Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices 29025

Overview of this information

collection.

(1) Type of Information Collection:

new information collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection:

Public Charge Bond in Pilot Program.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and

the applicable component of the

Department of Justice sponsoring the

collection: No agency form number.

Office of Examinations, Adjudications

Division, Immigration and

Naturalization Service.

(4) Affected public who will be asked

or required to respond, as well as a brief

abstract: Primary: Individuals or

Households. This information

collection, contained in a proposed rule,

will be used by the Service to determine

which districts will be selected to

participate in the Bond Pilot Program, as

well as what dollar amount of the bond

would be for each immigrant in that

State, depending on the dollar amount

of means-tested benefits available.

(5) An estimate of the total number of

respondents and the amount of time

estimated for an average respondent to

respond: 20 responses at 6 hours per

response.

(6) An estimate of the total public

burden (in hours) associated with the

collection: 120 annual burden hours.

If you have additional comments,

suggestions, or need a copy of the

proposed information collection

instrument with instructions, or

additional information, please contact

Richard A. Sloan 202–514–3291,

Director, Policy Directives and

Instructions Branch, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, U.S. Department

of Justice, Room 5307, 425 I Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20536. Additionally,

comments and/or suggestions regarding

the item(s) contained in this notice,

especially regarding the estimated

public burden and associated response

time may also be directed to Mr.

Richard A. Sloan.

If additional information is required

contact: Mr. Robert B. Briggs, Clearance

Officer, United States Department of

Justice, Information Management and

Security Staff, Justice Management

Division, Suite 850, Washington Center,

1001 G Street, NW, Washington, DC

20530.

Dated: May 20, 1998.

Robert B. Briggs,

Department Clearance Officer, United States

Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 98–13926 Filed 5–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics; National

Criminal History Improvement Program

(NCHIP)

[OJP(BJS)–1175]

RIN 1121–ZA95

AGENCY: Office of Justice Programs,

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), Justice.

ACTION: Notice of program plan.

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Justice

Statistics (BJS) is publishing this notice

to announce the continuation of the

National Criminal History Improvement

Program (NCHIP) in Fiscal Year 1998.

Copies of this announcement can also

be found on the Internet at http://

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carol G. Kaplan at (202) 307–0759 (this

is not a toll free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The program implements the grant

provisions of—

* the Brady Handgun Violence

Prevention Act (Brady Act), Pub. L. No.

103159, 107 Stat. 1536 (1993), codified

as amended at 18 U.S.C. Sections 921 et

seq.;

* the National Child Protection Act of

1993 (NCPA), Pub. L. No. 103209, 107

Stat. 2490 (1993), codified as amended

at 42 U.S.C. Sections 3759, 5101 note,

5119, 5119a, 5119b, 5119c;

* those provisions of the Omnibus

Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of

1968 (Omnibus Act), Pub. L. No. 90–

351, 82 Stat. 197 (1968), codified as

amended at 42 U.S.C. Sections 3711 et

seq., as amended; and the Violent Crime

Control and Law Enforcement Act of

1994 (Violent Crime Control Act), Pub.

L. No. 103–322, 108 Stat. 1796 (1994),

codified as amended at 42 U.S.C.

Sections 13701 et seq., which pertain to

the establishment, maintenance,

analysis, or use of criminal history

records and criminal record systems;

and,

* related laws pertaining to the

identification, collection, analysis and

interstate exchange of records relating to

domestic violence and stalking

(including protection orders) and to the

establishment of sexual offender

registries and exchange of data between

them.

The NCHIP Program to date. The

NCHIP program was initiated in 1995,

under the administration of the Bureau

of Justice Statistics. During Fiscal Years

1995, 1996, and 1997, from the total

appropriation of $178.25 million, direct

awards were made to all States and

eligible territories in an amount totaling

over $160 million. Six million dollars

was also transferred to the FBI for

implementation of the National Instant

Criminal Background Check System

(NICS), which will provide instant

interstate access to records prohibiting

the sale of a firearm. About $5 million

was awarded to provide direct technical

assistance to States, to evaluate the

program, and to collect statistics and

research data on presale firearm

programs.

To date, under the NCHIP program,

all States have received funds to

upgrade criminal record systems

(including establishing and upgrading

Automated Fingerprint Identification

Systems (AFIS)) and to support efforts

to participate in the FBI’s Interstate

Identification Index (III), which permits

instant exchange of criminal records

among the States. Eighteen States also

received additional funding under the

Advanced State Award Program to

initiate efforts to identify persons other

than felons who are prohibited from

purchasing firearms.

Beginning in FY 1996, NCHIP

program funds have also been available

to States to upgrade record systems to

identify and flag persons convicted of

abusing children, the elderly, and the

disabled, or to defray costs of providing

rapid and reliable background checks on

individuals who wish to work with

these sensitive populations.

Also since 1996, NCHIP program

funds have been available to develop

and implement procedures for

classifying and entering data regarding

stalking and domestic violence

(including protection orders) into local,

State, and national crime information

databases consistent with the provisions

of the Violence Against Women Act

(VAWA).

To date, approximately $10 million

has been awarded to States for purposes

relating to offenses against children, the

elderly and the disabled, and for

collection of data on stalking and

domestic abuse, including protection

orders and violations thereof.

The FY 1998 program. Consistent

with the FY 1998 appropriation, funds

awarded under the 1998 NCHIP

program may be used to improve

criminal record systems, to support

interstate exchange of records through

the FBI, to implement procedures

designed to permit participation in the

NICS, and for authorized purposes

consistent with the NCPA and the

identified sections of the VAWA, as

described above, and, more fully, in

later sections of this announcement.

The FY 1998 NCHIP program also

includes the National Sex Offender
29026 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices

Registry Assistance Program (NSOR–

AP) under which $25 million was

appropriated for grants to assist States

in upgrading sex offender registries and

providing data to the FBI Sex Offender

Registry. The NSOR–AP program is a

component of NCHIP but is funded

separately pursuant to a separate

application.

Commitment to full implementation

of the National Instant Criminal

Background Check System (NICS). The

Brady Act in Section 103(b) requires the

establishment of a national system to

provide instant background checks to

determine if a potential firearm

purchaser is a felon or otherwise

prohibited from purchase of a firearm

under Federal or State statute.

Consistent with the statutory

requirement, the National Instant

Criminal Background Check System

(NICS), which will be operated by the

FBI, will become operational in

November 1998, and Federal waiting

period requirements will no longer be

applicable.

The effectiveness of NICS will depend

on the extent to which the most accurate

and complete records of Federal and

State criminal offenses and records in

other prohibiting categories are instantly

available in response to inquiries from

firearms dealers.

