CSCC Attachments

Table of Contents
Attachments for Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC)

Attachment
1.

Description
34 USC § 10132

Page number
1

2.

Data extraction guide

7

3.

60 day notice

19

4.

30 day notice

21

5.

BJS introduction letter

23

6.

Request for data

25

7.

Initial follow-up script

8

Sample generic MOU

29

9.

Second follow-up

35

10.

BJS final follow-up

11.

Confirm data script

12.

Thank you email

41

13.

Civil Rights Division comments

42

14

NCAJ comments

15.

LAFLA comments

16

BJS response to public comments to the
CCSC

27

37
39

52
54
58

8/14/2018

34 USC 10132: Bureau of Justice Statistics
Text contains those laws in effect on August 13, 2018
From Title 34-CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
Subtitle I-Comprehensive Acts
CHAPTER 101-JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT
SUBCHAPTER III-BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS
Jump To:
Source Credit
References In Text
Codification
Prior Provisions
Amendments
Effective Date
Miscellaneous

§10132. Bureau of Justice Statistics
(a) Establishment
There is established within the Department of Justice, under the general authority of the Attorney General, a Bureau
of Justice Statistics (hereinafter referred to in this subchapter as "Bureau").
(b) Appointment of Director; experience; authority; restrictions
The Bureau shall be headed by a Director appointed by the President. The Director shall have had experience in
statistical programs. The Director shall have final authority for all grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts
awarded by the Bureau. The Director shall be responsible for the integrity of data and statistics and shall protect
against improper or illegal use or disclosure. The Director shall report to the Attorney General through the Assistant
Attorney General. The Director shall not engage in any other employment than that of serving as Director; nor shall the
Director hold any office in, or act in any capacity for, any organization, agency, or institution with which the Bureau
makes any contract or other arrangement under this Act.
(c) Duties and functions of Bureau
The Bureau is authorized to(1) make grants to, or enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with public agencies, institutions of higher
education, private organizations, or private individuals for purposes related to this subchapter; grants shall be made
subject to continuing compliance with standards for gathering justice statistics set forth in rules and regulations
promulgated by the Director;
(2) collect and analyze information concerning criminal victimization, including crimes against the elderly, and civil
disputes;
(3) collect and analyze data that will serve as a continuous and comparable national social indication of the
prevalence, incidence, rates, extent, distribution, and attributes of crime, juvenile delinquency, civil disputes, and
other statistical factors related to crime, civil disputes, and juvenile delinquency, in support of national, State, tribal,
and local justice policy and decisionmaking;
(4) collect and analyze statistical information, concerning the operations of the criminal justice system at the
Federal, State, tribal, and local levels;
(5) collect and analyze statistical information concerning the prevalence, incidence, rates, extent, distribution, and
attributes of crime, and juvenile delinquency, at the Federal, State, tribal, and local levels;
(6) analyze the correlates of crime, civil disputes and juvenile delinquency, by the use of statistical information,
about criminal and civil justice systems at the Federal, State, tribal, and local levels, and about the extent,
distribution and attributes of crime, and juvenile delinquency, in the Nation and at the Federal, State, tribal, and local
levels;
(7) compile, collate, analyze, publish, and disseminate uniform national statistics concerning all aspects of criminal
justice and related aspects of civil justice, crime, including crimes against the elderly, juvenile delinquency, criminal
offenders, juvenile delinquents, and civil disputes in the various States and in Indian country;
(8) recommend national standards for justice statistics and for insuring the reliability and validity of justice statistics
supplied pursuant to this chapter;
(9) maintain liaison with the judicial branches of the Federal Government and State and tribal governments in
matters relating to justice statistics, and cooperate with the judicial branch in assuring as much uniformity as feasible
in statistical systems of the executive and judicial branches;
(10) provide information to the President, the Congress, the judiciary, State, tribal, and local governments, and the
general public on justice statistics;
1
6

8/14/2018

(11) establish or assist in the establishment of a system to provide State, tribal, and local governments with access
to Federal informational resources useful in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of programs under this Act;
(12) conduct or support research relating to methods of gathering or analyzing justice statistics;
(13) provide for the development of justice information systems programs and assistance to the States, Indian
tribes, and units of local government relating to collection, analysis, or dissemination of justice statistics;
(14) develop and maintain a data processing capability to support the collection, aggregation, analysis and
dissemination of information on the incidence of crime and the operation of the criminal justice system;
(15) collect, analyze and disseminate comprehensive Federal justice transaction statistics (including statistics on
issues of Federal justice interest such as public fraud and high technology crime) and to provide technical assistance
to and work jointly with other Federal agencies to improve the availability and quality of Federal justice data;
(16) provide for the collection, compilation, analysis, publication and dissemination of information and statistics
about the prevalence, incidence, rates, extent, distribution and attributes of drug offenses, drug related offenses and
drug dependent offenders and further provide for the establishment of a national clearinghouse to maintain and
update a comprehensive and timely data base on all criminal justice aspects of the drug crisis and to disseminate
such information;
(17) provide for the collection, analysis, dissemination and publication of statistics on the condition and progress of
drug control activities at the Federal, State, tribal, and local levels with particular attention to programs and
intervention efforts demonstrated to be of value in the overall national anti-drug strategy and to provide for the
establishment of a national clearinghouse for the gathering of data generated by Federal, State, tribal, and local
criminal justice agencies on their drug enforcement activities;
(18) provide for the development and enhancement of State, tribal, and local criminal justice information systems,
and the standardization of data reporting relating to the collection, analysis or dissemination of data and statistics
about drug offenses, drug related offenses, or drug dependent offenders;
(19) provide for improvements in the accuracy, quality, timeliness, immediate accessibility, and integration of State
and tribal criminal history and related records, support the development and enhancement of national systems of
criminal history and related records including the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the National
Incident-Based Reporting System, and the records of the National Crime Information Center, facilitate State and
tribal participation in national records and information systems, and support statistical research for critical analysis of
the improvement and utilization of criminal history records;
(20) maintain liaison with State, tribal, and local governments and governments of other nations concerning justice
statistics;
(21) cooperate in and participate with national and international organizations in the development of uniform
justice statistics;
(22) ensure conformance with security and privacy requirement of section 10231 of this title and identify, analyze,
and participate in the development and implementation of privacy, security and information policies which impact on
Federal, tribal, and State criminal justice operations and related statistical activities; and
(23) exercise the powers and functions set out in subchapter VII.
(d) Justice statistical collection, analysis, and dissemination
(1) In general
To ensure that all justice statistical collection, analysis, and dissemination is carried out in a coordinated manner,
the Director is authorized to(A) utilize, with their consent, the services, equipment, records, personnel, information, and facilities of other
Federal, State, local, and private agencies and instrumentalities with or without reimbursement therefor, and to
enter into agreements with such agencies and instrumentalities for purposes of data collection and analysis;
(B) confer and cooperate with State, municipal, and other local agencies;
(C) request such information, data, and reports from any Federal agency as may be required to carry out the
purposes of this chapter;
(D) seek the cooperation of the judicial branch of the Federal Government in gathering data from criminal justice
records;
(E) encourage replication, coordination and sharing among justice agencies regarding information systems,
information policy, and data; and
(F) confer and cooperate with Federal statistical agencies as needed to carry out the purposes of this
subchapter, including by entering into cooperative data sharing agreements in conformity with all laws and
regulations applicable to the disclosure and use of data.
(2) Consultation with Indian tribes
The Director, acting jointly with the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs (acting through the Office of Justice
Services) and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall work with Indian tribes and tribal law
enforcement agencies to establish and implement such tribal data collection systems as the Director determines to
be necessary to achieve the purposes of this section.
(e) Furnishing of information, data, or reports by Federal agencies
Federal agencies requested to furnish information, data, or reports pursuant to subsection (d)(1)(C) shall provide
such information to the Bureau as is required to carry out the purposes of this section.
2
7

8/14/2018

(f) Consultation with representatives of State, tribal, and local government and judiciary
In recommending standards for gathering justice statistics under this section, the Director shall consult with
representatives of State, tribal, and local government, including, where appropriate, representatives of the judiciary.
(g) Reports
Not later than 1 year after July 29, 2010, and annually thereafter, the Director shall submit to Congress a report
describing the data collected and analyzed under this section relating to crimes in Indian country.
(Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §302, as added Pub. L. 96–157, §2, Dec. 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 1176 ; amended Pub. L. 98–473,
title II, §605(b), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2079 ; Pub. L. 100–690, title VI, §6092(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4339 ; Pub.
L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330001(h)(2), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2139 ; Pub. L. 109–162, title XI, §1115(a), Jan. 5,
2006, 119 Stat. 3103 ; Pub. L. 111–211, title II, §251(b), July 29, 2010, 124 Stat. 2297 ; Pub. L. 112–166, §2(h)(1), Aug.
10, 2012, 126 Stat. 1285 .)

REFERENCES IN TEXT
This Act, referred to in subsecs. (b) and (c)(11), is Pub. L. 90–351, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 197 , known as
the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. For complete classification of this Act to the
Code, see Short Title of 1968 Act note set out under section 10101 of this title and Tables.

CODIFICATION
Section was formerly classified to section 3732 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to
editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

PRIOR PROVISIONS
A prior section 302 of Pub. L. 90–351, title I, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 200 ; Pub. L. 93–83, §2, Aug. 6, 1973,
87 Stat. 201 ; Pub. L. 94–503, title I, §110, Oct. 15, 1976, 90 Stat. 2412 , related to establishment of State

planning agencies to develop comprehensive State plans for grants for law enforcement and criminal
justice purposes, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 96–157.

AMENDMENTS
2012-Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 112–166 struck out ", by and with the advice and consent of the Senate" before
period at end of first sentence.
2010-Subsec. (c)(3) to (6). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(A), inserted "tribal," after "State," wherever
appearing.
Subsec. (c)(7). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(B), inserted "and in Indian country" after "States".
Subsec. (c)(9). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(C), substituted "Federal Government and State and tribal
governments" for "Federal and State Governments".
Subsec. (c)(10), (11). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(D), inserted ", tribal," after "State".
Subsec. (c)(13). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(E), inserted ", Indian tribes," after "States".
Subsec. (c)(17). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(F), substituted "activities at the Federal, State, tribal, and
local" for "activities at the Federal, State and local" and "generated by Federal, State, tribal, and local" for
"generated by Federal, State, and local".
Subsec. (c)(18). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(G), substituted "State, tribal, and local" for "State and
local".
Subsec. (c)(19). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(H), inserted "and tribal" after "State" in two places.
Subsec. (c)(20). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(I), inserted ", tribal," after "State".
Subsec. (c)(22). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(1)(J), inserted ", tribal," after "Federal".
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(2), designated existing provisions as par. (1), inserted par. (1)
heading, substituted "To ensure" for "To insure", redesignated former pars. (1) to (6) as subpars. (A) to
(F), respectively, of par. (1), realigned margins, and added par. (2).
Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(3), substituted "subsection (d)(1)(C)" for "subsection (d)(3)".
Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(4)(B), inserted ", tribal," after "State".
Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(4)(A), which directed insertion of ", tribal," after "State" in heading, was
executed editorially but could not be executed in original because heading had been editorially supplied.
Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 111–211, §251(b)(5), added subsec. (g).
2006-Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109–162, §1115(a)(1), inserted after third sentence "The Director shall be
responsible for the integrity of data and statistics and shall protect against improper or illegal use or
disclosure."
Subsec. (c)(19). Pub. L. 109–162, §1115(a)(2), amended par. (19) generally. Prior to amendment, par.
(19) read as follows: "provide for research and improvements in the accuracy, completeness, and
inclusiveness of criminal history record information, information systems, arrest warrant, and stolen
3
8

8/14/2018

vehicle record information and information systems and support research concerning the accuracy,
completeness, and inclusiveness of other criminal justice record information;".
Subsec. (d)(6). Pub. L. 109–162, §1115(a)(3), added par. (6).
1994-Subsec. (c)(19). Pub. L. 103–322 substituted a semicolon for period at end.
1988-Subsec. (c)(16) to (23). Pub. L. 100–690 added pars. (16) to (19) and redesignated former pars.
(16) to (19) as (20) to (23), respectively.
1984-Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(1), inserted provision requiring Director to report to Attorney
General through Assistant Attorney General.
Subsec. (c)(13). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(2)(A), (C), added par. (13) and struck out former par. (13)
relating to provision of financial and technical assistance to States and units of local government relating
to collection, analysis, or dissemination of justice statistics.
Subsec. (c)(14), (15). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(2)(C), added pars. (14) and (15). Former pars. (14) and
(15) redesignated (16) and (17), respectively.
Subsec. (c)(16). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(2)(A), (B), redesignated par. (14) as (16) and struck out former
par. (16) relating to insuring conformance with security and privacy regulations issued under section 10231
of this title.
Subsec. (c)(17). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(2)(B), redesignated par. (15) as (17). Former par. (17)
redesignated (19).
Subsec. (c)(18). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(2)(D), added par. (18).
Subsec. (c)(19). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(2)(B), redesignated former par. (17) as (19).
Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(3)(A), inserted ", and to enter into agreements with such
agencies and instrumentalities for purposes of data collection and analysis".
Subsec. (d)(5). Pub. L. 98–473, §605(b)(3)(B)–(D), added par. (5).

EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2012 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 112–166 effective 60 days after Aug. 10, 2012, and applicable to appointments
made on and after that effective date, including any nomination pending in the Senate on that date, see
section 6(a) of Pub. L. 112–166, set out as a note under section 113 of Title 6, Domestic Security.

EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1984 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 98–473 effective Oct. 12, 1984, see section 609AA(a) of Pub. L. 98–473, set out
as an Effective Date note under section 10101 of this title.

