33708 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 118 / Friday, June 19, 1998 / Notices

included on the individual’s FBI

Identification Record.

The FBI is in the process of modifying

the National Crime Information Center

(NCIC) to establish a new crime

information system which will be

known as ‘‘NCIC 2000.’’ NCIC 2000,

which is expected to go on-line in mid1999, will include a Convicted Sexual

Offender Registry File that will serve as

the permanent National Sex Offender

Registry (the ‘‘Permanent Registry’’). In

the Permanent Registry, sex offender

registration information will be entered

directly into the NCIC Convicted Sexual

Offender Registry File, via the NCIC

communication circuit, and will include

such information as the offender’s name

and address and details regarding the

conviction resulting in registration.

States will receive further guidance

concerning participation in the

Permanent Registry through future

modifications of regulations and

guidelines.

VII. Good Faith Immunity [Available to

States Immediately]

Subsection (f) states that law

enforcement agencies, employees of law

enforcement agencies, independent

contractors acting at the direction of

such agencies, and state officials shall

be immune from liability for good faith

conduct under the Act, Inclusion of this

provision in the Act was necessary to

protect state actors and contractors

involved in registration and notification

programs for unwarranted exposure to

liability, since the states cannot legislate

immunities to liability under federal

causes of action. This part of the Act

does not impose any requirement on

states and the character of state law

provisions regarding the scope of

immunity or liability will not be

considered in the compliance review

under the Act.

VIII. Compliance Review;

Consequences of Non-Compliance

The time states have to comply with

the Act’s requirements depends on the

legislation from which the requirements

derive, as specified in these guidelines.

Thus, the initial deadline for complying

with requirements derived from the

Wetterling Act as originally enacted or

from Megan’s Law was September 12,

1997, and the deadline is now

September 12, 1999, for states that have

received a two-year extension based on

good faith efforts to achieve compliance.

Requirements deriving from the Pam

Lychner Act must be complied with by

October 2, 1999, subject to a possible

two-year extension for states making

good faith efforts to comply.

Requirements deriving from the CJSA

must be complied with by November 25,

2000, subject to a possible two-year

extension for states making good faith

efforts to comply.

These deadlines set outer limits for

state compliance to avoid a reduction of

Byrne Formula Grant funding. States are

strongly encouraged to attempt to

achieve compliance with all parts of the

Act as quickly as possible to maximize

the benefits of the Act’s reforms.

States that fail to come into

compliance within the specified time

periods will be subject to a mandatory

10% reduction of Byrne Formula Grant

funding, and any funds that are not

allocated to noncomplying states will be

reallocated to states that are in

compliance. If a state’s funding has been

reduced because it has failed to comply

with the Act’s requirements by an

applicable deadline, the state may

regain eligibility for full funding in later

program years by establishing

compliance with all applicable

requirements of the Act in such later

years.

States are encouraged to submit

information concerning existing and

proposed sex offender registration

provisions to the Bureau of Justice

Assistance with as much lead-time as

possible. This will enable the reviewing

authority to assess the status of state

compliance with the Act and to suggest

any necessary changes to achieve

compliance before the funding

reduction goes into effect. At the latest,

state submissions must be provided on

the following timetable:

To maintain eligiblity for full Byrne

Formula Grant funding following

September 12, 1999—the end of the

implementation period for the Act’s

original requirements and Megan’s Law,

for states that have received the twoyear ‘‘good faith’’ extension—such states

must submit to the Bureau of Justice

Assistance by July 12, 1999, information

that shows compliance, in the reviewing

authority’s judgment, with the

requirements described in parts I, II, and

III of these guidelines.

To maintain eligibility for full Byrne

Formula Grant funding following

October 2, 1999—the end of the

implementation period for the Pam

Lychner Act requirements, absent an

extension—states must submit to the

Bureau of Justice Assistance by July 12,

1999, information that shows

compliance, in the reviewing authority’s

judgment, with the requirements

described in part IV of these guidelines,

or a written explanation of why

compliance cannot be achieved within

that period and a description of the

good faith efforts that justify an

extension of time (but not more than

two years) for achieving compliance.