Under the NICS configuration, States

are encouraged to serve as a ‘‘Point of

Contact’’ (POC) interfacing between

firearm dealers and the FBI’s national

record system. Where the State is a POC,

firearm dealers will receive instant

access to (1) the most complete and upto-date State criminal records, (2) Stateheld records of noncriminal factors that

prohibit firearm purchase, and (3) State

personnel who can best interpret

records and their modifications. BJS

supports States that will be facilitating

background checks in this way by

allowing NCHIP funds to be used to

cover costs associated with the purchase

of equipment, development of software,

training, and other listed costs

associated with the NICS (for details,

see ‘‘Allowable Costs,’’ below).

Considering that the NICS is to become

operational in November 1998, requests

for funds in this category will receive

priority consideration.

In States not opting to serve as a POC,

inquiries will be made directly from the

firearm dealers to the FBI.

The Brady Act also allows States to

meet their presale firearm check

requirements through an ATF-approved

permit system. To assist States

following this procedure, NCHIP funds

may be used to cover costs associated

with development and implementation

of procedures that will meet ATF

requirements for a permit system to be

approved as an alternative to instant

checks at the time of sale.

Commitment to participation in the

Interstate Identification Index (III).

Participation by all States in the

Interstate Identification Index (III) is

critical to ensuring that the most

accurate and complete criminal records

are available instantly not only for NICS

presale firearm checks, but also for

background check inquiries regarding

persons seeking positions involving

national security; persons with

responsibility for children, the elderly

or the disabled, and other authorized

purposes. Instant interstate availability

of complete records is also vital to

supporting effective law enforcement

strategies involving pretrial release,

determinate sentencing, and

correctional assignment. At present, 36

States participate in III.

The NCHIP FY 1997 program

announcement emphasized the BJS

commitment to full State participation

in the FBI’s Interstate Identification

Index (III). In light of the importance of

III participation, BJS has again

identified III participation as a priority

goal of the NCHIP program and requires

States that are not currently III members

to specify whether funding already

committed is adequate to assure III

participation and, if not, to focus 1998

NCHIP funds on activities that further

this goal.

Commitment to support court efforts

relating to development of record

systems. Recent laws establishing

requirements for background checks for

firearms sales and in connection with

positions of responsibility with

children, the elderly and the disabled

have emphasized the importance of

records being complete with

dispositions. Moreover, other statutes

have highlighted the importance of

immediate statewide and interstate

access to protection orders related to

domestic violence. These requirements

can only be met if information initially

developed by the courts is available on

a complete and immediate basis. BJS is

committed to recognizing the

importance of the courts in all of these

efforts, and applicants should ensure

that in developing NCHIP operational

and funding plans, adequate attention is

directed at the role and needs of the

courts.

Program Goals. The goal of the NCHIP

grant program is to improve the Nation’s

public safety by—

* Facilitating the accurate and timely

identification of persons who are

ineligible to purchase a firearm;

* Ensuring that persons with

responsibility for child care, elder care,

or care of the disabled do not have

disqualifying criminal records;

* Improving access to protection

orders and records of people wanted for

stalking and domestic violence; and

* Enhancing the quality,

completeness and accessibility of the

Nation’s criminal history record systems

and the extent to which such records

can be used and analyzed for criminal

justice related purposes.

More specifically, NCHIP is designed

to assist States—

* To expand and enhance

participation in the FBI’s Interstate

Identification Index (III) and the

National Instant Criminal Background

Check System (NICS);

*To meet timetables for criminal

history record completeness and

participation in the III, as established for

each State by the Attorney General;

*To improve the level of criminal

history record automation, accuracy,

completeness, and flagging;

*To develop and implement

procedures for accessing records of

persons other than felons who are

ineligible to purchase firearms;

*To identify (through interface with

the National Incident-Based Reporting

System [NIBRS] where necessary)

records of crimes involving use of a

handgun and/or abuse of children, the

elderly, or disabled persons;

* To identify, classify, collect, and

maintain (through interface with the

National Crime Information Center

[NCIC] and the III where necessary)

protection orders, warrants, arrests, and

convictions of persons violating

protection orders intended to protect

victims of stalking and domestic

violence and to support the

development of State sex offender

registries and the interface with a

national sex offender registry; and,

* To ensure that States develop the

capability to monitor and assess State

progress in meeting legislative and

programmatic goals.

To ensure that all NCHIP-funded

efforts support the development of the

national criminal record system, the

program is closely coordinated with the

FBI, the Bureau of Justice Assistance,

and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms (ATF).

Legislative Background. Section 106

(b) of the Brady Act provides that—

The Attorney General, through the Bureau

of Justice Statistics, shall, subject to

appropriations and with preference to States

that as of the date of enactment of this Act

have the lowest percent currency of case

dispositions in computerized criminal

history files, make a grant to each State to be

used (A) for the creation of a computerized

criminal history record system or
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices 29027

improvement of an existing system; (B) to

improve accessibility to the national instant

criminal background system; and (C) upon

establishment of the national system, to assist

the State in the transmittal of criminal

records to the national system.

The provisions of 18 U.S.C. Sections

922 (g) and (n), as amended by the

Violent Crime Control Act and the

‘‘Lautenberg amendment,’’ prohibit the

sale of firearms to an individual who—

(1) Is under indictment for, or has

been convicted in any court, of a crime

punishable by imprisonment for a term

exceeding 1 year;

(2) Is a fugitive from justice;

(3) Is an unlawful user of, or addicted

to, any controlled substance;

(4) Has been adjudicated as a mental

defective or been committed to a mental

institution;

(5) Is an alien who is illegally or

unlawfully in the United States;

(6) Was discharged from the Armed

Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) Has renounced United States

citizenship;

(8) Is subject to a court order

restraining them from harassing,

stalking, or threatening an intimate

partner or child; or

(9) Has been convicted in any court of

a misdemeanor crime of domestic

violence.

Category 9, included as the

‘‘Lautenberg amendment’’ in the

Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations

Act of 1997, P.L. 104–208, 110 Stat

3009, became effective on October 1,

1996. See Appendix A of this

announcement for text of the

amendment, which includes applicable

definitions.

The Brady Act, enacted in November

1993 and effective in February 1994,

established interim provisions that are

applicable until the NICS is operational.