CONSTRUCTION OF 2010 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 111–211, title II, §251(c), July 29, 2010, 124 Stat. 2298 , provided that: "Nothing in this section
[amending this section and section 41507 of this title] or any amendment made by this section"(1) allows the grant to be made to, or used by, an entity for law enforcement activities that the
entity lacks jurisdiction to perform; or
"(2) has any effect other than to authorize, award, or deny a grant of funds to a federally
recognized Indian tribe for the purposes described in the relevant grant program."
[For definition of "Indian tribe" as used in section 251(c) of Pub. L. 111–211, set out above, see section
203(a) of Pub. L. 111–211, set out as a note under section 2801 of Title 25, Indians.]

INCLUSION OF HONOR VIOLENCE IN NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY
Pub. L. 113–235, div. B, title II, Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2191 , provided in part: "That beginning not later
than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act [div. B of Pub. L. 113–235, Dec. 16, 2014], as part of
each National Crime Victimization Survey, the Attorney General shall include statistics relating to honor
violence".

STUDY OF CRIMES AGAINST SENIORS
Pub. L. 106–534, §5, Nov. 22, 2000, 114 Stat. 2557 , provided that:
"(a) IN GENERAL.-The Attorney General shall conduct a study relating to crimes against seniors, in order

to assist in developing new strategies to prevent and otherwise reduce the incidence of those crimes.
"(b) ISSUES ADDRESSED.-The study conducted under this section shall include an analysis of"(1) the nature and type of crimes perpetrated against seniors, with special focus on"(A) the most common types of crimes that affect seniors;
"(B) the nature and extent of telemarketing, sweepstakes, and repair fraud against seniors;
and
"(C) the nature and extent of financial and material fraud targeted at seniors;
"(2) the risk factors associated with seniors who have been victimized;
4

9

8/14/2018

"(3) the manner in which the Federal and State criminal justice systems respond to crimes against
seniors;
"(4) the feasibility of States establishing and maintaining a centralized computer database on the
incidence of crimes against seniors that will promote the uniform identification and reporting of such
crimes;
"(5) the effectiveness of damage awards in court actions and other means by which seniors
receive reimbursement and other damages after fraud has been established; and
"(6) other effective ways to prevent or reduce the occurrence of crimes against seniors."

INCLUSION OF SENIORS IN NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY
Pub. L. 106–534, §6, Nov. 22, 2000, 114 Stat. 2557 , provided that: "Beginning not later than 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 22, 2000], as part of each National Crime Victimization Survey, the
Attorney General shall include statistics relating to"(1) crimes targeting or disproportionately affecting seniors;
"(2) crime risk factors for seniors, including the times and locations at which crimes victimizing
seniors are most likely to occur; and
"(3) specific characteristics of the victims of crimes who are seniors, including age, gender, race or
ethnicity, and socioeconomic status."

CRIME VICTIMS WITH DISABILITIES AWARENESS
Pub. L. 105–301, Oct. 27, 1998, 112 Stat. 2838 , as amended by Pub. L. 106–402, title IV, §401(b)(10), Oct.
30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1739 , provided that:

"SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
"This Act may be cited as the 'Crime Victims With Disabilities Awareness Act'.
"SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.
"(a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that"(1) although research conducted abroad demonstrates that individuals with developmental
disabilities are at a 4 to 10 times higher risk of becoming crime victims than those without disabilities,
there have been no significant studies on this subject conducted in the United States;
"(2) in fact, the National Crime Victim's Survey, conducted annually by the Bureau of Justice
Statistics of the Department of Justice, does not specifically collect data relating to crimes against
individuals with developmental disabilities;
"(3) studies in Canada, Australia, and Great Britain consistently show that victims with
developmental disabilities suffer repeated victimization because so few of the crimes against them are
reported, and even when they are, there is sometimes a reluctance by police, prosecutors, and judges
to rely on the testimony of a disabled individual, making individuals with developmental disabilities a
target for criminal predators;
"(4) research in the United States needs to be done to"(A) understand the nature and extent of crimes against individuals with developmental
disabilities;
"(B) describe the manner in which the justice system responds to crimes against individuals
with developmental disabilities; and
"(C) identify programs, policies, or laws that hold promises for making the justice system more
responsive to crimes against individuals with developmental disabilities; and
"(5) the National Academy of Science Committee on Law and Justice of the National Research
Council is a premier research institution with unique experience in developing seminal, multidisciplinary
studies to establish a strong research base from which to make public policy.
"(b) PURPOSES.-The purposes of this Act are"(1) to increase public awareness of the plight of victims of crime who are individuals with
developmental disabilities;
"(2) to collect data to measure the extent of the problem of crimes against individuals with
developmental disabilities; and
"(3) to develop a basis to find new strategies to address the safety and justice needs of victims of
crime who are individuals with developmental disabilities.
"SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITY.
"In this Act, the term 'developmental disability' has the meaning given the term in section 102 of the
Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 [42 U.S.C. 15002].
"SEC. 4. STUDY.

5
10

8/14/2018

"(a) IN GENERAL.-The Attorney General shall conduct a study to increase knowledge and information
about crimes against individuals with developmental disabilities that will be useful in developing new
strategies to reduce the incidence of crimes against those individuals.
"(b) ISSUES ADDRESSED.-The study conducted under this section shall address such issues as"(1) the nature and extent of crimes against individuals with developmental disabilities;
"(2) the risk factors associated with victimization of individuals with developmental disabilities;
"(3) the manner in which the justice system responds to crimes against individuals with
developmental disabilities; and
"(4) the means by which States may establish and maintain a centralized computer database on
the incidence of crimes against individuals with disabilities within a State.
"(c) NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.-In carrying out this section, the Attorney General shall consider
contracting with the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Research Council of the National
Academy of Sciences to provide research for the study conducted under this section.
"(d) REPORT.-Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 27, 1998], the
Attorney General shall submit to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report describing the results of the study conducted under this section.
"SEC. 5. NATIONAL CRIME VICTIM'S SURVEY.
"Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, as part of each National Crime Victim's
Survey, the Attorney General shall include statistics relating to"(1) the nature of crimes against individuals with developmental disabilities; and
"(2) the specific characteristics of the victims of those crimes."

6
11

Criminal Cases in State Courts
(CCSC)
United States Department of Justice
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Electronic Data Extraction Guide

January 2020
Prepared by:
The Urban Institute/National Center for State Courts

7

Contents
What is the study about? .............................................................................................................................. 2
Who do I contact if I have questions?........................................................................................................... 2
Will the data be secure and kept confidential? ............................................................................................ 3
How do I submit my file(s)? .......................................................................................................................... 4
When is the submission due? ....................................................................................................................... 4
How do I prepare the data for my jurisdiction? ........................................................................................... 4
File Structure ............................................................................................................................................. 4
File Format ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Supporting Documentation ...................................................................................................................... 5
How do I identify eligible cases? ............................................................................................................... 5
What data elements should I include? ..................................................................................................... 6
What if I am unable to provide all the requested data? ............................................................................... 7
What happens after we submit the data? .................................................................................................... 7
Appendix A. Requested Data Elements, Definitions, and Formats............................................................... 8

1
8

Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) Electronic Data
Extraction Guide
What is the study about?
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) has initiated a data collection of
case-level data on felony and misdemeanor cases in state criminal courts across the United States with
the goal of developing nationally representative state court statistics. BJS previously maintained two
reporting programs—the National Judicial Reporting Program (NJRP), last completed in 2006, and the
State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS), last completed in 2009—to collect and analyze case-level data
from criminal courts. The Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) leverages current advances in court data
systems and standards to update the reporting on state court activity. The CCSC sample will be drawn
from all felony and misdemeanor cases disposed in state criminal courts in 2019. This information is
critical to understanding the number and types of cases processed in state criminal courts nationwide,
along with other characteristics of these cases and the associated defendants.
BJS anticipates that the CCSC will inform 1) the field of court administration of current practice and
trends in criminal case processing and 2) the public of how criminal cases are handled in the United
States. Findings from the CCSC will be reported in aggregate form, precluding the possibility of revealing
the identity of individual defendants or jurisdictions, and any identifying information will be removed or
anonymized before archiving the data for research purposes. The CCSC can also serve as a benchmark to
state court administrators and policymakers who wish to compare their own data to these national
estimates. In other words, states and counties could better understand their own level of criminal
justice activity in a broad, national context.
The Urban Institute (Urban) and the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) will collect these data on
behalf of BJS. The ability to collect data electronically from automated information systems depends on
each jurisdiction’s capacity to extract the necessary data from their data management system. BJS,
Urban and NCSC recognize this variation in state court systems and have developed this data extraction
guide to support all modes of data collection. This data extraction guide will (1) describe the secure
electronic data submission process and (2) provide a set of reporting instructions and standards for
jurisdictions that have the capacity to extract data in electronic format. Appendix A includes a list of the
data elements we seek to collect along with their definitions, preferred formats, and example values.

Who do I contact if I have questions?
An CCSC research team member from Urban or NCSC will contact your jurisdiction by email to initiate
and facilitate a data request. For questions about extracting or submitting data, please reach out to this
original Urban or NCSC point of contact or:
CCSC Help Desk
Toll Free: 855-279-3515
Email: [email protected]
Mail: 500 L’Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, D.C. 20024

2
9

For general questions about the CCSC study:
Suzanne Strong
Statistician and CCSC Project Manager
Bureau of Justice Statistics
810 Seventh St., NW
Washington, DC 20531
202-616-3666

Will the data be secure and kept confidential?
Consistent with its statutory obligations (34 U.S.C. § 10134), BJS only uses information collected under
its authority for statistical or research purposes. Further, BJS is required by law to protect the
confidentiality of all personally identifiable information it collects or acquires in conjunction with BJSfunded projects (34 U.S.C. § 10231), and must maintain the appropriate administrative, physical, and
technical safeguards to protect the identifiable information against improper use or unauthorized
disclosure. BJS will not use or reveal data identifiable to a private person, except as authorized under 28
CFR § 22.21 and § 22.22. The BJS Data Protection Guidelines summarize the federal laws, regulations,
and other authorities that govern information acquired under BJS’s authority, and are published on the
BJS website: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/BJS_Data_Protection_Guidelines.pdf. Urban and NCSC are
required to adhere to these same requirements as a condition of funding. Any data collected as part of
the CCSC cannot and will not be used in any enforcement actions or administrative procedures to limit
access to a program or activity that receives Federal funds or other Federal financial assistance (Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act).
BJS only publishes de-identified data at the aggregate level in its project findings, reports, data files, and
other statistical products. BJS archives its published data and related data documentation (e.g., user
guides) at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD), located at the University of Michigan.
To the extent practical, BJS removes, masks, or collapses direct and indirect identifiers prior to sending
data to NACJD to protect confidentiality. NACJD takes additional precautions to protect confidentiality,
including conducting a comprehensive disclosure risk review to determine the appropriate level of
security that should be applied to the data. For more information on data requiring additional security
protections, please see: https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/content/NACJD/restricted.html.
Urban and NCSC project staff will receive data sets from contributing agencies through a Secure File
Transfer Protocol (SFTP) set up by Urban’s Technology and Data Science team. Personally-identifiable
information is encrypted while in transit, and once a dataset is received it will be transferred to a secure
encrypted drive. Access to the data will be limited to those employees who have a need for such data
and have signed a confidentiality pledge. The confidentiality pledge includes an agreement to comply
with all data security and human subjects' protection requirements. Any data set(s) electronically
transmitted to BJS will be over the DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) secure transfer site.
We understand that your agency may have preexisting policies in place around data sharing, and we will
work with your agency to meet any data transfer or agreement requirements you may have. While each
of the identified data elements were selected to fully understand the processing of cases disposed in
state criminal courts, we recognize that not all data elements may be collected or readily available
electronically for public use. Please notify us if you limit the amount or type of data you can release.
3
10

How do I submit my file(s)?
You can use Urban’s SFTP to transfer your agency’s data. Urban will provide you with a username and
password to log in to the project’s website and deposit the electronic data. You may deposit as many
files as necessary and in any format. For example, your jurisdiction may want to deposit several files that
must be linked to get complete case data, as well as a Word document that provides the record layout
for the files and linking instructions. Additional files, as necessary, may be submitted by your jurisdiction
and separately tracked.
An Urban research team member will contact your jurisdiction to initiate and facilitate the data
submission process. If needed, the Urban research team will provide guidance and assistance with
regard to uploading data via the SFTP. If your jurisdiction requires an alternative means of submission,
Urban will work with you to find the most convenient secure method for you to submit your data.
Please do not transfer data over non-secure mechanisms, such as unencrypted file transfer over the
internet or unencrypted email.

When is the submission due?
The target date is XXXX, but we understand that may not be possible for every agency. Please contact us
and we will work with you to set a realistic target date.

How do I prepare the data for my jurisdiction?
This section provides guidance on reporting specifications, including file structure, supporting
documentation, case identification and selection, and variable and value definitions.
There is no required format for the data you submit; use whatever is most convenient for you. The
suggested coding classifications and value labels – developed to be consistent with NCSC’s draft National
Open Court Data Standards (NODS) – are provided in Appendix A to assist with data submission. Your
project point of contact will also provide technical assistance, including guidance in interpreting the data
request. We recognize that the participating courts are unique and have different data systems with
different levels of detail and data sharing capabilities. Rather than placing the burden on the data
contributor to submit data in this uniform format, we will accept any data that each jurisdiction can
provide and in turn will process it into a standard format that can be used to produce the national
estimates.
To do this effectively, NCSC and Urban Institute will study and compare the submitted data to the
extract guideline specifications to determine if they require any restructuring. For each submission,
NCSC and Urban Institute will communicate with contributing jurisdictions to clarify any questions raised
during the review. For files that require substantial restructuring, Urban Institute and NCSC staff will
consult with jurisdiction personnel to obtain file documentation that will enhance understanding of the
data. During this process, NCSC and Urban Institute will be in close communication with the jurisdiction
to ensure that the data are processed and interpreted correctly.

