• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
SUMMARY
Mohamed
Atta January 2001 entry.
Time
line.
June
3,
2000. Admitted
as a B2
tourist
at
Newark arriving
from
Czechoslovakia.
July
7,
2000. Begins training
at
Huffman
Aviation
in
Venice, Florida.
September
19,
2000. Files
an INS
1-539
to
change
his
status
from B2
tourist
toMl
vocational student at
Huffman
Aviation in Venice, Florida.
Note:
theapplication's handwritten addendum
on the
back, describing
the financing-of his
schooling, reads
as
follows:
"My
family
is
supporting
me financially for all my
living
and
trainingexpenses.
I
receive money transfers regularly
on my
bank account.MOHAMEDATTA."
December
2,
2000.
Permitted length
of
stay expires.
December
19,
2000.
Passes
his
commercial pilot
test,
scoring
90.
January
4,
2001.
Departs
the
U.S. Pending change
of
status application
now
abandonedunder immigration rules.
January
10,
2001.
Seeks admission
at
Miami International Airport
from
Madrid.Has
a B2
tourist visa
yet
presents school paperwork
from
Huffman
Aviation,
claiming
to
have adjusted status
to an Ml
vocational student still attending
flight
school.
• The
primary inspection report reads: "PAX (passenger) turned
in [an
1-20
form]
but
has had a
response, meanwhile he's attending
flight
training school. Already
was in
school
for 5/6
months, please verify."
• The
secondary inspection report reads:
"SUBJ
applied
for M-l.
I.S. Adjustedstatus. No overstay/No removal grounds found." The secondary inspectorconducts a half hour interview, which he does not recall. Atta is admitted.
Analysis.
Atta's inspection reports indicate
he was
attempting
to
re-enter
the
U.S.
as a
vocational student with
a
tourist visa.
Atta claims
to
have adjusted
status.
He had
not.
A
check
in the
benefits
adjudication
database, CLAIMS, should have
verified
the application as stillpending.
Atta
was an
overstay
by
about
a
month. This information
was
likely unavailableto inspectors, as there was no real time entry-exit system in place.
Atta claims
to still be in
flight
school. A
student
tracking system,
if
in
place,
could
have
verified
that
he had
already completed
full
time schooling
at
Huffman.
Atta should have presented
an Ml
vocational visa:
ttrthe
inspector
forcontinued
full
time
flight
training.
He did
not. Atta
did not
indicate there
was an
emergencyreason why he did not have a Ml
visa,
so
option
of a 30 day deferred inspectionwas not an available.
Atta should have been denied entry under
8
U.S.C.
237...
Recommendation.
Request
Melendez-Perez
state for the
record, under
the
facts
provided above
(he
has previously reviewed them), whether he would have admitted Atta.
9/11
Commission. JKR. 1/23/04
 
SUMMARY
Marwan
Al
Shehhi January 2001 entry.Time
line.
May 29,
2000. Admitted
as a
B2 tourist
at
Newark arriving
from
Brussels,
(although
he had a
Bl
business visa).
Early
July, 2000. Begins training
at
Huffman
Aviation
in
Venice, Florida.
September
22,
2000. Files
an INS
1-539
to
change
his
status
from B2
tourist/Bl
business to Ml vocational student at
Huffman
Aviation in Venice, Florida. His
bank
account statement
and
residential lease paperwork
are
duplicates
of
Atta's,
and
his
handwritten addendum regarding
financial
support also
reads
Kkr
Atta's.
November
28,
2000. Permitted length
of
stay expires.
December
19,
2000. Passes
his
commercial pilot test, scoring
85.
January
11,2001.
Departs
the
U.S. Pending change
of
status
application
now
abandoned under immigration rules.
January 18,
2001.
Seeks admission
at JFK
International Airport.
Has a Bl
business visa
but
mentions attendance
at flight
school.
The
primary inspectionreport reads:
"SUBJ
left
one
week
ago
after
entry
in
May.
Has
extension
and now
returning for a few more months." Secondary inspection reads
"was
in USgaining flight hours to become a pilot. Admitted for
four
months."
Analysis.