Under the interim provisions, licensed

firearm dealers request a presale check

on all potential handgun purchasers by

the chief law enforcement officer in the

purchaser’s residence community to

determine, based on available records, if

the individual is legally prohibited from

purchase of the firearm under the

provisions of the Gun Control Act (18

U.S.C. Section 922) or State law. The

sale may not be completed for 5 days

unless the dealer receives an approval

before that time. The interim provisions,

including the Federal imposition of a 5-

day waiting period, terminate when the

NICS becomes operational. Section 103

of the Brady Act provides that NICS will

supply information on ‘‘whether receipt

of a firearm * * * would violate (18

U.S.C. Section 922) or State law.’’ As

noted above, Section 106(b) of the Brady

Act establishes a grant program that not

only assists States in upgrading criminal

record systems, but also assists States in

improving access to and interface with

the NICS.

In addition, Section 106(a) of the

Brady Act amended Section 509(d) of

the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe

Streets Act to specifically provide that

funds from the 5% set-aside under the

Byrne Formula grant program may be

spent for ‘‘the improvement of State

record systems and the sharing * * * of

records * * * for the purposes of

implementing * * * (the Brady Act).’’

The Child Protection Act, as amended

by the Violent Crime Control Act,

requires that records of abuse against

children be transmitted to the FBI’s

national record system. The Child

Protection Act also encourages States to

adopt laws requiring background checks

on individuals prior to assuming

responsibility for care of children, the

elderly, or the disabled.

Section 4 of the Act establishes a

grant program to assist States in

upgrading records to meet the

requirements of the Act. Under the

definition set forth in Section 5(3) of the

Act, ‘‘child abuse crimes’’ include

crimes under any law of the State and

are not limited to felonies.

Both the Brady and Child Protection

Acts required the Attorney General to

survey the status of State criminal

history records and develop timetables

for States to achieve complete and

automated records. The survey was

conducted during March 1994, and

State governors were advised of

timetables by the Attorney General in

letters of May and June 1994. The letters

indicated that compliance with

timetable goals and the ability to join III

by November 1998 was to be contingent

upon availability of grant funds under

each Act.

The National Stalker and Domestic

Violence Reduction program (Stalker

Reduction), (Section 40602 of the

Violence Against Women Act (VAWA),

Pub. L. No. 103–322) authorized a

program to assist States in entering data

on stalking and domestic violence into

local, State, and national databases. The

Act emphasizes the importance of

ensuring that data on convictions for

these crimes are included in databases

being developed with Federal funds.

Section 40606 of VAWA authorized

technical assistance and training in

furtherance of the purposes of the

Stalker Reduction program. This section

also allows for the evaluation of

programs that receive funds under this

provision.

Section 40602(b) of the Violent Crime

Control Act further provides that in

order to be eligible to receive funds for

Domestic Violence/Stalker Reduction

program activities, a State shall certify

that it has or intends to establish a

program that enters into the National

Crime Information Center the following

records:

* Warrants for the arrest of persons

violating protection orders intended to

protect victims from stalking or

domestic violence;

* Arrests or convictions of persons

violating protection or domestic

violence orders; and

* Protection orders for the protection

of persons from stalking or domestic

violence.

The NCHIP program implements the

requirements of the programs

established in the Brady Act, Child

Protection Act, and the Domestic

Violence/Stalker Reduction provisions

of VAWA.

Appropriation. Section 106 (b) of the

Brady Act authorized $200 million for

the grant program; the Child Protection

Act authorized $20 million; Section

40603 of the Violent Crime Control Act

authorized a total of $6 million over 3

years for the Domestic Violence/Stalker

Reduction program included in VAWA.

Pursuant to these authorizations, the

Brady, Child Protection, and Domestic

Violence/Stalker Reduction Acts are

combined under the NCHIP program.

FY 1995: An appropriation of $100

million was made to implement Section

106 (b) of the Brady Act for FY 1995, to

be available until expended. No

appropriation was made for activities

authorized under the Child Protection

Act or the Domestic Violence/Stalker

Reduction provisions of VAWA in FY

1995.

FY 1996: An appropriation of $25

million was made in FY 1996 to

continue implementation of Section 106

(b) of the Brady Act and to implement

Section 4 (b) of the Child Protection Act.

In addition an appropriation of $1.5

million was made in FY 1996 for the

Domestic Violence/Stalker Reduction

component of the program.

FY 1997: In FY 1997, an appropriation

of $50 million was made to further the

implementation of Section 106 (b) of the

Brady Act and Section 4 (b) of the Child

Protection Act. $1.75 million was

appropriated for Domestic Violence/

Stalker Reduction activities.

FY 1998: The FY 1998 appropriation

for criminal record improvement was

$45 million. For purposes relating to

Domestic Violence/Stalker Reduction,

an appropriation of $2.75 million was

also made in FY 1998.

To date, approximately $10 million

has been awarded for purposes

authorized under the NCPA and the

Domestic Violence/Stalker Reduction
29028 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices

provisions of the VAWA. In recognition

of the importance of these issues, up to

$16 million of the 1998 appropriation

will be available to be awarded for these

purposes. Of this amount, the full $2.75

million appropriated to BJS for

Domestic Violence/Stalker Reduction

activities under VAWA in 1998 will be

allocated for purposes associated with

development/enhancement of

protection order files, including

interface with the FBI’s national

protection order file.

The FY 1998 NCHIP program also

includes the National Sex Offender

Registry Assistance Program (NSOR–

AP) under which $25 million was

appropriated for grants to assist States

in upgrading sex offender registries and

providing data to the FBI Sex Offender

Registry. The NSOR–AP program is a

component of NCHIP but is funded

separately pursuant to a separate

application.

Application and Award Process.

Eligibility requirements. Only one

application will be accepted from each

State. The application must be

submitted by the agency designated by

the State Governor. A State may,

however, choose to submit its

application as part of a multistate

consortium or other entity. In such case,

the application should include a

statement of commitment from each

State and be signed by an individual

designated by the Governor of each

participating State. The application

should also indicate specific

responsibilities and include a separate

budget for each State.

A grant will be made to each eligible

applicant State with funds from the

1998 appropriation. All States,

including States previously designated

as ‘‘priority States,’’ are eligible to

receive funds for activities relating to

criminal records improvement and NICS

participation, as well as the additional

purposes authorized under the Child

Protection Act and the Domestic

Violence/Stalker Reduction legislation,

as described in this announcement.

States may submit an application

even though funds remain unexpended

under the previous NCHIP awards. In

such a case, the application should

describe the efforts undertaken to date,

the specific reasons that funds remain

unexpended, and the anticipated time

when funds will be expended.

FY 1998 projects may overlap with FY

1997 projects or the projects may run

consecutively.