File Structure
Both case- and event-level data is requested. You can provide data in any format that is convenient for
you; please provide supporting documentation to ensure that we interpret the data properly.
4
11

One way to structure data is to provide one file at the case level and multiple event-level files with
clearly established relationships between the appropriate fields and records of source tables and the
targeted output layout. Using this format, the case level file would include one record for each disposed
case. If there are multiple charges, they would all appear in the same record. Event-level files could
include more than one record for each event in the case (e.g. separate records for each attorney
assignment or court hearing). Case or docket numbers (with defendant identifiers, if applicable) should
be included in each file to allow for record linking.

File Format
The preferred electronic file formats include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Text files (fixed width, delimited);
Excel (or .csv) files;
Stata data files;
SAS data files;
R data files;
SPSS data files;
Access database; or
SQL server database.

Supporting Documentation
Please provide some tracking information and relevant documentation for your data submission,
including:
•
•
•
•

•

Date of submission
Primary point of contact: name, organization, position, address, telephone, and e-mail address
File format and format version (e.g., SQL server DB, Access DB, text files (fixed width, delimited),
Excel, etc.)
Known data quality problems or limitations
o Missing data:
 System-missing (data element not available in system)
 Unit-missing (large % of missing values for a particular data element)
o Common data errors, system-wide or with specific elements (e.g. misspellings,
redundancy, duplication, contradictory values)
Data formatting information:
o Diagrams, data dictionaries, and/or field descriptions where available
o Documentation of variables that diverge from the definitions provided in Appendix A
o Any lookup table(s) that helps to translate data values
o Graphical representation of the physical data source to show underlying database
architecture that would inform the restructuring of data files
o Information on the level at which data is provided for each table (e.g., case-level, eventlevel)

How do I identify eligible cases?
The data provided should include all felony and misdemeanor cases disposed in state criminal courts of
general and limited jurisdiction, excluding municipal courts, in 2019. Case dispositions may be entered
5
12

as nolle prosequi, guilty finding or verdict, dismissal, or acquittal, among others (e.g. directed verdict,
incompetent to stand trial). Cases disposed in 2019 but not sentenced should be included. Please
exclude from the data file all cases still pending a final decision from a judicial officer (e.g., those in
which there is not a disposition for the original charge(s)). For appeals, include all cases appealed from a
limited jurisdiction court to a general jurisdiction court if there is a final disposition in the general
jurisdiction court. Do not include any cases that are remanded, unless the remand includes a final
disposition in either a limited or general jurisdiction court. Exclude any violations of probation or parole
hearings or cases.
The data file should include the following case types:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Felonies;
Misdemeanors;
Criminal traffic;
Appeals or transfers from limited jurisdiction courts to general jurisdiction courts;
Transfers from other jurisdictions; and
Juvenile court cases transferred to adult court.

The data file should exclude the following types of cases if possible. If it would be too difficult to remove
these cases, please note this in your submission.
•
•
•
•
•
•

Cases disposed in municipal courts, unless it would be too difficult to remove these cases;
Civil traffic;
Appellate court cases;
Juvenile court cases (except if a juvenile is tried by the adult court);
Cases in which a defendant was diverted but has not yet completed the diversion program; and
Violations of probation or parole.

BJS defines a criminal case as a set of all charges against a single defendant arising out of one incident.
An incident with a continuing course of conduct (e.g., sexual assaults against one victim over time; thefts
committed by one defendant multiple times) meets this definition. If your definition of a case differs
from this (e.g., single citation per case, multiple defendants per case), please call your project point of
contact or the CCSC Help Line at 855-279-3515 and note this in your submission. A case should include
all charges under the same case number; if multiple charges were disposed at different points in time,
then select cases where the most serious charge was disposed in 2019.

What data elements should I include?
Urban and NCSC are requesting data elements pertaining to multiple points throughout the life of a
case. Appendix A lists the data elements we are requesting and their definitions, which are consistent
with the draft NCSC NODS. Preferred formats and example values for each data element are also
provided in Appendix A. Please note that preferred formats and example values are optional; please
provide data in the format most convenient for you along with appropriate documentation of data
structure and values.
We plan to collect data elements from the following categories:
6
13

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

General case information;
Defendant information;
Charge information;
Sentencing information;
Hearing information;
Attorney information;
Pretrial release information;
Diversion and problem solving court information; and
Warrant information.

What if I am unable to provide all the requested data?
If your agency does not collect one or more data elements, or providing them would be too burdensome
or is prohibited under agency policy, then exclude those data elements from your data submission. If
you are unable to provide many of the elements, please reach out to your point of contact or the CCSC
Help Desk at 855-279-3515.

What happens after we submit the data?
Urban and NCSC will verify the contents of the data file. We may reach out to clarify or confirm any
questions about variable formats or values. Typically, this will be within 2-3 weeks of your submission.
Urban or NCSC will contact you to review any questions. Having a thorough understanding of your data
is vital to constructing a valid CCSC dataset and ensuring that we are properly interpreting and using
your data.

7
14

Appendix A. Requested Data Elements, Definitions, and Formats
Category

Data Element
Jurisdiction identifier
Court level

General Case
Information

Court case identifier

Initiating action
Defendant identifier
Age at arrest

Definition
County name; district name; circuit name
Level of court.
Anonymized series of characters that identify
the court case that follows a case through court
levels. This identifier should be assigned to each
charge within the same case.
Type of action that initiated the case.
Anonymized series of characters that identify
the same individual within the court system,
across cases and courts within the state.
Individual’s age as of arrest/offense date. If age
is not available, please provide date of birth.

Format
String
String

Example Values
County name; district name; circuit name
District; circuit

Numeric
or string
Numeric
or
String

1=Summons; 2=Arrest; 3=Warrant;
4=Warrantless arrest; 5=Indictment

Numeric
or string
Numeric

Gender or sex

Individual's gender.

Numeric
or
String

1 = Male; 2 = Female

Ethnicity

Individual’s ethnicity determines whether a
person is of Hispanic origin or not.

1=Spanish/Hispanic/Latino; 0=Not
Spanish/Hispanic/Latino

Race

Individual’s self-identification with one or more
racial groups. NOTE: Self-identification is much
preferred, but in its absence, the perception of
race by the criminal justice officer(s) who had
the first contact with the defendant can serve as
a proxy.

Numeric
or
String
Numeric
or
String

1=White; 2=African American; 3=American
Indian or Alaskan; 4=Asian 5=Pacific Islander or
Native Hawaiian; 5=Other 6=Two or more races

Defendant indigency
status

Indicator of whether individual was determined
to be indigent at any point during the case.

Attorney type

Type of counsel at disposition/sentencing.

Defendant
Information

Numeric
or
String
Numeric
or
String

1=Yes; 0=No
1 = private/retained; 2=public defender;
3=assigned/appointed; 4=no counsel/pro se

8
15

Category

Data Element

Charge filing date
Filing charge statute
number
Filing charge description

Definition
Total number of failures to appear in the instant
case
Date when the defendant was arrested on this
charge. If not available, please provide date on
which the offense occurred.
Sequence number uniquely identifying each
filing charge within a case (count number). This
is not the statute number or case type code.
Date the charge was filed.
The statute number that defines the alleged
behavior as a criminal offense.
Description of the offense at filing.

Filing charge degree

Charge class severity/degree at filing.

Failures to appear
Arrest/offense date
Charge identifier

Charge
Information

Filing charge degree
detail
Disposition charge
statute number
Disposition charge
description

The specific class severity or degree provided by
statutory laws for each charge against the
defendant.
The state statute number that defines the
alleged behavior as a criminal offense for each
disposed charge.
Description of the offense at disposition.

Disposition charge
degree

Charge class severity/degree at disposition.

Disposition charge
degree detailed

The specific class severity or degree provided by
statutory laws for each disposed charge.

Charge disposition date
Charge sentencing date
Charge manner of
disposition

Date when the charge received a judgment or
disposition.
Date when the charge received a sentence.
The manner in which the charge was disposed.

Format

Example Values

Numeric
Date
Numeric
or string
Date
Numeric
or string
String
Numeric
or
String
Numeric
or
String

1=Felony; 2=Gross misdemeanor;
3=Misdemeanor
1=Felony 1; 2=Felony 2; 3=Misdemeanor A;
4=Misdemeanor B; etc.

Numeric
or string
String
Numeric
or
String
Numeric
or
String

1=Felony; 2=Gross misdemeanor;
3=Misdemeanor
1=Felony 1; 2=Felony 2; 3=Misdemeanor A;
4=Misdemeanor B; etc.

Date
Date
Numeric
or
String

1= Jury trial; 2=Bench/non-jury trial; 3=Guilty
plea; 4=Entry into a drug court or other
problem-solving court; 5=Diversion (not a

9
16

Category

Data Element

Definition

Format

Charge result of
disposition

The judgment or disposition entered by the
court for the charge.

Numeric
or
String

Sentence type

Type(s) of sentence(s) the defendant was
ordered to serve.

Numeric
or
String

Sentence length

Length in days of minimum sentence imposed
by the court. Includes indeterminate sentences.
If sentences are recorded as minimummaximum, please provide both and indicate the
min and max.

Numeric

Sentence conditions

Additional conditions imposed at sentencing.

Concurrent/consecutive
sentence

Flag to indicate the sentence is to be served
concurrently or consecutively.
Length of time (in days) spent in pretrial
detention that was credited toward the
sentence the defendant was mandated to serve.
Dollar amount of the fine the defendant was
sentenced to pay.
Dollar amount of the all fees/costs the
defendant was mandated to pay.

Sentencing
Information

Time served credit
length
Fine amount 1
Fees/costs amount

1

Example Values
problem-solving court); 6=Dismissal/nolle
prosequi; 7= Bindover/transfer; 8=Other
1=Conviction; 2=Acquittal; 3=Mistrial; 4=Entry
into a problem-solving court docket;
5=Diversion (not to a problem-solving court
docket); 6=Continued without a finding;
7=Dismissed/nolle prosequi;
8==Bindover/transfer; 9=Other
1=Death penalty; 2=Life in prison with no
chance of release; 3=Life in prison with any
chance of release; 4=State prison; 5=Jail;
6=Lifetime supervision; 7=Extended
supervision/split sentence; 8=Probation; 9=Fine;
10=Restitution; 11=Community service;
12=Time served; 13=Other. This field should
include all sentences imposed in the case.

Numeric
or
String

1=Suspension or revocation of driver’s license;
2=Sex offender registration; 3=Firearms
eligibility; etc.

Numeric

1=Yes; 0=No

Numeric
Numeric

Dollar amount.

Numeric

Dollar amount.

If dollar amounts are not available for fine amount, fees/costs, or restitution, please indicate if any fines, fees, or restitution were ordered in the case.

10
17

Category

Data Element
Restitution amount

Definition
Dollar amount of the restitution the defendant
was sentenced to pay.

Format

Example Values

Numeric

Dollar amount.

11
18

56838

Federal

Register/Vol.

INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1149]
Certain Semiconductor Devices,
Integrated Circuits, and Consumer
Products Containing the Same;
Commission Determination Not To
Review an Initial Determination
Terminating the Investigation Based
on a Settlement Agreement and a
Withdrawal of the Complaint;
Termination of the Investigation
U.S. International
Commission.
ACTION:Notice.
AGENCY:

Trade

Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to
review an initial determination
("ID")
(Order No. 33) issued by the presiding
administrative
law judge ("ALJ")
granting a motion to terminate the
investigation based on a settlement
agreement and a withdrawal of the
complaint.
INFORMATION

October

by reason of infringement of certain
claims of U,S. Patent Nos, 6,583,012;
6,797,572; 7,009,226; 7,880,236; and
9,373,548.
Id. The Commission's
notice
of investigation namfld as respondents
BBK Communication Technology Co.,
Ltd., of Dongguan, China; Vivo Mobile
Communication
Co., Ltd., of Dongguan,
China; OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen)
Co" Ltd., of Shenzhen, China;
Guangdong OPPO Mobile
Telecommunications
Co., Ltd., of
Dongguan, China; Hisense Electric Co.,
Ltd. of Quingdao, China; Hisense USA
Corporation of Suwanee, Georgia;
Hisense USA Multimedia R&D Center

Inc, of Suwanee, Georgia; TeL

SUMMARY:

FOR FURTHER

84, No. 205/Wednesday,

CONTACT:

Robert Needham, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708-5468. Copies of non-confidential
documents filed in connection with this
investigation are or will be available for
inspection during official business
hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW, Washington, DC 20436,
telephone (202) 205-2000. General
information concerning the Commission
may also be obtained by accessing its
internet server (https://www.usitc.gov).
The public record for this investigation
may be viewed on the Commission's
electronic docket (EDTS) at https://
edis. usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired
persons are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission's TDD
terminal on (202) 205-1810,
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
The
Commission instituted this investigation
on April 3, 2019, based on a complaint
filed by Innovative Foundry
Technologies LLC of Portsmouth, New
Hampshire ("1FT"), 84 FR 13065. The
complaint, as supplement8d,
alleges
violations of s8ction 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U,S,C,
1337, in the importation into the United
States, the sale for importation, and the
sale within the United States after
importation of certain semiconductor
devices, integrated circuits, and
consumer products containing the same

