United Kingdom or the United States and france before we implemented this. Of course there was. Share all the time. This structures it and makes it mandatory and we can potentially take remedial action if a country is not meeting their obligations. And very quickly to finish the other two components. The third element that makes the Visa Waiver Program is documents. Again, this is something that exists for travel under the v. W. P. But not under visas you have a have an electronic passport and incorporates biometric identifiers. Your bill addresses it, there is a small percentage of v. W. P. Travelers who dont have to carry that passport. The bill closes the loophole to make all Visa Waiver Program travelers carry it. Not be able to use a fake passport to use the program. This is a point that sometimes gets overlooked, the law mandates that dhs leads audits. Dhs is working with the state department to continue monitoring developments in these countries. I would like to focus just a minute on the inspections having participated in a number of them. They are unbelievable comprehensive, sort of soup nuts to Border Security, aviation security, passport development and issueance processes. It is way for dhs, the u. S. Government more broadly to have visibility into how a country does security. If we find there are gaps, whether in information sharing or what a country does with respect to its counterradicalization programs or foreign fighter tracking program, we have the ability to know country x is not up to our standards and work collaboratively with them to provide technical assistance, what have you. Without that visibility we wouldnt have as much information. So these inspections are incredibly powerful tools to make sure Visa Waiver Program countries are meeting the standards we set. If they are not, it is a collaborative program, to help them get to those standards. Before i throw it open to other members, in your testimony you talked about requiring v. W. P. Travelers to submit biometrics prior to boarding the flight would not meaningfully enhance security, it would cause diplomatic challenges. Can you talk about that. I would be happy to. My colleagues can weigh in on the security benefit. Let me talk about logistical challenges and resource challenges in doing so. As i see it, there are primarily two ways you could set up such a system to capture biometrics to ensure the person submitting them is actually the person who is traveling. You have to direct the people to embassies and consulates oversees and Visa Waiver Program countries are not staffed to handle the extra flow or set up enrollment centers. Again, how many you would need all over the world would be quite a challenge. Some trusted agent could oversee the submission of fingerprint and i. T. Back to c. B. P. That is one that their doing it. Expensive to have personnel overseas. Some suggest a kiosk at the airport. Again, hard to imagine how it works logistically because it is not just a kiosk at Visa Waiver Program airports. It is kiosks all over the world. If you are a british citizen living in hong kong and want to travel to the United States for business, you can leave under the v. W. P. From hong kong. We would have to put these kiosks in hong kong, beijing, moscow, not Visa Waiver Program countries and set up a sorting system so the Visa Waiver Program travelers are submitting biometrics and not the u. S. Citizen traveling home. A logistical challenge overseas. That is the logistical and diplomatic side. All <