To maintain eligibility for full Byrne

Grant funding following November 25,

2000—the end of the implementation

period for the CJSA requirements,

absent an extension—states must submit

to the Bureau of Justice Assistance by

September 25, 2000, information that

shows compliance, in the reviewing

authority’s judgment, with the

requirements described in the parts V

and VI of these guidelines, or a written

explanation of why compliance cannot

be achieved within that period and a

description of the good faith efforts that

justify an extension of time (but not

more than two years) for achieving

compliance.

After the reviewing authority has

determined that a state is in compliance

with the Act, the state will be required

as part of the Byrne Formula Grant

application process in subsequent

program years to certify that the state

remains in compliance with the Act.

Dated: June 13, 1998.

Janet Reno,

Attorney General.

[FR Doc. 98–16391 Filed 6–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–BB–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Under the Comprehensive,

Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act

(‘‘CERCLA’’)

In accordance with Departmental

policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby

given that a proposed consent decree in

United States v. Atkemix Thirty-Seven,

Inc., (M.D. Fl.) Civil Action No. 98–

1203–CIV–T–25–F was lodged on June

10, 1998, with the United States District

Court for the Middle District of Florida.

In this action the United States sought

injunctive relief and recovery of

response costs under sections 106(a)

and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606(a)

and 9607, with respect to the Stauffer

Chemical Superfund Site in Tampa,

Florida (‘‘the Site’’).

Under a proposed Consent Decree,

Atkemix Thirty-Seven, Inc., the present

owner and operator of a portion of the

Site, has agreed to perform the remedy

chosen by EPA to clean up the Site, pay

the government’s remaining past

response costs, and pay future response

costs, in settlement of the government’s

claims under sections 106 and 107 of

CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607.

The Department of Justice will

receive, for a period of thirty (30) days

from the date of this publication,
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 118 / Friday, June 19, 1998 / Notices 33709

comments relating to the proposed

consent decree. Comments should be

addressed to the Assistant Attorney

General for the Environment and

Natural Resources Division, Department

of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and

should refer to United States v. Atkemix

Thirty-Seven, Inc., (M.D. Fl.), DOJ# 90–

11–2–1227.

The proposed consent decree may be

examined at the Office of the United

States Attorney, 400 North Tampa

Street, Suite 3200, Tampa, Florida

33602; the Region 4 Office of the

Environmental Protection Agency, 61

Forsyth Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303,

and at the Consent Decree Library, 1120

G Street, NW, 4th Floor, Washington,

DC 20005, (202) 624–0892. A copy of

the proposed consent decree may be

obtained in person or by mail from the

Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street,

NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20005.

In requesting a copy please refer to the

referenced case and enclose a check in

the amount of $50.00 (25 cents per page

reproduction costs), payable to the

Consent Decree Library. In requesting a

copy exclusive of exhibits, please

enclose a check for $20.50 (25 cents per

page reproduction costs), payable to the

Consent Decree Library.

Joel M. Gross,

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 98–16389 Filed 6–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

In accordance with Departmental

policy, 28 CFR 50.7, and 42 U.S.C.

9622(d)(2), notice is hereby given that a

proposed consent decree in United

States v. City of Clear Lake, Iowa, Civil

Action No. C 98 3043, was lodged on

June 4, 1998 with United States District

Court for the Northern District of Iowa,

Central Division. In a complaint filed

contemporaneously with lodging of the

proposed consent decree, the United

States alleged that the Defendant City of

Clear Lake is liable as an owner at the

time of disposal of hazardous

substances, and is the current owner of

the Clear Lake FMGP Superfund Site

located in Cerro Gordo County, Iowa

(‘‘Site’’) pursuant to Sections 107(a)(1)

and (2) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a)(1)