Corporation of Huizhou City, China;
TCL Communication,
Inc. of Irvine,
California; TTE T8chnology, Inc, (d/b/a
TCL America) of Wilmington, Delaware;
TCT Mobile (US) Inc. of Irvine,
California; VIZIO, Inc, of Irvine,
California; MediaTek Inc. of Hsinchu
City, Taiwan, MediaTek USA Inc, of San
Jose, California, and Mstar
Semiconductor,
Inc. of ChuPei City,
Taiwan (collectively, "MediaTek");
Qualcomm Incorporated of San Diego,
California, and Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc, of San Diego,
California (collectively, "Qualcomm");
and Taiwan Semiconductor
Manufacturing Company Limited of
Hsinchu City, Taiwan, TSMC North
America of San Jose, California, and
TSMC Technology, Inc. of San Jose,
California (collectively, "TSMC"j. Id. at
13066, The complaint and notice of
investigation were amended to add as
respondents Dongguan OPPO Precision
Electronic Corp" Ltd.; TCL Mobile
Communication
(HK) Co., Ltd,; and
Huizhou TCL Mobile Communication
Co. Ltd. Order No. 15 (Jun, 13, 2019),
not reviewed Notice (Jul. 7,2019); Order
No. 24 (Jul. 22, 2019), not reviewed
Notice (Aug. 13,2019). The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations ("OUII") is
participating in this investigation, 84 FR
13066,
On September 4,2019, 1FT filed an
unopposed motion to terminate the
investigation with respect to TSMC,
MediaTek, and Qualcomm based on a
settlement agreement, and to terminate
the investigation with respect to all
other respondents based on a
withdrawal of the complaint. On
September 6,2019, OUI! filed a
response in support of the motion.
On September 27,2019, the ALJ
issued the subject ID, granting the
motion to terminate the investigation
based on a settlement agreement and the
withdrawal of the complaint. The ALJ
found that the motion complied with
the Commission Rules and that there
was no evidence that termination was

19

23, 2019/Notices
contrary to the public interest. No
petitions for review of the ID were
received.
The Commission has determined not
to review the subject ID. The
investigation is terminated.
The authority for the Commission's
determination is contained in section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amend8d (19 U,S,C. 1337), and in part
210 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part
210),
By order of the Commission.
Issued: October 17,2019.
Lisa Barton,

Secretmy to the Commission.
lFR Doc. 2019-23071 Filed 10-22-19; 8;45 am]
BILLING CODE

702G-02-P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[OMB Number1121-NEW]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed eColiection
eComments Requested; New
Collection: Analysis of Publicly
Available Court Data (APACD)
AGENCY: Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: 60-Day notice,

The Department of Justice
(DO]), Office of Justice Programs,
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), will be
submitting the following information
collection request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Comments are encouraged
and
will be accepted for 60 days until
December 23, 2019.
SUMMARY:

FOR

FURTHER

INFORMATION

CONTACT:

If

you have additional comments
especially on the estimated public
burden or associated response time,
suggestions, or need a copy of the
proposed information collection
instrument with instructions or
additional information, please contact
Suzanne Strong, Statistician,
Prosecution and Judicial Statistics Unit,
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 810 Seventh
Street NW, Washington, DC 20531
(email: [email protected];
telephone: 202-616-3666).
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Written
comments and suggestions from the
public and affected agencies concerning
the proposed collection of information
are encouraged. Your comments should
address one or more of the following
four points:
-Evaluate
whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary

Federal Register/Vol. 84, No. 205/Wednesday, October 23, 2019/Notices
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Bureau of Justice
Statistics, 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;
-Evaluate
whether and if so how the
quality, utility, and clarity ofthe
information to be collected can be
enhanced; 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.
Overview of This Information
Collection
(1)

Type of Information Collection:

New collection.
(2)

The Title of the Form/Collection:

Analysis of Publicly Available Court
Data (APACD).
(3) The agency form number, if any,
and the applicable component of the
Department sponsoring the collection:

The Data Extraction Guide is AP ACD001. The applicable component within
the Department of Justice is the Bureau
of Justice Statistics, in the Office of
Justice Programs.

(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Respondents will be court
administrators or their information
technology (IT) staff within state or
county courts. Abstract: Among other
responsibilities, the Bureau of Justice
Statistics is charged with collecting data
regarding the prosecution of crimes by
state and federal offices. This effort is
directed towards state and county courts
regarding the processing of criminal
felony and misdemeanor cases in courts
of limited and general jurisdiction. The
AP ACD will collect information from
state and county courts by requesting
data extracts of court case management
systems. Thirty-one states and the
District of Columbia have statewide
court case management systems. An
additional five states have a majority of
counties included, with one to four
counties missing from the statewide
case management systems, for a total of
10 additional counties needed to
complete the almost-statewide systems.
The remaining fourteen states and
Puerto Rico do not have statewide case
management systems, or at least not
statewide systems that cover most of the
state.

BJS will request complete records
from the statewide and mostly-statewide
systems, with separate requests to the
counties not included in the mostly
statewide systems. BJS will also sample
counties from the states unable to
provide statewide extracts. The requests
will sample with certainty any county
with a total resident population
exceeding one million persons.
This is BJS's first collection from state
courts since the Survey of Juveniles
Charged in Adult Criminal Courts effort
in 2014. BJS is requesting that the
extracts include all felony and
misdemeanor criminal cases disposed of
by December 31,2019. BJS is also
requesting that the extracts include
defendant demographics; information
about charges, hearings, disposition,
and sentences; attorney information;
diversion and problem-solving court
information; and whether a bench
warrant was issued during the case.
State and local courts can provide the
data extract or extracts in any format.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: BJS will send a data extraction

guide to a total of 150 jurisdictions. The
150 jurisdictions include 36 states
(including 10 counties that are not
included in the statewide case
management systems) and the District of
Columbia, 23 counties with total
populations exceeding 1,000,000
residents, and 80 sampled counties
representing the 14 states and Puerto
Rico that cannot provide statewide data.
The expected burden placed on these
jurisdictions is about 30 hours per
jurisdiction, with an additional 10 hours
to explain any data inconsistencies or
questions of the data collection team.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total respondent burden
is approximately 6,000 burden hours for
the 150 jurisdictions.
If additional information is required
contact: Melody Braswell, Department

Clearance Officer, United States
Department of Justice, Justice
Management Division, Policy and
Planning Staff, Two Constitution
Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A,
Washington, DC 20530.
Dated: October 18, 2019.
Melody

Braswell,

Department Clearance Officer for PRA, u.s.
Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2019-23092

Filed 10-22-19;

BILLING CODE 441(}-18-P

20

8:45 am]

56839

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[OMB Number 1103-0098]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed eCollection
eComments Requested; COPS
Application Package
Community Oriented Policing
Services, Department of Justice.
ACTION: 60-Day notice.
AGENCY:

The Department of Justice
(DO]) Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) will be
submitting the following information
collection request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: The purpose of this notice is to
allow for an additional 30 days for
public comment December 23, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have comments especially on the
estimated public burden or associated
response time, suggestions, or need a
copy of the proposed information
collection instrument with instructions
or additional information, please
contact Lashon M. Hilliard, Department
of Justice Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services, 145 N Street NE,
Washington, DC 20530, (202) 514-6563.
Written comments and/or suggestions
can also be directed to the Office of
Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attention Department of Justice Desk
Officer, Washington, DC 20530 or sent
to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Written
comments and suggestions from the
public and affected agencies concerning
the proposed collection of information
are encouraged. Your comments should
address one or more of the following
four points:
-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
SUMMARY:

'o'''''''''''''';:(
Gl'o;::J'

Federal Register/Vol.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-506 and 508
and 731-TA-1238-1243 (Review)]
Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from
China, Germany, Japan, Korea,
Sweden, and Taiwan; Notice of
Commission Determinations To
Conduct Full Five-Year Reviews
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY:

The Commission

hereby gives

notice that it will proceed with full
reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of
1930 to determine whether revocation of
countervailing duty orders on nonoriented electrical steel ("NOES") from
China and Taiwan and the antidumping
duty orders on NOES from China,
Germany, Japan, Korea, Sweden, and
Taiwan would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of material
injury within a reasonably foreseeable
time. A schedule for the reviews will be
established and announced at a later
date.
DATES:

February 4, 2020.

may also be obtained

February 13, 2020/Notices

FR 58743, Novp.mber 1, 2019) was
adequate. The Commission also found
that the respondent interested party
group response to its notice of
institution concerning the antidumping
duty order on imports from Germany
was adequate and, therefore, determined
to proceed with a full review of that
order. The Commission determined that
the respondent interested party group
responses to its notice of institution
concerning the countervailing duty
orders on imports from China and
Taiwan, and the antidumping duty
orders on imports from China, Japan,
Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan were
inadequate. However, the Commission
detp.rminp.d to conduct full IP.vip.ws of
those orders in order to promote
administrative
efficiency considering its
determination to conduct a full review
of the antidumping duty order on
imports from Germany. A record of the
Commissioners'
votes, the
Commission's statement on adequacy,
and any individual Commissioner's
statements will be available from the
Office of the Secretary and at the
Commission's website.
Authority: These reviews are being
conducted under authority of title VII of the

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT: Abu
B. Kanu (202-205-2597),
Office of
Investigations, U.S. International Tradp.
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain
information on this matter by contacting
the Commission's TDD terminal on 202205-1810. Persons with mobility
impairments who will need special
assistance in gaining access to the
Commission should contact the Office
of the Secretary at 202-205-2000.
General information concerning the

Commission

85, No. 30/Thursday,

Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published
pursuant to sflction 207.62 of the
Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: February 7, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
IFR Doc. 2020-02854

Filed 2-12-20;

8:45 ami

BILLING CODE 702~2-P

thp. public wp.re received during this
period and are thoroughly addressed in
the supporting statement for thi:;
collection. Three comments requested
that information on interpreters be
added. The requesters sought data
elements reflecting for whom the
interpreter was ordered (defendant,
witness, victim), whether the interpreter
was present for all hearings, and the
qualifications of the interpreter. BJS
added data elements asking courts to
provide whether an interpreter was
ordered for the case and for which
party(ies) to the case the interpreter was
ordered. BJS does not expect these
.
changes to impact the estimated
respondent burden.
DATES: Comments are encouraged
and
will be accepted for an additional 30
day until March 16, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have additional comments
especially on the estimated public
burden or associated response time,
suggestions, or need a copy of the
proposed information collection
instrument with instructions or
additional information, please contact
Suzanne M. Strong, Statistician, Bureau
of Justice Statistics, 810 Sp.vp.nth Strep.t
NW, Washington, DC 20531 (email:

Suzanne [email protected];
telephone: 202-616-3666).
Written
comments and/or suggestions can also
be sent to the Office of Management and
Budget, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Attention
Department of Justice Desk Officer,
Washington, DC 20503 or sent to OIRA_

[email protected].
INFORMATION:
Written
comments and suggestions from the
public and affected agencies concerning
the proposed collection of information
SUPPLEMENTARY.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[OMB Number1121-NEW]

by

accessing its internet server (https:ff
www.usitc.gov). The public record for
these reviews may be viewed on the
Commission's elp.ctronic docket (EDIS)
at https;//edis.usitc.gov.
For further information concerning
the conduct of these reviews and rules
of general application, consult the
Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, part 201, subparts A through
E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207,
subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part
207).
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
On
February 4, 2020, the Commission
determined that it should proceed to
full reviews in the subject five-year
reviews pursuant to section 751(c) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.c. 1675(cll.
The Commission found that the
domestic interested party group
response to its notice of institution (84

8325

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed eColiection;
eComments Requested; New
Collection: Criminal Cases in State
Courts (CCSC), Previously Posted as
Analysis of Publicly Available Court
Data (APACD)
Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: 30-Day notice.
AGENCY:

Department of Justice (DOJ),
Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of
Justicp. Statistics, will be submitting the
following information collection request
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed
information collection was previously
published, allowing for a 60 day
comment period. Seven comments from
SUMMARY:

21

are encouraged.

Your comnlents

should

address one or more of the following
four points:
-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 ofthe agencies
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 thosp. who am to
respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms

8326

Federal Register/Vol.

of information technology, e.g.,
permitting electronic submission
responses.

of

Overview of This Information
Collection

(1) Type of Information Collection:
New collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC),
formerly titled Analysis of Publicly
Available Court Data.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and

the applicable component of the
Department sponsoring the collection:
The Data Extraction guide is CCSC-001.
The applicable component within the
Department of Justice is the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, in the Office of Justice
Programs.

(4) Afj'ected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: BJS will request complete
records from the statewide and mostlystatewide systems, with separate
requests to the counties not included in
the mostly statewide systems. BJS will
also sample counties from the states
unable to provide statewide extracts.
The requests will sample with certainty
any county with a total resident
population exceeding one million
persons. A total of 150 jurisdictions
(states or counties) will be included in
this effort.
BJS is requesting that the data extracts
provided by courts include all felony
and misdemeanor criminal cases
disposed of between January 1 and
December 31,2019. BJS is also
requesting that the extracts include
defendant demographics; information
about charges, disposition, and
sentences. State and local courts can
provide the data extract or extracts in
any format.
BJS plans to publish this information
in reports and reference it when
responding to queries from the U.S.
Congress, Executive Office of the
President, the U.S. Supreme Court, state
officials, international organizations,
researchers, students, the media, and
others interested in criminal justice
statistics.

(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond/reply: BJS will send a data
extraction guide to 150 jurisdictions.
The 150 jurisdictions include 36 states
(including 10 counties that are not
included in the statewide case
management systems) and the District of
Columbia, 23 counties with total
populations exceeding 1,000,000
residents, and 79 sampled counties
representing the 14 states and Puerto
Rico that cannot provide statewide data.

85, No. 3D/Thursday,

February 13, 2020/Notices

The expected burden placed on these
jurisdictions is about 30 hours per
jurisdiction, with an additional 10 hours
to explain any data inconsistencies or
questions of the data collection team.
(6) An estimate of the total public

burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: There are an estimated 6,000
total burden hours associated
collection.

with this

If additional information is required
contact: Melody Braswell, Department
Clearance Officer, United States
Department of Justice, Justice
Management Division, Policy and
Planning Staff, Two Constitution
Square, 145 N Street NE, Suite 3E.405B,
Washington, DC 20530.
Dated: February

7. 2020.