Program narrative. In addition to the

requirements set forth in Appendix A,

the NCHIP application should include

the following four parts. States may, at

their option, satisfy requirements noted

below by referencing or summarizing

previous applications. Additionally,

States in which the applicant agency is

the same under the BJS NCHIP and

Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) State

Identification Systems (SIS) program

may also choose to submit duplicate

material to BJS and BJA under Part I

(Background) and Part II (Identification

of Needs), below.

Part I. Background

This section should include a short

update of current efforts relating to

criminal history record improvement

funded under the BJS NCHIP, Advanced

State Award Program (ASAP), Criminal

History Record Improvements (CHRI)

programs, and the BJA Byrne 5% setaside, or with State funds during the

past year. Where applicable, the section

should also include a reference to

projects that are, or may be, funded

under the State Identification Systems

(SIS) Formula Grant program

administered by BJA. The discussion

should also specify total funds awarded

to the State under NCHIP, Byrne, and

SIS programs (if SIS funding is used for

criminal history record improvements)

and the funds in each category

remaining at the time of application.

Part II. Identification of Needs

This part should discuss any

evaluative efforts undertaken to identify

the key areas of weakness in the State’s

criminal record system since

submission of the last NCHIP

application. The application should also

indicate those areas that must be

addressed in order to enable the State to

identify ineligible firearm purchasers,

persons ineligible to hold positions

involving children, the elderly, or the

disabled, and people wanted, arrested,

or convicted of stalking and/or domestic

violence offenses, including violations

of protection orders.

States that are not members of III at

the time of application must include a

section identifying the tasks remaining

to permit III participation. This section

must specifically state whether funding

already available is adequate for the

State to participate in III and the

planned month and year of participation

in III. If funding already available is not

adequate, the State is expected to apply

for NCHIP funding that will permit the

State to participate in III.

Part III. NCHIP Effort

This section should describe the

activities to be undertaken with NCHIP

funds over the 12-month period.

Specifically, each application should

indicate the activities proposed, how

these activities relate to efforts funded

under the previous NCHIP awards, and

the results that will be achieved from

FY 1998 funding. In order to permit

assessment of State progress in meeting

grant goals, this section should also set

forth measurable benchmarks or goals

for each proposed activity.

States that are not members of III must

include a description and timetable for

activities that are specifically designed

to permit such participation.

Part III of the application should also

describe any efforts to be supported to

monitor State compliance with

legislative or programmatic goals

through ongoing audits or other means

such as statistical analysis or

comparison between Computerized

Criminal History (CCH) records and

National Incident-Based Reporting

System (NIBRS) or Uniform Crime

Reporting (UCR) data. Studies relating

to handgun use or sales approval, if

proposed, should be described in this

section.

In addition, to ensure program

continuity and emphasize the

importance of judicial efforts in meeting

newly established record requirements,

the application should indicate the level

of funds that will be made directly

available to the courts, where the courts

are the appropriate source for data on

dispositions or other record data.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics will

coordinate the Domestic Violence/

Stalker Reduction portion of NCHIP

with the Violence Against Women

Office (VAWA) at the Department of

Justice.

Part IV. Coordination

Byrne Formula Funds: Funds under

the Byrne Formula 5% set-aside

program are available to support the

improvement of record systems and to

meet the goals of the Brady and Child

Protection Acts.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics and

the Bureau of Justice Assistance have

jointly agreed that close and continuing

coordination between the NCHIP and

Byrne 5% set-aside program is critical to

meeting the goals of the Brady Act and

the National Child Protection Act. Such

coordinated efforts are also necessary to

ensure the development of an effective

interstate criminal history record system

to meet the needs of law enforcement,

the criminal justice community, and the

increasing number of noncriminal

justice users of criminal history record

information. To achieve this goal, BJS

and BJA prepared guidelines governing

use of the Byrne 5% set-aside funds.

The guidelines were issued February 23,

1995 to State administrative agencies

that receive and distribute Byrne

formula grant funds.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices 29029

To avoid overlap and maximize

funding effectiveness, BJS expects that

program plans for projects to be funded

under NCHIP and the Byrne 5% setaside will be coordinated by the State

agencies responsible for these programs.

Where costs of a proposed activity

exceed NCHIP available funds or are

unallowable under NCHIP, the State

might, for example, use Byrne funds to

fill remaining needs. This joint effort

will maximize the effectiveness of these

programs.

State Identification Systems (SIS)

Program: In May 1997, BJA announced

the State Identification Systems (SIS)

Formula Grant Program, under which

States are eligible to apply for funds to

‘‘establish, develop, update or

upgrade—

(A) computerized identification

systems that are compatible and

integrated with the databases of the

National Crime Information Center

(NCIC) of the FBI;

(B) the capability to analyze DNA in

a forensic laboratory in ways that are

compatible and integrated with the

combined DNA Identification System

(CODIS) of the FBI; and

(C) automated fingerprint

identification systems that are

compatible and integrated with the

Integrated Automated Fingerprint

Identification System (IAFIS) of the

FBI.’’

NCHIP applications should insure

that efforts under these programs will be

coordinated. Information copies of the

proposed activities to be funded under

the SIS program will be provided to BJS

for inclusion as part of the State’s

NCHIP file.

Other Federal funding: To ensure

coordination of Federal funding efforts,

the application should include

information on other current awards or

pending applications for Federal

funding to support activities for which

funds are being requested in the current

NCHIP application. Where relevant,

such information should indicate the

amount of the other award, the grantor

agency, and the program purpose.

Award Period and Budget. Awards

may be for up to 12 months. Since the

FY 1998 NCHIP program builds on the

long-term NCHIP activity, States will

have the flexibility to begin FY 1998

funded activities immediately upon

award or as late as the summer of 1999.

Activities must be completed by June 1,

2000. Applicants are also encouraged to

incorporate or reference pages of

previously submitted materials, when

appropriate.

The budget should provide details for

expenses in required categories and by

individual task (see Appendix A,

Application content). The application

should identify those agencies to receive

direct funding and indicate the fiscal

arrangements to accomplish fund

transfer.

Application Submission and Due

Dates. Applications may be submitted at

any time after publication of this

announcement. Applications must be

received by June 30, 1998, to be eligible

for funding from the FY 1998

appropriation.

To minimize administrative burdens,

States may resubmit parts of previous

proposals that did not receive funds

under previous NCHIP awards,

accompanied by a current budget.

Review Criteria. States should

understand that full funding may not be

possible for all proposed activities.