Al
Shehhi's
inspection reports indicate
he was
attempting
to
re-enter
the
U.S.
as a
vocational student with
a
business visa. (Language
is
more ambiguous
on
Al
Shehhi's
inspectiorrreports.)
Al
Shehhi claims
to
have
an
"extension".
He did
not.
A
check
in the
benefits
adjudication
database, CLAIMS, should have
verified
thestatusofbothapplications.
Atta claims
to
still
be in flight
school.
(It is
less clear
for Al Shehhi.). A
student
tracking system, if in place, could have
verified
that both had alreadycompleted
schooKng
at
Huffman.
Both should have
hadMl
vocational visas, which they
did
not,
for
continued
full
time
flight
training. Neither did.
(Itis
less clear this
was AlShehhi's
claim. Al
Shehhi's
secondary report says he is "gaining flight hours to become
a
pilot".
This
may
mean
he was
claiming
"incidentally"
engaging
in a
"short"
course of study while in the U.S..)
Al
Shehhi appears
to
claim student status holding
a
business visa,
and if
this
was
the
case,
he too
should have been denied entry. However,
the INS
Inspector's
Field
Manual gave
a
pass
to a
tourist "incidentally" engaging
in a
"short"
courseof study while
in the
U.S. This option was/was
not
available
to a Bl
visa holder.
Team
5
needs
to do
further
scrubbing
on the Al
Shehhi January 2001 entry,
to
determine
the
extent
the Bl
business visa,
as
opposed
to B2
tourist
visa,
may
have
had
on his adjudication.
 
o
SUMMARY
FOR OF
ATTA
AND AL
SHEHHIJanuary
2001
admissions.
Atta,
the
pilot
of
AA#11,
first
came into
the US in
June2000as atourist visitorviaNewark,NJ. Theinspector admitted Attauntil December2,2000,butAttadid notleave until early January2001, thereby making him an overstay. Atta began training at
Huffman
Aviation on July 7, 2000 and passed his commercial pilot testonDecember19,2000.It was notuntil Sept.
19,
2000, that Atta
filed
an 1-539 to change his status to an M-1 student at
Huffman
Aviation inVenice Florida, thereby violating the terms of his stay by attendingschool
full
time prior to applying to change his
status.
Interestingly,
Atta's
application
was
handwritten
on the
back,
with a
note describinghow heplannedto financiallysupport himselfif notemployed:
"My
family
is
supporting
me financially for all my
living
and
training expenses. I receive money
transfers
regularly on mybank account.MOHAMED
ATTA."
Slide
of
application
here.
While
Atta's
INS application was pending, he
left
the US, whichtechnically meant he had abandoned his application. When Attadeparted January 4, 2001 and then returned again to MiamiInternational Airport on January
10
as a tourist again, he was pulledinto secondary inspection upon arrival, for he had some limited schoolpapers with him.Theinspector conductedahalf hour interview,which he does not recall. The primary inspection report reads: "PAX(passenger) turned
in [an
1-20
form]
but has had a
response,
meanwhile
he's
attending
flight
training
school.
Already
was in
school for 5/6 months, please verify." Secondary Inspection resultsread: SUBJ applied for
M-1.
I.S.
Adjusted
status. No overstay/Noremoval grounds found." At the time, while the law
found
Atta inviolationofimmigrationlaw as anoverstay,in hisvisa
status,
andunder the terms of the pending application, the INS Inspector's FieldManual gave
a
pass
to a
tourist
"incidentally"
engaging
in a
"short"
course of study while in the
US.
In other words, as long as Atta couldtalk himself throughtheinterview, he'dbegivena
pass.
Withoutanentry-exit system
in
place
to
show
that
Atta
was an
overstay,
and
withoutastudent tracking systeminplaceto
verify
that Attawaslyingaboutthestatusof hisstudies(hesaidhe wasstill attending schoolwhen he already had his commercial pilot license), the inspector couldonly check the status of the benefits application, which, if theapplication database
was
checked, would indicate
it the
application
still
pending, not as described by Atta as "adjusted". Under thosecircumstances, Atta was able to convince the inspector his continuingstudent status was legitimate. Eventually, Atta did receive his changeof status to a vocational student in the summer of
2001.
Atta
left
againon
July
7, 2001, returning on July 19 to learn that his vocational
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...