Melody Braswell,

Department ClearanceOfficer,PRA, u.s.
Department ofJustice.
[FR Doc. 2020-02842 Filed 2-12-20;
BILLING

8:45 am]

CODE 441(}-1S-P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC-201~0411

Instrument

Sensing Lines

Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory guide, issuance.
AGENCY:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing Revision 2
to Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.151,
"Instrument Sensing Lines." RG 1.151
describes an approach that is acceptable
to the staff of the NRC to meet
SUMMARY:

regulatory

requirements

for instrument

sensing lines in nuclear power plants.
The RG would endorse, with certain
exceptions, standards that were updated
and corrected subsequent to the last
time the NRC endorsed them in RG
1.151. More information on updates can
be found in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section below.
DATES: Revision 2 to RG 1.151 is
available on February 13, 2020.
ADDRESSES:
Please refer to Docket ID
NRC-2019-0041 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may obtain publicly-available
information related to this document
using one of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
https://www.regulations.govand
search
for Docket ID NRC-2019-0041. Address
questions about NRC docket IDs in
Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges;
telephone: 301-287-9127; email:
[email protected]. For technical
questions, contact the individual(s)

22

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
section of this document.

CONTACT

• NRC's Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection

at

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
"Begin Web-based ADAMS Search." For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1-800-397--4209, 301415--4737, or by email to pdr.resource@
nrc.gov. Revision 2 to RG 1.151 and the
regulatory analysis may be found in
ADAMS under Accession Nos.
ML19156A129 and ML18158A301,
respectively.
• NRC's PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC's PDR, Room 01-F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
Regulatory guides are not
copyrighted, and NRC approval is not
required to reproduce them.
FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION

CONTACT:

David Dawood, telephone: 301--4152389, email: [email protected];
Yaguang Yang, telephone: 301--4150655, email: Yaguang. [email protected];
and Michael Eudy, telephone: 301--4153104, email: [email protected]. All
are staff members of the Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION:

I. Discussion
The NRC is issuing a revision to an
existing guide in the NRC's "Regulatory
Guide" series. This series was
developed to describe and make
available to the public information
regarding methods that are acceptable to
the NRC staff for implementing specific
parts of the agency's regulations,
techniques that the NRC staff uses in
evaluating specific issues or postulated
events, and data that the NRC staff
needs in its review of applications for
permits and licenses.
Revision 2 of RG 1.151 was issued
with a temporary identification of Draft
Regulatory Guide, DG-1352. Revision 2
of RG 1.151 describes an approach that
is acceptable to the staff of the NRC to
meet regulatory requirements for
instrument sensing lines in nuclear
power plants. It endorses, with certain
exceptions, American National
Standards Institute/International
Society of Automation (ANSI/ISA)67.02.01-2014, "Nuclear Safety-Related
Instrument Sensing Line Piping and
Tubing Standard for Use in Nuclear

Attachment 5. Extract Announcement
Letter – State Court Administrator,
County Court Administrator versions

[Date]
(NAME), (TITLE)
(AGENCYNAME)
(ADDR)
(CITY), (STATE) (ZIP)
Dear (NAME),

I am writing to request your participation in the 2019 Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) collection,
sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The CCSC is intended to
collect case-level data about criminal cases tried in state courts.
BJS will request data extracts for all criminal cases with a final disposition between January 1, 2019 and
December 31, 2019. BJS requests that all courts of general jurisdiction and, if available, courts of limited
jurisdiction, provide these data. Municipal courts are excluded from this collection. There are several ways to
provide data, including an extract that follows our formatting request, an unformatted extract, or a complete
extract of your data system. The data collected from states will be combined with county data from
decentralized states to provide a national picture of the volume of criminal cases, types of cases, demographics
of defendants, and outcomes of cases.
BJS is authorized to conduct this data collection under 34 U.S.C. § 10132. BJS, BJS employees, and BJS data
collection agents will use the information you provide only for statistical or research purposes pursuant to 34
U.S.C. § 10134 (section 304 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (Pub. L. No. 90-351),
as amended), and will protect it to the fullest extent under federal law. For more information on the federal
statutes, regulations, and other authorities that govern how BJS, BJS employees, and BJS data collection agents
collect, handle, store, disseminate, and protect your information, see the BJS Data Protection Guidelines at
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/BJS_Data_Protection_Guidelines.pdf.
In approximately one week, you will receive an invitation from Urban Institute to participate in this data
collection, including a data extract guide. If you have questions regarding the CCSC data collection, please
contact BJS’s authorized data collection for this effort, the Urban Institute, at [EMAIL ADDRESS] or at
[TOLL FREE PHONE]. If you have general comments about the CCSC program, please contact Suzanne
Strong, BJS project manager at [email protected] or call (202) 616-3666.
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey H. Anderson, Director

23

[Date]
(NAME), (TITLE)
(AGENCYNAME)
(ADDR)
(CITY), (STATE) (ZIP)
Dear (NAME),
I am writing to request your participation in the 2019 Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) collection,
sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The CCSC is intended to
collect case-level data about criminal cases tried in state and local courts.
BJS will request data extracts for all criminal cases with a final disposition between January 1, 2019 and
December 31, 2019. BJS requests that all courts of general jurisdiction provide these data. Limited jurisdiction
and municipal courts are excluded from the county-level collection. There are several ways courts can provide
data, including an extract that follows our formatting request, an unformatted extract, or a complete extract of
your data system. The data collected from counties like yours will be combined with data from other counties
and from statewide systems to provide a national picture of the volume of criminal cases, types of cases,
demographics of defendants, and outcomes of cases.
BJS is authorized to conduct this data collection under 34 U.S.C. § 10132. BJS, BJS employees, and BJS data
collection agents will use the information you provide only for statistical or research purposes pursuant to 34
U.S.C. § 10134 (section 304 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (Pub. L. No. 90-351),
as amended), and will protect it to the fullest extent under federal law. For more information on the federal
statutes, regulations, and other authorities that govern how BJS, BJS employees, and BJS data collection agents
collect, handle, store, disseminate, and protect your information, see the BJS Data Protection Guidelines at
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/BJS_Data_Protection_Guidelines.pdf.
In approximately one week, you will receive an invitation from Urban Institute to participate in this data
collection, including a data extract guide. If you have questions regarding the CCSC data collection, please
contact BJS’s authorized data collection for this effort, the Urban Institute, at [EMAIL ADDRESS] or at
[TOLL FREE PHONE]. If you have general comments about the CCSC program, please contact Suzanne
Strong, BJS project manager at [email protected] or call (202) 616-3666.
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey H. Anderson, Director

24

Attachment 6:
Request for Data
Check the tracking log for information about previous contacts.

Data Request Email Script (Without Any Prior Contact)
Hello ______________,
About a week ago, you should have received an emailed or mailed announcement of the Criminal Cases
in State Courts (CCSC) project from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). BJS
has partnered with the Urban Institute and the National Center for State Courts.
Urban and the National Center are collecting data on adult criminal cases disposed in 2019 on behalf of
BJS. Once compiled, the CCSC data are expected to serve as a strategic resource for policymakers and
court administrators, as well as an important component of good governance to improve transparency
and public trust in court administration.
We are reaching out to request your jurisdiction’s participation in this data collection effort. It is very
important that every invited jurisdiction participate in order to develop national statistics on court
activity. Please find attached for your review a description of the project and a list of the data elements
we are hoping to collect. We would like to work with your office to submit a data request for
[JURISTICTION] case-level court data and understand how to properly process and interpret the data.
If you are not the right person to guide us on this data request, please let me know via email at
[[email protected] or phone at 202-261-5281]. We are also happy to schedule a phone call to
answer any questions you may have or discuss our data request further if needed. Please do not
hesitate to let us know.
Thank you for your time!
Best,
Kelly Roberts Freeman, PhD

Research Associate
202-261-5281

U R B A N I N S T I T U T E
Justice Policy Center
www.urban.org [urban.org]

25

Data Request Email Script (With Prior Contact in Phase 1)
Hello ______________,
My name is ____________. I’m a researcher with the Urban Institute. As you may recall, Urban and the
National Center for State Courts contacted you previously on the Bureau of Justice Criminal Cases in
State Courts (CCSC) project, which aims to develop national statistics on criminal court activity in the
United States.
Based on our previous discussion, we would like to move forward and make a formal bulk data request.
We are requesting all criminal case-level data in [JURISTICTION] for cases that concluded in 2019.
Attached to this email is a short description of our project with the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the
National Center for State Courts and a list of the data elements we are requesting.
Please reach out to myself at [EMAIL and PHONE] or [Kelly Roberts Freeman at 202-261-5281
([email protected])] if you have any questions or if you require more information.
Best,
[NAME]
[PROJECT TITLE/CCSC POC for [JURISDICTION]]
[ORGANIZATION]
[CONTACT]
Update the tracking with the outcome of this contact.

26

Attachment 7:
Initial Follow-Up
Check the tracking log for information about previous contacts and any notes about tentative
submission dates.
For nonresponsive jurisdictions, try multiple forms of contact (e.g. phone and email) and have
representatives from the Urban Institute and NCSC reach out.

Email Script
Dear _____________,
On behalf of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Urban Institute and the National Center for State Courts
are reaching out to collect nationally representative case-level criminal court data for the Criminal Cases
in State Courts (CCSC) project. We submitted a data request on [DATE] and haven’t received a response.
We wanted to see if you have any questions about our data request or the project, and if we have
provided everything needed to comply with [JURISTICTION’S] requirements for data requests.
If you have any questions about our data request, the project, or your participation in the project,
please do not hesitate to contact me via any means listed below. We thank you in advance for your
participation in this very important national study.
Sincerely,
[NAME]
[PROJECT TITLE/CCSC POC for [JURISTICTION]
[ORGANIZATION]
[CONTACT]

27

Phone Script
Hello, my name is ____________ from the [Urban Institute/National Center for State Courts], and I’m
calling on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. We reached out to you
about participating in the Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) project on [DATE], and I was calling to
confirm that we have submitted everything necessary for you to consider and respond to our data
request.
•

Has the jurisdiction received the contact email?
o

Are you the appropriate point of contact for this request?




•

•

Yes: Are there any questions you have about the project or your participation
that we can answer?
•

No questions: Thank you very much for your time and participation.
[Go to next question about data extraction guide]

•

Yes, questions: Record jurisdictions questions and answers here. [Go to
next question about data extraction guide]

No: Identify appropriate point of contact
•

Thank you very much for your time. We will reach out to ________ via
[PHONE/EMAIL]. We look forward to working with your jurisdiction.

•

END CALL

Do you need a copy of the data extraction guide?
o

Yes: We will provide you one via email by [DATE] (confirm email).

o

No: [Go to next question]

Do you have any questions about the project or data request?
o

Yes: Answer questions, then move on to the talking points under “No.”

o

No: Is your jurisdiction able to participate in this data collection effort?
•

Agree to participate: Thank you very much for your time and
participation. Is there a good time for us to reach back out to check in
with you on this request? [record new date in tracking log]

•

Refuse to participate: Thank you very much for your time. We
understand that your jurisdiction may not be able to fulfill our request
at this time. As the CCSC data are expected to be nationally
representative, it is very important that every invited jurisdiction
participate in order to develop national statistics. If your jurisdiction is
able to participate at a later date, please do not hesitate to reach out to
us.

Update the tracking with the outcome of this contact.

28

DATA USE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS
AND
FOR THE
I.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this Data Use Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement) is
for to provide to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), located
within the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ),
(the Parties) with data on for the . The data
that BJS obtains from the will contribute to BJS’s objectives to
.
This Agreement includes the following attachments:
•
•
•

II.

project description (Attachment I)
List of data variables and reference years that will
provide to BJS (Attachment II)
BJS Data Protection Guidelines (available at
(https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/BJS_Data_Protection_Guidelines.pdf).

AUTHORITY
The Director of BJS is statutorily authorized to “utilize, with their consent, the
records . . . [and] information of other Federal, State, local and private agencies and
instrumentalities. . .” 34 U.S.C. § 10132.
may provide data to BJS under

III.

GOVERNANCE
This Agreement and the performance of the parties’ obligations hereunder will be
governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with federal law.

IV.

DEFINITIONS
Key terms in this Agreement (e.g., incident, personally identifiable information,
information identifiable to a private person, etc.) will maintain their definitions as
provided by federal law and policy, to include: statutes, regulations, and other
guidance provided by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the DOJ.

29

For the purpose of this Agreement, the term “award recipient” refers to the entity
(e.g., a private organization or an institution of higher learning) that receives funding
from BJS through a cooperative agreement, grant, contract, subaward, or subcontract
to perform statistical or research activities (e.g., collecting, receiving, handling,
maintaining, transferring, processing, storing, or disseminating data). The term “data
collection agent” refers to an individual who works under BJS’s authority through
such an award to complete statistical or research activities in conjunction with the
funded project(s).
V.

EFFECTIVE PERIOD
This Agreement shall become effective upon the date of signature by the second of
the authorized officials of BJS and . This Agreement shall
renew automatically and remain in effect for five years from the effective date, or
until terminated by one or both of the parties.

VI.

MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION
Either party may modify this Agreement at any time by a written modification that is
approved and signed by the appropriate authorities of each party. Either party may
terminate this Agreement by a written modification submitted 60 days before the new
end date.
The shall retain the right to terminate this Agreement at any
time should BJS or its data collection agents violate the terms of the Agreement.

VII.