Allocation of funds will be based on the

amount requested and the following

factors:

(1) The extent to which funds will

support participation in NICS, State

efforts to become a III participant, and

meet the timetables established for the

State by the Attorney General;

(2) The extent to which improvements

in the State system, by virtue of record

numbers, levels of technical

development, or operating procedures,

will have a major impact on availability

of records throughout the national

system;

(3) The proposed use or enhancement

of innovative procedures which may be

of value to other jurisdictions;

(4) The technical feasibility of the

proposal and the extent to which the

proposal appears reasonable in light of

the State’s current level of system

development and statutory framework;

(5) The total amount already awarded

under previous NCHIP program

announcements;

(6) The extent to which the State has

fulfilled goals of previous NCHIP grants,

expended funds awarded in previous

grants, and demonstrated a commitment

to criminal history record improvement

through activities under the NCHIP

program;

(7) State commitment to the national

record system as evidenced by

membership in III, participation in the

FBI’s National Fingerprint File (NFF)

and Felon Identification in Firearms

Sales (FIFS) programs, etc., and the

current status of development of its

CCH;

(8) Reasonableness of the budget;

(9) Evidence of State progress in

meeting record improvement and

background check goals as measured in

terms of audits, and meeting data

collection goals relating to presale

firearm checks and background checks

on persons seeking positions involving

children, the aged and the disabled;

(10) Appropriate focus on criminal

history data improvement regarding

protection orders and crimes against

children, the elderly, and the disabled;

(11) Nature of the proposed

expenditures;

(12) The extent to which the plan

reflects constructive interface between

relevant components of the State

organization and/or multistate systems;

(13) The reasonableness of the

relationship between the proposed

activities and the current status of the

State system, in terms of technical

development, legislation, current fiscal

demands, and future operating costs.

The program does not require either

‘‘hard’’ (cash) or ‘‘soft’’ (in-kind) match.

Indications of State support, however,

may be interpreted as expressions of

commitment by the State to the

program.

All applicants must agree to

participate in evaluations sponsored by

the Federal Government. Applicants

must also agree to provide data relating

to Brady Act activity to the Firearm

Inquiry Statistics Program (FIST) in the

format designated by the FIST.

Allowable Costs. Allowable expenses

are detailed below. All expenses are

allowable only to the extent that they

directly relate to programs described in

the application’s program narrative.

(1) Participation in III. This is a key

goal. Covered costs include, but are not

limited to, costs associated with

automation of the database,

synchronization of records between the

State and the FBI, and development of

necessary software and hardware

enabling electronic access on an

intrastate or interstate basis.

(2) Database enhancement. Improving

the quality, completeness, and accuracy

of criminal history records is a key goal

of the NCHIP effort. Allowable costs

include the costs associated with

implementing improved record capture

procedures, establishing more effective

accuracy controls, and ensuring that

records of all criminal events that start

with an arrest or indictment are

included in the database.

In addition to felony records, funds

may be used to capture data on

domestic violence misdemeanors and to

ensure that data on persons convicted of

abuse of children, the elderly, and the

disabled and/or stalking and domestic

violence offenses (including protection

orders and violations thereof) are

included in the database.

States that currently participate in III

may also use limited funds to identify

and develop access to data on other

categories of persons prohibited from
29030 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices

firearm purchase under recent

amendments to the Gun Control Act (18

U.S.C. Section 922), as incorporated in

the Brady Act. States proposing use of

funds for these purposes must

demonstrate in the application that

results of applicable pilot efforts

supported under the NCHIP Advanced

State Award Program (ASAP) have been

considered and that necessary

protections for individual privacy will

be incorporated in the proposed

procedures. Information about current

NCHIP-supported efforts in these areas

and relevant State contacts is available

through the BJS Internet site.

(3) Improved capture of case

disposition. Automated interface

between the criminal history repository

and the courts, prosecutors, and/or

corrections agencies is encouraged.

Funds provided to courts or prosecutors

for these purposes are allowable only to

the extent that the function to be

supported is related to the capture of

disposition or other data relating to the

offender record (for example, full costs

associated with establishment of court

Management Information Systems (MIS)

are not allowable under the NCHIP

program).

(4) Flagging of records. Upgrading the

accessibility of records through flagging

for presale and preemployment checks

is an important activity. Allowable costs

include costs of flagging or algorithms

used for flagging of felony records and

records of persons with convictions for

crimes involving children, the elderly,

and/or the disabled, as well as records

of persons convicted of crimes involving

domestic violence and/or stalking. Costs

may include the cost of technical record

flagging and the costs associated with

identification of records to be flagged

(see [12] below regarding interface with

NIBRS).

(5) Participation in the NICS. NCHIP

funds may be used to enable the State

to participate in the NICS consistent

with the provisions of 18 U.S.C. Section

922 (t). Allowable expenditures include,

but are not limited to costs necessary to

enable the State to serve as a Point of

Contact under the FBI’s NICS system,

and include costs of equipment,

software, personnel training, and

development and implementation of

related operating and administrative

procedures. Funds may not be used to

conduct presale firearm background

checks.

(6) Firearm permits. NCHIP funds

may be used to comply with Brady Act

provisions pursuant to an ATFapproved firearm permit system and to

develop and implement procedures to

review the currency of firearm permits

and/or to provide appropriate

notification when permits are revoked.

(7) Protection order file.

Establishment of a protection order file

to enhance the cross-jurisdictional

enforcement of protective orders, and to

support the FBI’s National Protection

Order File is an important goal of the

NCHIP program. Costs (including

equipment, software, training and

procedural development) associated

with development and enhancement of

such files and with interface with the

FBI’s National Protection Order File are

covered. Protection order files

supported with NCHIP funds must be

compatible with the FBI file, and the

application must indicate that records

are presently being submitted to the FBI

or indicate the date upon which that

submission will commence. Funds are

only allowable to support development

of local protection order files where data

in such files is or will become directly

accessible throughout the State and

available to the FBI’s national system.

(8) Interface between criminal history

records, sex offender registry, and civil

protection order files. To ensure that,

consistent with State law, a complete

data review is possible in connection

with background checks for child care

or other authorized purposes, funds may

be used to develop software to establish

protocols to permit interface between

the criminal history record system, the

State sex offender registry, and related

protection order files including files of

civil protection orders.

(9) Uniform RAP sheet format. The

FBI has recently endorsed a format and

standards for transmission of a uniform

RAP sheet (text version of a person’s

criminal history record) among States.

The format reflects efforts initiated

under the BJS/SEARCH Task Force on

Uniform RAP Sheet Standards. Funds

are available to assist States in

converting State criminal history

records to the FBI standard interstate

RAP sheet format or for developing

electronic interchange capabilities

related thereto.