and (2). The Complaint also alleges that

Defendants Kansas City Power and

Light, and Centel Corporation, are

successors to and assumed liability for

persons who at the time of disposal of

hazardous substances owned and/or

operated a facility at the Site at which

hazardous substances were disposed,

and who by contract, agreement, or

otherwise arranged for disposal or

treatment, or arranged with a transporter

for transport for disposal or treatment,

of hazardous substances at the Site, and

are liable pursuant to Sections 107(a) (2)

and (3) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a) (2)

and (3). The complaint further alleges

that the United States incurred costs

and may continue to incur costs for

response actions at and in connection

with the Site.

The proposed consent decree

provides that the Defendants shall pay

$350,000 to the EPA Hazardous

Substance Superfund for Response

Costs. The proposed consent decree also

provides that the United States

covenants not to sue or take

administrative action against the

Defendants under sections 106, 107 and

113 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607

and 9613 except as specifically

provided in the consent decree.

The Department of Justice will

receive, for a period of thirty (30) days

from the date of this publication,

comments relating to the proposed

consent decree. Comments should be

addressed to the Assistant Attorney

General for the Environment and

Natural Resources Division, Department

of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and

should refer to United States v. City of

Clear Lake, Iowa, DOJ Ref. 90–11–2–

1343.

The proposed consent decree can be

examined at the Office of the United

States Attorney, Northern District of

Iowa, Hach Building, 401 1st Street, SE,

Suite 400, Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401–

1825; the Region 7 Office of the

Environmental Protection Agency, 726

Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas

66101; and at the Consent Decree

Library, 1120 G Street, NW., 4th Floor,

Washington, DC 20005, (202) 624–0892.

A copy of the proposed consent decree

may be obtained in person or by mail

from the Consent Decree Library, 1120

G Street, NW., 4th Floor, Washington,

DC 20005. In requesting a copy, please

refer to the referenced case and enclose

a check in the amount of $8.00 (25 cents

per page reproduction costs) payable to

the Consent Decree Library.

Joel Gross,

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 98–16390 Filed 6–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment Standards

Administration, Wage and Hour

Division

Minimum Wages for Federal and

Federally Assisted Construction;

General Wage Determination Decisions

General wage determination decisions

of the Secretary of Labor are issued in

accordance with applicable law and are

based on the information obtained by

the Department of Labor from its study

of local wage conditions and data made

available from other sources. They

specify the basic hourly wage rates and

fringe benefits which are determined to

be prevailing for the described classes of

laborers and mechanics employed on

construction projects of a similar

character and in the localities specified

therein.

The determinations in these decisions

of prevailing rates and fringe benefits

have been made in accordance with 29

CFR Part 1, by authority of the Secretary

of Labor pursuant to the provisions of

the Davis-Bacon Act of March 3, 1931,

as amended (46 Stat. 1494, as amended,

40 U.S.C. 276a) and of other Federal

statutes referred to in 29 CFR Part 1,

Appendix, as well as such additional

statutes as may from time to time be

enacted containing provisions for the

payment of wages determined to be

prevailing by the Secretary of Labor in

accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act.

The prevailing rates and fringe benefits

determined in these decisions shall, in

accordance with the provisions of the

foregoing statutes, constitute the

minimum wages payable on Federal and

federally assisted construction projects

to laborers and mechanics of the

specified classes engaged on contract

work of the character and in the

localities described therein.

Good cause is hereby found for not

utilizing notice and public comment

procedure thereon prior to the issuance

of these determinations as prescribed in

5 U.S.C. 553 and not providing for delay

in the effective date as prescribed in that

section, because the necessity to issue

current construction industry wage

determinations frequently and in large

volume causes procedures to be

impractical and contrary to the public

interest.

General wage determination

decisions, and modifications and

supersedes decisions thereto, contain no

expiration dates and are effective from

their date of notice in the Federal

Register, or on the date written notice

is received by the agency, whichever is

earlier. These decisions are to be used