DATA CONFIDENTIALITY
Data collected by BJS are maintained under the confidentiality provisions outlined in
28 C.F.R. Part 22 and 34 U.S.C. §§ 10134 and 10231. Relevant provisions include the
following—
•
•

•
•

BJS shall utilize the data it collects from only for research
and statistical purposes
Data collected by BJS shall be gathered in a manner that precludes their use for
law enforcement or any purpose relating to a private person or public agency
other than a statistical or research purpose
BJS shall provide access to the data file and the
information contained in it to entities outside of BJS only to the extent that the
entity has a need to know, consistent with the above referenced federal statutes
and regulations
No identifiable information shall be disclosed to persons or entities outside of the
BJS project team without the express permission of
Any reports, analyses, or other summaries of the information contained in the
data files that are made publicly available shall not contain

30

information that can reasonably be expected to lead to the identification of an
individual or other person identified therein.
BJS data collection agents working under BJS’s direction may be involved in the
collection and handling of data provided under this Agreement. Such data collection
agents are required by law to follow the same federal confidentiality statutes and
regulations that govern how BJS protects information collected under its authority.
For additional information regarding data protection responsibilities, see the BJS Data
Protection Guidelines.
VIII. DATA SECURITY AND PRIVACY
BJS shall maintain the appropriate administrative, physical, and technical safeguards
to protect identifiable information collected or maintained under its authority in
accordance with applicable DOJ IT security policies and regulations, OMB guidance,
and federal law.
The BJS Data Protection Guidelines summarize the specific technical requirements
that BJS is required to follow, including –
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Ensure that information systems that maintain identifiable information are
adequately secured and protected against unauthorized disclosure in accordance
with the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA; Pub.
L. No. 113-283)
Adhere to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines to
categorize the sensitivity of all information collected or maintained on behalf of
BJS
Once the system has been categorized, secure data in accordance with the
accepted Risk Management Framework
Employ adequate controls to ensure data are not comingled with any other dataset
or product without the express written consent of BJS (applicable to BJS data
collection agents)
Reduce the volume of PII collected, used, or retained to the minimum necessary
Limit access to PII to only those individuals who must have such access,
including requisite IT security administrators
Limit the use of PII to only the purposes for which it was approved
Ensure all cooperative agreements and contracts involving the processing and
storage of PII comply with DOJ policies on remote access and security incident
reporting
Employ sanctions for anyone failing to comply with DOJ policies and procedures,
in accordance with applicable laws and regulations
Ensure that all BJS employees and data collection agents complete data security
and confidentiality training, as applicable.

To comply with the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015 (codified in relevant
part at 6 U.S.C. § 151), OJP facilitates, through the DOJ Trusted Internet Connection

31

and the Department of Homeland Security’s EINSTEIN 3A system, the inspection of
all information transmitted to and from OJP systems including, but not limited to,
data collected and maintained by BJS.
IX.

DISPOSITION OF DATA
BJS shall follow federal regulations at 28 C.F.R. § 22.25 related to the disposition of
data containing PII, which requires the maintenance of a separate name-code index to
ensure that an individual cannot be identified in the data file or the destruction of PII
after a three-year period, unless the data are still needed for statistical purposes.

X.

DATA ARCHIVAL
BJS shall archive data to facilitate and encourage replication and further research in
the field of criminal justice. Each dataset submitted for archival shall be subject to a
comprehensive disclosure risk assessment and thoroughly examined to verify that its
contents do not violate explicit or implicit confidentiality pledges that BJS provides to
respondents. To the extent possible, BJS shall remove, mask, or collapse direct and
indirect identifiers prior to submitting data for archival, and the appropriate level of
data security shall be applied to protect data confidentiality and mitigate the risk of
indirect identification.

XI.

INCIDENT RESPONSE PROCEDURES
In the event of a real or suspected data incident involving PII collected or maintained
by BJS or its data collection agents pursuant to this Agreement, BJS shall follow
DOJ’s established incident response procedures and rules of behavior. These
procedures include the timely internal and external notification to the appropriate
DOJ officials, law enforcement agencies, and individuals potentially impacted by the
incident; assessment of the potential risk of harm; and development of appropriate
mitigation options. BJS contractors that collect or maintain PII under BJS’s authority
are similarly required to maintain procedures to effectively respond to an incident. In
the event of a suspected incident, BJS may disclose information to the appropriate
agencies, entities, and persons to respond to an incident involving PII maintained by
BJS or to assist another agency in its response to an incident. The BJS Data
Protection Guidelines provide more details about DOJ’s incident response
procedures.

XII.

PENALTIES FOR UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE
Each party shall be responsible for any and all acts or omissions of its own staff,
employees, officers, agents, and contractors.
Violations of the confidentiality provisions of 34 U.S.C. § 10231 shall constitute a
violation of this Agreement and may be punished by a fine not to exceed $10,000, in

32

addition to any other penalty imposed by federal law. Further confidentiality
protections for statistical data are contained in 18 U.S.C § 1905. Penalties for
violating this statue include mandatory termination from employment, as well as a
fine, term of imprisonment of not more than one year, or both.
In the event BJS or its data collection agents fails to comply with any of the material
terms of this Agreement, the shall have the right to terminate
the Agreement, in addition to pursuing all penalties available under federal law.
Additionally, at the direction of , BJS shall forthwith return or
dispose of all information provided by .
XIII. LIABILITY/INDEMNIFICATION:
Each party shall be responsible for any liability arising from its own conduct and
retains immunity and all defenses available to them pursuant to federal law, and
neither party agrees to insure, defend, or indemnify the other party.
In the event of a dispute between the parties, the parties shall use their best efforts to
resolve the dispute in an informal fashion through consultation and communication
that is mutually acceptable to both parties.
XIV. APPROVALS
By their signatures below, the authorized officials approve this Agreement:
BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS
_____________________________________
Date

_____________________________________
Name, Title

_______________________

_______________________
Date

Compliance Agreement of BJS Data Collection Agent
, as a BJS award recipient and data collection agent
authorized to work on the funded under award number(s)
, has reviewed and agrees to comply
with the terms and conditions of the foregoing Agreement between and BJS.

33

___________________________________
(Name of Data Collection Agent)
____________________________________
(Name of Authorized Representative)
____________________________________
(Signature of Authorized

Representative/Date)

34

Attachment 9:
Second Follow-Up
Check the tracking log for information about previous contacts.
For nonresponsive jurisdictions, try multiple forms of contact (e.g. phone and email) and have
representatives from the Urban Institute and NCSC reach out.

Email Script
Dear _____________,
As you may recall from prior contacts, the Bureau of Justice Statistics partnered with the Urban Institute
and the National Center for State Courts to collect adult felony and misdemeanor case-level data for the
Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) project. We had submitted a data request on [DATE] and followed
up with you on [DATE]. Since we have not received a [response/signed MOU/data], we wonder if we
have provided everything needed to comply with [JURISTICTION’S] requirements for data requests, or if
you have any concerns that we can address.
Should you have any questions, need additional information about the CCSC project or data request, or
need our support in any other way, please do not hesitate to contact me via any means listed below. We
thank you in advance for your participation in this very important national study.
Sincerely,
[NAME]
[PROJECT TITLE/CCSC POC for [JURISTICTION]]
[ORGANIZATION]
[CONTACT]

35

Phone Script
Hello, my name is ____________ from the [Urban Institute/National Center for State Courts], and I’m
calling on behalf of the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Our partners at the [National
Center for State Courts/Urban Institute] reached out to you about participating in the Criminal Cases in
State Courts (CCSC) project on [DATE] and followed up on [DATE]. I am calling to confirm that we have
submitted everything necessary for you to review our data request.
•

Do you have everything you need from us?
o

o

Yes: Are there any ways we can help your jurisdiction?


Agree to participate: Thank you very much for your time and participation. Is
there a good time for us to reach back out to check in with you on this request?



Refuse to participate: Thank you very much for your time. We understand that
your jurisdiction may not be able to fulfill our request at this time. As the CCSC
data are expected to be nationally representative, it is very important that every
invited jurisdiction participate in order to develop national statistics. If your
jurisdiction is able to participate at a later date, please do not hesitate to reach
out to us.

No: Identify what needs are not yet met


Thank you very much for your time. We will make sure that we get you those
materials/that support by [DATE] (record what jurisdiction needs).

Update the tracking with the outcome of this contact.

36

[Date]

Attachment 10. BJS Outreach MAILED VERSION

(NAME) (TITLE)
(ADDR)
(CITY), (STATE) (ZIP)
Dear (NAME),
I am writing to let you know the data collection for the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS’s) Criminal Cases in
State Courts (CCSC) is closing soon and we have not yet received a data file from you.
For your convenience, the data extract guide is enclosed. Your response is critical to being able to provide a
national view of the criminal cases processed by state courts. Please respond by contacting Urban Institute at
PHONE or EMAIL to arrange file transfers. You can submit the data as a formatted data extract, an unformatted
data extract, or a complete extract of your criminal case management system.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is authorized to conduct this data collection under 34 U.S.C. § 10132. BJS,
BJS employees, and BJS data collection agents will use the information you provide only for statistical or
research purposes pursuant to 34 U.S.C. § 10134 (section 304 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
of 1968 (Pub. L. No. 90-351), as amended), and will protect it to the fullest extent under federal law. For more
information on the federal statutes, regulations, and other authorities that govern how BJS, BJS employees, and
BJS data collection agents collect, handle, store, disseminate, and protect your information, see the BJS Data
Protection Guidelines at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/BJS_Data_Protection_Guidelines.pdf.
We thank you in advance for your time and contribution to this important study. Participation is voluntary, but by
submitting the data by [DATE], the results of this study will provide comprehensive, accurate and timely
information on criminal case processing in the United States. BJS will report data from the CCSC and make it
available on its website at https://www.bjs.gov after the project closes. BJS will not release any personally
identifiable information included in the data extracts. If you have any questions, e-mail me at
[email protected] or call (202) 616-3666.
Sincerely,
Suzanne M. Strong, CCSC Project Manager

EMAILED VERSION
37

Dear (NAME),
I am writing to let you know the data collection for the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS’s) Criminal Cases in
State Courts (CCSC) is closing soon and we have not yet received a data file from you.
For your convenience, the data extract guide is attached. Your response is critical to being able to provide a
national view criminal cases processed by state courts. Please respond by contacting Urban Institute at PHONE
or EMAIL to arrange file transfers. You can submit the data as a formatted data extract, an unformatted data
extract, or a complete extract of your criminal case management system.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is authorized to conduct this data collection under 34 U.S.C. § 10132. BJS,
BJS employees, and BJS data collection agents will use the information you provide only for statistical or
research purposes pursuant to 34 U.S.C. § 10134 (section 304 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
of 1968 (Pub. L. No. 90-351), as amended), and will protect it to the fullest extent under federal law. For more
information on the federal statutes, regulations, and other authorities that govern how BJS, BJS employees, and
BJS data collection agents collect, handle, store, disseminate, and protect your information, see the BJS Data
Protection Guidelines at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/BJS_Data_Protection_Guidelines.pdf.
We thank you in advance for your time and contribution to this important study. Participation is voluntary, but by
submitting the data by [DATE], the results of this study will provide comprehensive, accurate and timely
information on criminal case processing in the United States. BJS will report data from the CCSC and make it
available on its website at https://www.bjs.gov after the project closes. BJS will not release any personally
identifiable information included in the data extracts. If you have any questions, e-mail me at
[email protected] or call (202) 616-3666.
Sincerely,
Suzanne M. Strong, CCSC Project Manager

38

Attachment 11:
Confirm Data Script/Additional Follow-up
Check the tracking log for information about previous contacts.

Send out an initial email confirming receipt of the data (unless the respondent prefers telephone).
Follow up with an email or call for data clarification.

Confirmation of Receipt - Email Script
Dear ______________,
Hello, this is _________, your state/county’s contact person from the [Urban Institute/National Center
for State Courts]. I am emailing to confirm our receipt of a data extract you provided to us on [DATE].
This dataset was provided in response to the Criminal Cases in State Courts (CCSC) project led by the
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). We will email you for guidance when we review
your data file more closely. Thank you so much for your participation in our project.
Best,
[NAME]
[PROJECT TITLE/CCSC POC for [JURISTICTION]]
[ORGANIZATION]
[CONTACT]

Data Clarification Email Script
[ LATER CONTACT AFTER IN-DEPTH REVIEW, EMAIL]
Hello, this is _________, your state/county’s contact person from the [Urban Institute/National Center
for State Courts]. I am calling to discuss some questions we have about the data you submitted on
[DATE] in response to the Criminal Cases in State Courts project. We have a few questions regarding [list
items needing clarification for follow-up in bullet points for easy review]. We estimate that we would
need about [AMOUNT OF TIME] to discuss our questions via telephone. Can we schedule a call to
discuss these items? Here are some available days and times for your review [list potential days/times
the following week for consideration]. If these do not work, please send us your availability and we will
work with you to address these questions as quickly as possible. Thank you again for your participation
and guidance in understanding your data.
Best,
[NAME]
[PROJECT TITLE/CCSC POC for [JURISTICTION]]

39

[ORGANIZATION]
[CONTACT]

Data Clarification Phone Script
Hello, this is _________, your state/county’s contact for the Criminal Cases in State Courts project from
the [Urban Institute/National Center for State Courts]. Thank you for being available to discuss some
questions we had about your data. Is now still a good time?
o
o

Yes: Discuss questions. Upon completion, make notes on data structure, formatting, or
definitions in the Data Quality Notes column of the Data Collection Tracker.
No: Can we schedule a better time to talk to you about the data? (Schedule an
appropriate time and update the Data Collection Tracker about this call. After
subsequent call, make notes on data structure, formatting, or definitions in the Data
Quality Notes column of the Data Collection Tracker.)

Update the tracking with the outcome of this contact.