(10) Record automation. These are

allowable costs only with respect to

records where the subject has been

arrested, indicted, convicted, or released

from confinement within 5 years of the

date of automation. As appropriate,

allowable costs also include costs

associated with system design in States

with nonautomated systems or in States

proposing to enhance system operation

to include access to non-CCH databases.

(11) AFIS/livescan. Automated

Fingerprint Identification System

(AFIS)/livescan equipment for local law

enforcement agencies is allowable to

improve the level of arrest and

disposition reporting, but only where—

(a) the State repository system is

automated, is participating in, or is

planning to participate in III, and has in

place the technical capability to accept

AFIS transmissions, and

(b) sufficient traffic can be

demonstrated to justify the cost,

possibly through the use of regional

systems.

Funding of AFIS/livescan in squad

cars is not allowable, since field

inquiries are not a factor in checks

under either the Brady Act or the Child

Protection Act. Additionally, since data

are not generally input to the system by

the field unit, AFIS in the squad car

would not support record improvement

or completeness. AFIS/livescan for use

in courts is allowable, to support record

completeness. The same conditions

regarding repository capability and

levels of traffic are also applicable to

costs in this category. Costs associated

with AFIS/livescan communication

from the repository to the FBI national

system (IAFIS) are allowable but only

where the State can demonstrate

adequate levels of record completeness

(both arrest and disposition) and current

membership in III.

States should understand that Byrne

5% set-aside funds are available for

AFIS/livescan, and that, accordingly,

use of NCHIP funds for AFIS or livescan

will only be allowable when justified as

appropriate given the overall status of

the State system, its participation in the

national system and its planned use of

Byrne 5% set-aside funds. This is

particularly relevant with respect to

State proposals to use NCHIP funds to

cover costs of local livescan equipment.

(12) Interface with NIBRS. Funds may

be used to interface with any State data

system that is compatible with NIBRS

for purposes of identifying persons

convicted of crimes against children, the

elderly, or the disabled; crimes

involving domestic violence and/or

stalking; and/or identification of records

involving firearm crimes for operational

or research purposes. NCHIP funds are

not available, however, to develop the

NIBRS database.

(13) Research, evaluation, monitoring,

and audits. Costs associated with

research or evaluation efforts are

allowable to the extent that they are

directly associated with a project

approved in the application. Costs

associated with monitoring State

compliance with legislative or

programmatic goals through ongoing or

periodic audits or other procedures are

allowable and encouraged. The

purchase of equipment such as modems

and the necessary communications and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices 29031

data software for storing and

transmitting evaluative data between

States and to BJS or other designated

Federal agencies is an allowable

expense. (14) Conversion of juvenile records to

the adult system. Federal regulations

allow the FBI to accept juvenile records

if submitted by the State or local

arresting agency. Expenditures to

interface juvenile and adult records are

allowable if consistent with relevant

State law and undertaken to further the

goals of the NCHIP program. (15) Missing dispositions backlog

reduction. These costs are allowable to

improve the level of disposition

reporting but only where limited to

records with arrests within the past 5

years. States must also propose a

strategy to prevent future backlogs from

developing. (16) Equipment upgrades. Upgrade

costs are allowable where related to

improving availability of data and

where appropriate given the level of

data completeness, participation in III,

etc. Replacement costs will be

considered, but States are encouraged to

contribute some portion of the total

costs.

(17) Training, participation in

seminars and meetings. Limited funds

may be used to cover costs of training

and participation in State, regional, or

national seminars or conferences

(including travel, where necessary). (18) Reducing cost of background

checks. States may use funds to develop

and implement technologies that lower

costs of conducting background checks.

These funds may also be used to pay all

or part of the State’s cost of conducting

background checks on persons who are

employed by or volunteer with a public,

not-for-profit, or other voluntary

organization to reduce the amount of

fees charged for such background

checks, consistent with the provisions

of 42 USC 5119(b).

(19) Allowable activities relating to

implementation of the Child Protection

Act and the Domestic Violence and

Stalker Reduction provisions of the

VAWA. Allowable activities include— * capturing domestic violence and/or

stalking protection orders; * flagging of records concerning child

abuse, crimes against children, the

elderly and the disabled; convictions for

domestic violence and/or stalking; and

domestic violence protection orders; * incorporating serious misdemeanor

offenses against children, the elderly

and the disabled into existing criminal

history records; * offsetting the cost of certain

background checks, including

development and implementation of

technological and procedural advances;

and

* improving processes for entering

data regarding stalking and domestic

violence into local, State, and national

crime information databases.

Text of ‘‘Lautenberg Amendment.’’

The ‘‘Lautenberg Amendment’’ amends

the Federal Gun Control Act (18 U.S.C.

Section 922) to prohibit the transfer of

firearms to a person convicted of a

‘‘misdemeanor crime of domestic

violence.’’ The text of the amendment is

set forth below.

Sec. 668. GUN BAN FOR INDIVIDUALS

CONVICTED OF A MISDEMEANOR CRIME

OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

(a) Definition—Section 921 (a) of title 18,

United States Code, is amended by adding at

the end of the following:

‘‘(33)(A) Except as provided in

subparagraph (C), the term ‘misdemeanor

crime of domestic violence’ means an offense

that—

‘‘(i) is a misdemeanor under Federal or

State law; and

‘‘(ii) has, as an element, the use or

attempted use of physical force, or the

threatened use of a deadly weapon,

committed by a current or former spouse,

parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person

who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with

the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian,

or by a person similarly situated to a spouse,

parent, or guardian of the victim.

‘‘(B)(i) A person shall not be considered to

have been convicted of such an offense for

purposes of this chapter, unless—

‘‘(I) the person was represented by counsel

in the case, or knowingly and intelligently

waived the right to counsel in the case; and

(II) in the case of a prosecution for an

offense described in this paragraph for which

a person was entitled to a jury trial in the

jurisdiction in which the case was tried,

either

(aa) the case was tried by a jury, or

(bb) the person knowingly and intelligently

waived the right to have the case tried by a

jury, by guilty plea or otherwise.

‘‘(ii) A person shall not be considered to

have been convicted of such an offense for

purposes of this chapter if the conviction has

been expunged or set aside, or is an offense

for which the person has been pardoned or

has had civil rights restored (if the law of the

applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss

of civil rights under such an offense) unless

the pardon, expungement, or restoration of

civil rights expressly provides that the person

may not ship, transport, possess, or receive

firearms.’’

(b) PROHIBITIONS—

(1) Section 922(d) of such title is amended

(A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of paragraph

(7);

(B) by striking the period at the end of

paragraph (8) and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and

(C) by inserting after paragraph (8) the

following:

(9) has been convicted in any court of a

misdemeanor crime of domestic violence’’.

(2) Section 922(g) of such title is

amended—

(A) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of paragraph

(7);

(B) by striking the period at the end of

paragraph (8) and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and

(C) by inserting after paragraph (8) the

following:

‘‘(9) has been convicted in any court of a

misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.’’

(3) Section 922(s)(3)(B)(I) of such title is

amended by inserting, ‘‘and has not been

convicted in any court of a misdemeanor

crime of domestic violence’’ before this

semicolon.

(c) GOVERNMENT ENTITIES NOT

EXCEPTED—Section 925(a)(1) of such title is

amended by inserting ‘‘sections 922(d)(9) and

922(g)(9) and’’ after ‘‘except for’’.

Application and administrative

requirements. Application content. All

applicants must submit:

* Standard Form 424, Application for

Federal Assistance.

* Budget Detail Worksheet (replaced

the SF 424A, Budget Information).

* OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev. 1–93),

Program Narrative and Assurances.

* OJP Form 4061/6 Certification

Regarding Lobbying, Debarment,

Suspension, and Other Responsibility

Matters; Drug-Free Workplace

Requirements.

Applicants are requested to submit an

original and two copies of the

application and certifications to the

following address: Application

Coordinator, Bureau of Justice Statistics,

810 Seventh Street, NW, Washington DC

20531, Telephone: (202) 616–3500.

Standard Form 424 (SF–424). The SF–

424, a one-page sheet with 18 items,

serves as a cover sheet for the entire

application. This form is required for

every application for Federal assistance.

NO APPLICATION CAN BE ACCEPTED

WITHOUT A COMPLETED, SIGNED

ORIGINAL SF–424. Directions to

complete each item are included on the

back of the form.

Budget Detail Worksheet.

Applications must provide a detailed

justification for all costs, including the

basis for computation of these costs. For

example, the detailed budget would

include the salaries of staff involved in

the project and the portion of those

salaries to be paid from the award;

fringe benefits paid to each staff person;

travel costs related to the project;

equipment to be purchased with the

award funds; and supplies required to

complete the project.

Budget narrative. The budget

narrative should detail costs included in

each budget category for the Federal and

the non-Federal (in-kind and cash)

share. The purpose of the budget

narrative is to relate items budgeted to

project activities and to provide

justification and explanation for budget

items, including criteria and data used

to arrive at the estimates for each budget

category. The budget narrative should

also indicate amounts to be made

available to subrecipient agencies

(under Contractual/Contracts category)

other than the direct grant recipient.

The following information is provided
29032 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices

to assist the applicant in developing the

budget narrative:

a. Personnel category. List each

position by title (and name of employee

if available), show annual salary rate

and percentage of time to be devoted to

the project by the employee.

Compensation paid for employees

engaged in federally assisted activities

must be consistent with that paid for

similar work in other activities of the

applicant.

b. Fringe benefits category. Indicate

each type of benefit included and

explain how the total cost allowable for

employees assigned to the project is

computed.

c. Travel category. Itemize travel

expenses of project personnel by

purpose (e.g., faculty to training site,

field interviews, advisory group

meetings, etc.) and show basis or

computation (e.g., ‘‘Five trips for x

purpose at $80 average cost—$50

transportation and two days per diem at

$15’’ or ‘‘Six people to 3-day meeting at

$70 transportation and $45

subsistence.’’) In training projects where

travel and subsistence for trainees is

included, this should be separately

listed indicating the number of trainees

and the unit costs involved.

(1) Identify the tentative location of

all training sessions, meetings, and

other travel.

(2) Travel costs are allowable as

expenses by employees who are in

travel status on official business. These

costs must be in accordance with the

Federal or an organizationally-approved

travel policy.

(3) Recipients may follow their own

established travel rates. If a recipient

does not have an established travel

policy, the recipient must abide by the

Federal travel policy. Subrecipients of

States must follow their State’s

established travel policy. If a State does

not have an established travel policy,

the subrecipient must abide by the

Federal travel rates.

d. Equipment. List each type of

equipment to be purchased or rented

with unit or monthly costs.

e. Supplies. List items within this

category by major type (office supplies,

training materials, research forms,

postage) and show basis for

computation. Provide unit or monthly

estimates.

f. Contractual category. State the

selection basis for any contract,

subcontract, prospective contract or

prospective subcontract (including

construction services and equipment).

Please note, applications that include

noncompetitive contracts for the

provision of specific services must

contain a sole source justification for

any procurement in excess of $100,000.

For individuals to be reimbursed for

personal services on a fee basis, list by

name or type of consultant or service,

the proposed fee (by day, week, or hour)

and the amounts of time to be devoted

to such services. For construction

contracts and organization (including

professional associations and education

institutions performing professional

services), indicate the type of service to

be performed and the estimated contract

cost data.

g. Construction category. Describe

construction or renovation which will

be accomplished using grant funds and

the method used to calculate cost.

h. Other category. Include under

‘‘other’’ such items as rent,

reproduction, telephone, and janitorial

or security services. List items by major

type with basis of computation shown.

(Provide square footage and cost per

square foot for rent. Provide local and

long distance telephone charges

separately.)

i. Indirect charges category. The

Agency may accept an indirect cost rate

previously approved for an applicant by

a Federal agency. Applicants must

enclose a copy of the approved rate

agreement with the grant application.

j. Program income. If applicable,

provide a detailed estimate of the

amount of program income to be

generated during the grant period and

its proposed application (to reduce the

cost of the project or to increase the

scope of the project). Also, describe the

source of program income, listing the

rental rates to be obtained, sale prices of

publications supported by grant funds,

and registration fees charged for

particular sessions. If scholarships

(covering, for example, registration fees)

are awarded by the organization to

certain conference attendees, the

application should identify the

percentage of all attendees that are

projected as ‘‘scholarship’’ cases and the

precise criteria for their selection.

Program narrative. All applications

must include a program narrative that

fully describes the expected design and

implementation of the proposed

program. OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev. 1–93)

provides additional detailed

instructions for preparing the program

narrative.

The narrative should include a time

line of activities indicating, for each

proposed activity, the projected

duration of the activity, expected

completion date, and any products

expected. The application should

include a description of the roles and

responsibilities of key organizational

and/or functional components involved

in project activities; and a list of key

personnel responsible for managing and

implementing the major elements of the

program.

Assurances. OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev.

1–93) must be included in the

application submission. If submitting

this form separately from the SF–424,

the applicant must sign and date the

form to certify compliance with the

Federal statutes, regulations, and

requirements as cited.