40

Attachment 12
Thank You Email
Dear NAME,
On behalf of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), Urban Institute, and National Center for State Courts
(NCSC) I would like to thank you for your participation in the 2019 Criminal Cases in State Courts
(CCSC). I truly appreciate your support, and the efforts of <> for providing the data extract, as it is vital to the success of this collection.
This letter confirms that we have processed the data you provided, and the data are ready for inclusion
in our analysis file. We anticipate that the report, Criminal Case Processing in State Courts, 2019
(working title), will be published in the winter of 2021. The report will be available on our website
www.bjs.gov.
If you have questions or updates to the contact information for you or your agency, you may contact
Urban Institute team at [TOLL FREE NUMBER] or by email at [EMAIL]. You may also contact me at
(202) 616-3666 or [email protected].
Sincerely,

Suzanne M. Strong
Project Manager, Criminal Cases in State Courts
Bureau of Justice Statistics

41

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:

Uyehara, Paul (CRT)
Strong, Suzanne M. (OJP)
FW: BJS APACD Comment OMB 1121 query
Thursday, December 19, 2019 4:57:32 PM
DRAFT_APACD_Data extraction 20191014_FCS_comments_121919.xlsx

Suzanne,
My section has a long standing initiative that seeks to improve language access in state
courts in order to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  We have case examples and
other materials illustrating the scope and nature of the initiative on one of our websites. 
https://www.lep.gov/resources/resources.html#SC.  We are submitting these comments consistent
with efforts to increase compliance with Title VI, as we have an interest in supporting state court
efforts to improve data collection practices related to court interpreting, and to make the data
available to others. 
The attached spreadsheet outlines several ideas for additional language data to be
collected.  We think the additional data would increase the utility of the APACD project.  For our
office and other federal civil rights offices, the additional data would be useful for enforcement and
compliance efforts in several ways.   For courts that gather and share the data, it can be studied to
help determine if it appears that the court is providing defendants, witnesses, and crime victims with
qualified court interpreters so that the individuals are able to participate in court proceedings and
programs in the same way that English speakers do.  Case delays related to interpreter unavailability,
especially by language, may suggest problems in the state’s interpreter corps or how interpreters
are managed.  If a court does not capture the data, it may suggest weaknesses in how it manages
and provides language assistance.  Attorneys and advocates would benefit from the availability of
such data for the same reasons that we would.
DOJ program offices may also draw upon this data to help design programs, consider local
and state needs, and award grants.  Programs such as the Office on Violence against Women and the
Office for Victims of Crime administer grants, for example, that are concerned with service delivery
to limited English proficient and Deaf/Hard of Hearing defendants, victims, and witnesses.  Likewise,
advocates and other Civil Rights Division sections may be able to make use of the race and gender
data to spot potential discrimination in law enforcement or the courts, further increasing the utility
of the data.
Courts will benefit from gathering and sharing the data as well.  Internally, courts can use
the data to ensure that language needs are being properly addressed in criminal cases.  Problems
and inefficiencies can be spotted, decisions can be made about allocating resources and training,
and so forth.  Courts may also gain insights from analysis of data submitted by other states.  As an
entity assisting state courts, the National Center for State Courts also seeks to help the courts
improve language access in criminal as well as civil programs.  https://www.ncsc.org/Services-andExperts/Areas-of-expertise/Language-access.aspx. 
You are aware of the NCSC NODS data project, which includes language data requirements. 
We made suggestions to them to strengthen their data proposal as well with respect to language. 
To the extent that states adopt NODS standards when they are completed,  any burden from BJS
42

data reporting should be reduced.
For these reasons, my section sees many benefits from the proposed BJS data collection for
other DOJ components, the courts, and the public.  And we encourage broadening the data to be
gathered as outlined in our spreadsheet.  Please let me know if you have any questions.

Paul

Paul M. Uyehara
Senior Attorney
Federal Coordination and Compliance Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
4 Constitution Square, Suite 7.131
150 M Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 305-9813
(202) 307-0595 (fax)
[email protected]
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/cor/

From: Uyehara, Paul (CRT)
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 9:37 AM
To: Strong, Suzanne M. (OJP)
Subject: RE: BJS APACD Comment OMB 1121 query
Thanks very much for the guide Suzanne.  The connection with NCSC and NODS should simplify our
comments.
Paul
From: Strong, Suzanne M. (OJP)
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 8:49 AM
To: Uyehara, Paul (CRT)
Subject: RE: BJS APACD Comment OMB 1121 query
Good morning Paul,
Thank you for your interest in the APACD. Attached, you will find our draft data extract guide.
Please be mindful that we are still revising the guide based on interviews with state court data
experts.
NCSC is a subcontractor on this award. BJS is aware of NODS and we are trying to be consistent
with the standards developed in that project.
I would welcome any comments, which are due by 12/23/19. After that date, we will post the 30 day
43

notice and submit the entire Paperwork Reduction Act package to the Office of Management and
Budget. I do anticipate some delay because of the holidays, but expect it will be submitted in early
January.
Thank you,
Suzanne
Suzanne M. Strong, PhD
Statistician
Direct: (202) 616-3666
Main: (202) 307-0765
www.bjs.gov

From: Uyehara, Paul (CRT)
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 6:07 PM
To: Strong, Suzanne M. (OJP)
Subject: BJS APACD Comment OMB 1121 query
Suzanne,
My office is hoping to send you informal comments on the new BJS proposed information request to
criminal courts.  It would be helpful if you could share the proposed collection instrument with
instructions so we could see what it already contains.  In addition, we wanted to confirm that you
are in touch with the National Center for State Courts and aware of its current National Open Court
Data Standards project, https://www.ncsc.org/nods.   Since we recently submitted comments to
them, it might simplify our input depending on your proposed instrument.  And it presumably relates
to the burden for individual courts to respond to you if the final NODS format aligns with your needs.
Thanks
Paul

Paul M. Uyehara
Senior Attorney
Federal Coordination and Compliance Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
4 Constitution Square, Suite 7.131
150 M Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 305-9813
(202) 307-0595 (fax)
[email protected]
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/cor/

44

Appendix A. Requested Data Elements and Definitions
Category

Data Element

Definition

Core Data FCS Comments - Additional data
Element elements

A unique identifier for the jurisdiction where the case was filed (e.g.,
county name, district number, circuit number).

i
i
i

Initiating action

Level of court.
Anonymized series of characters that identify the court case that
follows a case through court levels. This identifier should be assigned to
each charge within the same case.
Type of action that initiated the case.

Prosecutor or prosecuting
agency

Identifier for individual prosecutor and/or prosecuting agency; may be
anonymized.

Defendant identifier type

e.g., anonymized number, FBI number, etc

Defendant identifier

Anonymized series of characters that identify the same individual within
the court system, across cases and courts within the state.

Defendant indigency status

Indicator of whether individual was determined to be indigent at any
point during the case.
Individual's date of birth. If date of birth is not available, please use age
at disposition.
Individual's gender.

i

Individual’s ethnicity determines whether a person is of Hispanic origin
or not.
Individual’s self-identification with one or more racial groups.

i
i

General Case
Jurisdiction identifier
and Defendant
Information
Court level
Court case identifier

Date of birth
Gender
Ethnicity
Race

i
i

i

Add element: Primary Language.
Charge
Information

FCS Comments - Definitions

Offense date
Arrest date
Charge identifier

Date when the offense occurred.
Date when the defendant was arrested.
Sequence number uniquely identifying each filing charge within a case
(count number). This is not the statute number or case type code.

i
i

Charge filing date
Filing charge statute number

Date the charge was filed.
The statute number that defines the alleged behavior as a an offense.

i
i

Filing NCIC Code
Filing charge description

The NCIC code associated with the charge at filing.
Description of the offense at filing.

Filing charge degree

Charge class severity/degree at filing.

i
i
45

Define: Individual's primary language
if limited English proficient

FCS Comments - Values

Filing charge degree detail

Category

Filing charge modifiers

The specific class severity or degree provided by statutory laws for each
charge against the defendant.
The specific type of mitigator or enhancer associated the filed charge.

Disposition charge statute
number
Disposition NCIC Code
Disposition charge description

The state statute number that defines the alleged behavior as a criminal
offense for each disposed charge.
The NCIC code associated with the charge at disposition.
Description of the offense at disposition.

Disposition charge degree

Charge class severity/degree at disposition.

Data Element

Definition

Disposition charge degree
detailed
Disposition charge modifiers

The specific class severity or degree provided by statutory laws for each
disposed charge.
The specific type of mitigator or enhancer associated the disposed
charge.
Charge disposition date
Date when each charge received a judgment or disposition.
Charge sentencing date
Date when each charge received a sentence.
Charge manner of disposition The manner in which each charge was disposed.
Sentencing
Information

Hearing
Information

Charge result of disposition

The judgment or disposition entered by the court for each charge.

Sentence type

Type(s) of sentence(s) the defendant was mandated to serve.

Sentence length in days
Sentence length in months

Length in days of sentence imposed by the court.
Length in months of sentence imposed by the court.

Sentence conditions
Concurrent/consecutive
sentence

Additional conditions imposed at sentencing.
Flag to indicate the sentence is to be served concurrently or
consecutively.

Time served credit length

Length of time (in days) spent in pretrial detention that was credited
toward the sentence the defendant was mandated to serve.

Fine amount

Dollar amount of the fine the defendant was sentenced to pay.

Fees/costs amount

Dollar amount of the all fees/costs the defendant was mandated to pay.

Restitution amount

Dollar amount of the restitution the defendant was sentenced to pay.

Event date
Event type
Event outcome

Date the event took place or was scheduled.
Type of event.
The status of the hearing or conference, including whether it was
actually held or reasons for not holding the event.
Name or unique code for the judicial officer who presided over the
event.

Judicial officer
Attorney
Information

i
i
i
Core Data
Element

i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i

Add to definition: "including
interpreter not available"

Defense attorney assignment Date defense attorney was assigned.
date

46

Defense attorney type

Type of defense attorney.

Defense attorney withdrawal
date

Date defense attorney was withdrawn.
Add category & element: Court
Interpreter Information

Definition: Court interpreter(s)
present for hearing.

Add element: Number and Credentials Definition: Number and Credentials
of Court Interpreters
Add element: Role

Pretrial Release Pretrial release date
Type of bond
Information
Conditions of release
Pretrial release revocation
date
Pretrial release revocation
reason
Judicial officer

Date of pretrial release.
Type of pretrial release bond imposed by the court at the bond/bail
hearing.
Conditions the defendant must follow when released pre- trial.
Date of pretrial release revocation.
The reason pretrial release was revoked.
Name or unique code for the judicial officer who presided over the
event.
Definition

Category

Data Element

Diversion and
Problem
solving Court
Information

Diversion program entry date Date of entry into diversion program.
Diversion program
Diversion point of referral
Diversion program exit date

The diversion program the defendant entered.
The stage of the case when the defendant was referred to the diversion
program.
Date of exit from diversion program.

Diversion program outcome

The program outcome achieved by the defendant.

Problem solving court entry
date
Problem solving court type

Date of entry into problem solving court.

Core Data
Element

The problem solving court docket the defendant entered.

Problem solving court point of The stage of the case when the defendant was referred to the problem
referral
solving court.
Problem solving court exit
Date of exit from problem solving court.
date

47

Values: In-person; Video remote;
Telephone; Absent
Values: [Number of] Certified,
Qualified, Other

Definition: specify person(s) needing Values: Defendant; Witness; Victim;
interpreter
Parent/guardian of defendant, witness,
victim [permit more than one entry]

Warrant
Information

Problem solving court
outcome
Bench warrant issued Date

The program outcome achieved by the defendant.

Reason for bench warrant

Reason the warrant was issued.

Bench warrant returned or
served date

Date bench warrant was returned or served.

Date bench warrant was issued.

Appendix B. Preferred Data Structure, Formats, and Example Values
Category & File
Structure
General Case
and Defendant
Information
One record per
case

Data Element

Format

Example Values

Jurisdiction identifier

String

County name; district name; circuit name

Court level

String

District; circuit

Court case identifier

Numeric or
string
String

1=Summons; 2=Arrest; 3=Warrant; 4=Warrantless arrest; 5=Indictment

Initiating action
Prosecutor or prosecuting
agency
Defendant identifier(s)

Charge
Information
One record per
charge

String

Defendant indigency status

Numeric or
string
Numeric

Date of birth

Date

Gender

String

1=Male; 2=Female

Ethnicity

Numeric

1=Spanish/Hispanic/Latino; 0=Not Spanish/Hispanic/Latino

Race

String

1=White; 2=African American; 3=American Indian or Alaskan; 4=Asian
5= Pacific Islander or Native Hawaiian; 5=Other 6=Two or more races

Court case identifier

Numeric or
string
Numeric or
string
Date
Date
Numeric

Defendant identifier
Offense date
Arrest date
Number of charges/counts

1=Yes; 0=No

Charge identifier

Numeric or
string
Charge filing date
Date
Filing charge statute number Numeric or
string
Filing NCIC Code
String
Filing charge description
String

48

Category & File
Structure

Filing charge degree
Filing charge degree detail

String
String

1=Felony; 2=Gross misdemeanor; 3=Misdemeanor
1=Felony 1; 2=Felony 2; 3=Misdemeanor A; 4=Misdemeanor B; etc.

Filing charge modifiers

String

Disposition charge statute
number
Disposition NCIC Code
Disposition charge
description
Data Element

Numeric or
string
String
String

1=Attempt; 2=Conspiracy; 3=Domestic violence; 4=Using a weapon in
the commission of a crime; etc.

Format

Example Values

Disposition charge degree

String

1=Felony; 2=Gross misdemeanor; 3=Misdemeanor

Disposition charge degree
String
detailed
Disposition charge modifiers String

Sentencing
Information
One record per
case or charge

1=Felony 1; 2=Felony 2; 3=Misdemeanor A; 4=Misdemeanor B; etc.
1=Attempt; 2=Conspiracy; 3=Domestic violence; 4=Using a weapon in
the commission of a crime; etc.