Certification Regarding Lobbying;

Debarment, Suspension, and Other

Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free

Workplace. Applicants should refer to

the regulations cited in OJP Form, 4061/

6 to determine the certification to which

they are required to attest. A copy of

OJP Form 4061/6 can be obtained from

the BJS Application Coordinator.

Applicants should also review the

instructions for certification included in

the regulations before completing this

form. Signature of this form provides for

compliance with certification

requirements under 28 C.F.R. Part 69,

‘‘New Restrictions on Lobbying,’’ and 28

C.F.R. Part 67, ‘‘Government-wide

Debarment and Suspension

(Nonprocurement) and Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free

Workplace (Grants).’’ The certifications

shall be treated as a material

representation of fact upon which

reliance will be placed when the U.S.

Department of Justice determines to

award the covered transaction, grant, or

cooperative agreement.

Financial and administrative

requirements. Discretionary grants are

governed by the provisions of OMB

Circulars applicable to financial

assistance. The circulars, in addition to

the OJP Financial Guide, are available

from the Office of Justice Programs. This

guideline manual is intended to assist

grantees in the administration of funds

and includes information on allowable

costs, methods of payment, Federal

rights of access to records, audit

requirements, accounting systems, and

financial records.

Complete and accurate information is

required relative to the application,

expenditure of funds, and program

performance. The consequences of

failure to comply with program

guidelines and requirements will be

determined at the discretion of the

Department.

Civil rights obligations. All applicants

for Federal financial assistance must

sign Certified Assurances that they are

in compliance with the Federal laws

and regulations which prohibit

discrimination in any program or

activity that receives such Federal

funds. Section 809(c), Omnibus Crime
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 101 /Wednesday, May 27, 1998 / Notices 29033

Control & Safe Streets Act of 1968,

provides that:

No person in any State shall on the

ground of race, color, religion, national

origin, or sex be excluded from

participation in, be denied the benefits

of, or be subjected to discrimination

under, or denied employment in

connection with any program or activity

funded in whole or in part with funds

made available under this title.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973, and Title II of the Americans

With Disabilities Act prohibit

discrimination on the basis of disability.

The applicant agency must discuss

how it will ensure nondiscriminatory

practices as they relate to:

(1) Delivery of services or benefits—to

ensure that individuals will not be

denied access to services or benefits

under the program or activity on the

basis of race, color, religion, national

origin, gender, age, or disability;

(2) Employment practices—to ensure

that its personnel in the program or

activity are selected for employment

without regard to race, color, religion,

national origin, gender, age, or

disability; and

(3) Program participation—to ensure

members of any planning, steering or

advisory board, which is an integral part

of the program or activity, are not

excluded from participation on the basis

of race, color, religion, national origin,

gender, age or disability; and to

encourage the selection of such

members who are reflective of the

diversity in the community to be served.

Audit requirement. On June 30, 1997,

the Office of Management and Budget

issued Circular A–133, ‘‘Audits of

States, Local Governments, and NonProfit Organizations,’’ which establishes

regulations to implement the Single

Audit Act of 1996. This Circular A–133

outlines the requirements for

organizational audits which apply to

BJS grantees.

Intergovernmental review of Federal

programs. Federal Executive Order

12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of

Federal Programs,’’ allows States to

establish a process for reviewing Federal

programs in the State, to choose which

programs they wish to review, to

conduct such reviews, and to make their

views known to the funding Federal

agency through a State ‘‘single point of

contact.’’

If the State has established a ‘‘single

point of contact,’’ and if the State has

selected this program to be included in

its review process, the applicant must

send a copy of its letter or application

to the State ‘‘single point of contact’’ at

the same time that it is submitted to BJS.

The letter or application submitted to

BJS must indicate that this has been

done. The State must complete its

review within 60 days. The review

period will begin on the date that the

letter or application is officially

received by BJS. If BJS does not receive

comments from the State’s ‘‘single point

of contact’’ by the end of the review

period, this will be interpreted as a ‘‘no

comment’’ response.

If the State has not established a

‘‘single point of contact,’’ or if it has not

selected the BJS statistics development

or criminal history improvement

programs in its review process, this

must be stated in the letter or

application.

Jan M. Chaiken,

Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

[FR Doc. 98–13965 Filed 5–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary

Submission for OMB review; comment

request

May 21, 1998.

The Department of Labor (DOL) has

submitted the following public

information collection requests (ICRs) to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and approval in

accordance with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13,

44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of each

individual ICR, with applicable

supporting documentation, may be

obtained by calling the Department of

Labor, Departmental Clearance Officer,

Todd R. Owen ((202) 219–5096 ext. 143)

or by E-Mail to Owen-Todd@dol.gov.

Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TTY/TDD) may call (202) 219–4720

between 1:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern

time, Monday-Friday.

Comments should be sent to Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Attn: OMB Desk Officer for BLS, DM,

ESA, ETA, MSHA, OSHA, PWBA, or

VETS, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC

20503 ((202) 395–7316), by June 26,

1998.

The OMB is particularly interested in

comments which:

* Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

* Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

* Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

* Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated,

electronic, mechanical, or other

technological collection techniques or

other forms of information technology,

e.g., permitting electronic submission of

responses.

Agency: Occupational Safety and

Health Administration.

Title: Gear Certification (29 CFR part

1919).

OMB Number: 1218–0003 (Extension).

Form Number: OSHA 70, OSHA 71,

and OSHA 72.

Frequency: Quadrennially; Annually.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions; State,

Local and Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents: 278.

Total Responses: 6443.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 55

minutes.

Total Burden Hours: 93.

Total annualized capital/startup

costs: $0.

Total annual costs (operating/

maintaining systems or purchasing

services): $476,406.

Description: 29 CFR part 1919 (Gear

Certification), requires the gathering of

information to complete three forms, the

OSHA 70, OSHA 71, and OSHA 72. The

OSHA 70 Form is used by applicants

seeking accreditation from OSHA to be

able to test or examine certain

equipment and material handling

devices, as required under the maritime

regulations, part 1917 (Marine

Terminals), and part 1918 (Long

shoring). The OSHA 70 Form

application for accreditation provides

an easy means for companies to apply

for accreditation. The OSHA 71 Form is

required to be issued by those

accredited by OSHA to make known to

employers in the maritime industry that

certain equipment and material

handling devices are safe to use or

operate.

The OSHA 72 Form is required to be

used by those accredited by OSHA to

employers in maritime industry when

the equipment or material handling

device is found to be unsafe to use.

Agency: Occupational Safety and

Health Administration.

Title: Course Evaluation Form.

OMB Number: 1218–0173 (Extension).

Frequency: Once (at the end of the

training course).

Affected Public: Individuals.