Charge disposition date

Date

Charge sentencing date

Date

Charge manner of
disposition

String

1=Bindover/transfer; 2=Jury trial; 3=Bench/non-jury trial; 4=Guilty plea;
5=Entry into a drug court or other problem solving court; 6=Diversion
(not a problem solving court); 6=Dismissal/nolle prosequi; 7=Other

Charge result of disposition

String

Court case identifier

Numeric or
string
Numeric or
string
Date

1=Bindover/transfer; 2=Conviction; 3=Acquittal; 4=Mistrial; 5=Entry into
a problem solving court docket; 6=Diversion (not to a problem solving
court docket); 7=Continued without a finding; 8=Dismissed/nolle
prosequi; 9=Other

Defendant identifier
Initial court sentence date

Sentence type

String

Sentence length in days

Numeric

Sentence length in months

Numeric

Sentence conditions

String

1=Death penalty; 2=Life in prison; 3=State prison; 4=Jail; 5=Lifetime
supervision; 6=Extended supervision/split sentence; 7=Probation;
8=Fine; 9=Restitution; 10=Community service; 11=Time served;
12=Other. This field should include all sentences imposed in the case.
The sentence length should be recorded separately for each type of
sentence.
The sentence length should be recorded separately for each type of
sentence.
1=Suspension or revocation of driver’s license; 2=Sex offender
registration; 3=Firearms eligibility; etc.

49

Concurrent/consecutiv e
sentence
Time served credit length in
days
Fine amount
Fees/costs amount
Restitution amount
Court case identifier
Defendant identifier
Event date
Category & File Data Element
Structure
Hearing
Event type
Information
One record per
scheduled court
event
Event outcome

Numeric

1=Yes; 0=No

Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric or
string
Numeric or
string
Date

Dollar amount.
Dollar amount.
Dollar amount.

Format

Example Values

String

1=Initial appearance; 2=Arraignment; 3=Plea hearing; 4=Pretrial
hearing; 5=Trial; 6=Grand jury indictment; 7=Bond/bail setting;
8=Bond/bail review; 9=Bench warrant issued; 10=Motion, order;
11=Probation violation; 12=Appeal filed; 12=Other

String

1=Held; 2=Continued; 3=Cancelled; 4=Postponed/rescheduled; 5=FTA

Judicial officer
Attorney
Information
One record per
attorney

Pretrial Release
Information
One record per
pretrial release
event or
outcome

Numeric or
string
Court case identifier
Numeric or
string
Defendant identifier
Numeric or
string
Defense attorney assignment Date
date
Defense attorney type
String
Defense attorney withdrawal Date
date
Court case identifier
Numeric or
string
Defendant identifier
Numeric or
string
Pretrial release date
Date
Type of bond
String

Conditions of Release

String

Pretrial release revocation
date

Date

1=Public defender; 2=Assigned counsel; 3=Private attorney

1=Signature bond (release on recognizance); 2=Unsecure personal
bond; 3=Monetary bond (includes cash and surety bonds); 4=Property
bond; 5=Other
1=Release on supervision; 2=Electronic monitoring; 3=Drug testing;
4=Program compliance; 5=No contact orders; etc.

50

Pretrial release revocation
reason

String

Judicial officer

Numeric or
string
Numeric or
string
Numeric or
string
Date

Diversion and
Court case identifier
Problem solving
Defendant identifier
Court
Information
Diversion program entry
date
Diversion program
String
Diversion program point of String
referral
Diversion program exit date Date
Category & File
Structure
One record per
program per
case

Warrant
Information
One record per
warrant

Data Element

Format

1=FTA; 2=New offense; 3=Violation of a technical condition of pretrial
release (e.g., not reporting to supervision, urine test results, having
contact with known criminal associates, violate a no contact order, etc.)

Name of the program
1=Pre-plea; 2=Post-plea; 3=Post-sentence

Example Values

Diversion program outcome String

1=Successful completion; 2=Neutral; 3=Unsuccessful

Problem solving court entry Date
date
Problem solving court type String

Name of the program

Problem solving court point
of referral
Problem solving court exit
date
Problem solving court
outcome
Court case identifier

String
Date
String

Bench warrant issued Date

Numeric or
string
Numeric or
string
Date

Reason for bench warrant

String

Bench warrant returned or
served date

Date

Defendant identifier

1=Pre-plea; 2=Post-plea; 3=Post-sentence

1=Successful completion; 2=Neutral; 3=Unsuccessful

1=FTA; 2=Violation of conditions

51

52

53

1550 W. 8th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
323-801-7989
323-801-7921 fax
www.lafla.org

December 23, 2019
Suzanne Strong
Statistician
Prosecution and Judicial Statistics Unit
Bureau of Justice Statistics
810 Seventh Street NW
Washington, DC 20531
Submitted via email to [email protected]
RE:

New Collection: Analysis of Publicly Available Court Data (APACD),
84 Fed. Reg. 56838 | OMB Number 1121-NEW | Doc. No. 2019-23092

Dear Ms. Strong,
Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA) provides these written public comments
on the Analysis of Publicly Available Court Data (APACD) from the Department of Justice,
Bureau of Justice Statistics. Specifically, we suggest enhancing the data collection to include
language related data, such as interpreter requests, languages requested, issues encountered,
complaints received, how such complaints were resolved, and court interpreter credentialing and
qualification processes.
LAFLA is a nonprofit law firm that protects and advances the rights of the most
underserved – leveling the play field and ensuring equal access to the justice system. Every year,
LAFLA helps more than 100,000 people in civil legal matters by providing direct legal
representation and other legal assistance for low-income people across the Greater Los Angeles
region. Its unique combination of neighborhood offices, self-help centers at courthouses, and
domestic violence clinics puts LAFLA on the frontlines in communities at the forefront of
change. LAFLA’s Asian Pacific Islander (API) Community Outreach Project was founded in the
1990s in recognition of the great need for improved access to justice for API immigrant
communities, particularly those who do not speak English as their dominant language.
LAFLA has conducted pioneering work to ensure language access to the courts, public benefits,
immigration services, and other government agencies and systems. In 2010, LAFLA filed an
administrative complaint against the Los Angeles Superior Court with the U.S. Department of Justice,
alleging violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, based on the failure to provide interpreters
in civil proceedings. In response, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and U.S. Attorney’s Office launched a
federal investigation of the entire California state court system. As a result, the California Judicial
Council developed and adopted a Strategic Plan for Language Access in the California Courts, which
provides for interpreters free-of-charge in all proceedings and at all points of contact throughout the
Other Office Locations:

East Los Angeles Office, 5228 Whittier Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90022; 213-640-3883
Long Beach Office, 601 Pacific Ave., Long Beach, CA 90802; 562-435-3501
Santa Monica Office, 1640 5th St., Suite 124, Santa Monica, CA 90401; 310-899-6200
South Los Angeles Office, 7000 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90003;
54 213-640-3950

LAFLA Comments to Bureau of Justice Statistics
December 19, 2019 | Page 2 of 4

judicial process. The plan called on the courts to provide free interpretation services for all court
proceedings, provide language services outside the courtroom at counters and other public areas, translate
court documents and other materials, post signs notifying litigants of the availability of interpretation,
translate key pages on the court website, provide training for court staff, and monitor complaints. We
provide these public comments as an extension of our commitment to justice, which includes meaningful
access to the courts in all its contexts, whether it be criminal, civil, family, probate, or small claims
proceedings.

Language Diversity in Los Angeles
Los Angeles County has a total population of over 10 million,1 making it larger than all
but nine states,2 with over one third of the population being immigrants.3 Latinos make up over
48% of the county’s population, and APIs represent over 16%—the largest API population in the
mainland U.S.4 Over 34% of those living in Los Angeles County are foreign-born, compared to
nearly 13% nationally.5 In fact, 43% of Latinos6 and 70% of Asians7 in Los Angeles County are
foreign-born. Californians speak over 200 languages,8 and 57% in Los Angeles County speak a
language other than English at home.9
Individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) have historically faced challenges in
seeking access to basic amenities, legal remedies and supportive services. Reports have found
that limited English proficiency has impacted the “ability to access fundamental necessities such
as employment, police protection, and health care.”10 Unsurprisingly, access to justice has
proven difficult for individuals who speak a language other than English at home, who have
higher rates of poverty than the general population in Los Angeles County and California.11 In
fact, in Los Angeles County, 57% of foreign-born female head of households, who are not
naturalized U.S. citizens, with children under 18 years old, live below the federal poverty line.12
Requirements Under Title VI
For individuals who do not speak English as their dominate language, accessing and
navigating the courts can be challenging. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI)
requires that equal access be provided to LEP litigants.13 Under Title VI and its implementing
regulations, recipients of federal funds, which includes state courts, must provide “meaningful
1

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/losangelescountycalifornia/PST045218
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/tables/2010-2018/state/totals/nst-est2018-03.xlsx
3
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/losangelescountycalifornia/PST045218
4
https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/17_5YR/DP05/0500000US06037
5
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US,losangelescountycalifornia,CA/POP645217
6
https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/17_5YR/B16005I/0500000US06037
7
https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/17_5YR/B16005D/0500000US06037
8
https://www.courts.ca.gov/languageaccess.htm
9
https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/15_5YR/B16001/0500000US06037
10
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/language_portal/California%20Speaks%20%20Language%20Diversity%20and%20English%20Proficiency%20by%20Legislative%20District_0.pdf
11
https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/17_1YR/S1603/0500000US06037
12
https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/17_5YR/S0501/0500000US06037
13
42 U.S.C. § 2000d (2004); 67 Fed. Reg. 41455-41471 (2002).
2

The Frontline Law Firm for Poor and Low-income People in Los Angeles
55

LAFLA Comments to Bureau of Justice Statistics
December 19, 2019 | Page 3 of 4

access” to their services for LEP individuals.14 For courts, this includes, at a minimum,
competent interpretation during hearings, trials, and motions.15 The United States Department of
Justice has explicitly noted that “the federal requirement to provide language access to LEP
individuals applies notwithstanding conflicting state or local laws or court rules.”16 Language
access is not therefore a matter of the courts’ largesse or discretion. Rather, federal and many
state laws compel the courts to provide meaningful language access services. Providing
language access is a necessary core court function. The courts must treat language access as a
“basic and essential operating expense, not as an ancillary cost.”17
Enhancement of Data Collected by BJS
The request for public comments indicates that the APACD will collect information from
state and county courts by requesting data extracts of court case management systems. The data
collection will include defendant demographics; information about charges, hearings,
disposition, and sentences; attorney information; diversion and problem-solving court
information; and whether a bench warrant was issued during the case. In light of the
requirements under Title VI and similar state court mandates, data collection efforts should be
enhanced to specify that defendant demographics should include primary language spoken.
Further, data collected should include information related to interpreter requests, issues
encountered, complaints received, how such complaints were resolved, and court interpreter
credentials and qualifications.
Many states are enhancing their case management systems to integrate with interpreter
management software and to record primary language needs of parties, in accordance with Title
VI and similar state mandates.18 These systems and related protocols may also capture and
address when language needs are requested, how they are provided, whether there were delays or
continuances, complaints filed, the nature of such complaints, and how such complaints are
resolved. This data should be collected to ensure compliance with Title VI. Finally, data should
be collected on court interpreter credentialing and qualification processes, as there is
inconsistency among different states in this area. These practices and procedures are critical to
ensuring that LEP litigants and defendants receive quality interpretation and meaningful
language access to the judicial system.19
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments to the Bureau of Justice
Statistics. In the public interest community, we continuously seek to identify, understand, and
address the complexities of the barriers our communities face, to ensure that justice is still an
14

See id.
Id.
16
www.lep.gov/final_courts_ltr_081610.pdf.
17
Id.
18
http://ww2.nycourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/files/2018-06/language-access-report2017.pdf;
https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/lap-toolkit-technological-options-outside-the-courtroom.pdf;
https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/CLASP_report_060514.pdf
19
https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Topics/Language-Access/language-access-called-toaction.ashx#page=66;
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_aid_indigent_defendants/ls_sclaid_standards_fo
r_language_access_proposal.pdf#page=103
15

The Frontline Law Firm for Poor and Low-income People in Los Angeles
56

LAFLA Comments to Bureau of Justice Statistics
December 19, 2019 | Page 4 of 4

option for all. If you have any questions or seek any further information, please contact Joann
Lee at [email protected] or (323) 801-7976. Thank you.
Sincerely,

Joann H. Lee
Special Counsel

The Frontline Law Firm for Poor and Low-income People in Los Angeles
57

BJS Response to Public Comments received on under the 60 Day FR Notice
During the 60-day comment period, BJS received substantive comments from three organizations: Civil
Rights Division (USDOJ), Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, and National Center for Access to
Justice. The three organizations were similar in that they requested BJS consider collecting (1)
defendant primary language, (2) information on whether an interpreter was ordered and for what party,
(3) whether the interpreter was actually provided or whether there were delays because an interpreter
was not present, and (4) interpreters qualifications.
Feedback incorporated into the data extraction guide
BJS considered each requested data element, and determined that adding these data elements would
be too burdensome. See the below section for a more detailed description.
Data elements requested, but already included in the data extract guide were defendant demographics
and case outcomes.
Feedback not incorporated into the data extraction guide
Based on information from the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), courts have varying ability to
report limited English proficiency or defendant primary language. The source of the information is likely
to be administrative (e.g., on the arrest document based on the officer’s perception or from some other
agency evaluation). Thus, the information may not be entirely accurate. Second, many courts use the
request for an interpreter, either by the defendant, attorney, or judge, to be evidence of limited English
proficiency. BJS had not included interpreter requests or limited English proficiency questions during the
state data interviews; therefore, we do not know anything whether states keep that information in their
case management systems. It is likely that interpreter information may be stored in a text document,
such as an order for an interpreter, rather than in the case management system.
BJS decided not to request any information on hearings, based on the information gathered during
interviews with state data experts. Many of the state courts expressed that hearing information is
stored in a separate scheduling system, or that the information is overwritten each time there is a
hearing, or hearing information would be difficult to extract and match at the case-level. Since BJS is not
asking for hearing data, BJS cannot ask whether an interpreter was present or whether a case was
delayed because an interpreter was not present for a hearing.
Based on feedback from NCSC, interpreter qualifications are not likely to be stored in court case
management systems. There may be an external certification obtained by the interpreters, or the
qualifications are met and recorded by some other outside agency.

58