Sharing criminal records: two new interstate compacts enhance public safety by improving the exchange of information.

Demand for criminal history information has skyrocketed as an increasing number of states require background checks; some of this is due to the events of Sept. 11.

The USA Patriot Act passed by congress in the fall of 2001, for example, requires a fingerprint background check of every truck driver with a commercial driver's license and a hazardous materials endorsement. This is a tremendous task, says Wilbur W. Rehmann, project manager of the Montana Criminal Justice Information Services. "In Montana, we have approximately 30,000 truck drivers who will need to have background checks conducted."

Even before this, states wanted to know about any criminal, backgrounds of teachers, day care providers, elderly caregivers and volunteers. "This puts a tremendous strain on state information centers," said Rehmann.

The National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact, now with 16 participating states, aids in the exchange of crime records for non-criminal justice purposes, such as background checks.

The compact standardizes procedures for releasing information, while protecting the rights of individuals and recognizing differences in state policy regarding the use of records. The eventual benefits of the compact, says Gary Cooper, the executive director for SEARCH Group Inc., is the "elimination of duplicate record-keeping by both states and the FBI." SEARCH is a nonprofit membership organization created by and for the states, which is dedicated to improving the criminal justice system.

"It will also lead to more complete and higher quality records, increased system security and faster response to requests for information," he says. "These built-in efficiencies will result in savings to states that already have suitable automated systems."

Some legislators are concerned that they may lose control over their information. Every state controls how criminal records are distributed; however, they cannot dictate how their information is used in other states. For most states this is not an issue because 43 already release substantially the same information to the FBI's database, which then releases the information according to the law in the receiving state. The compact simply standardizes what information is made available.

The now ratified Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision is another project that aims to improve public safety by sharing information. The compact went into effect June 19, 2002, when Pennsylvania became the 35th to ratify it. To date, 41 states are a party to the compact. It replaces a 60-year-old compact and helps track the estimated 250,000 probationers and parolees who are expected to cross state lines each year. Offenders who live in other states frequently return home following their sentences. However, they remain under the supervision of the state in which they were convicted. As a condition of release, probationers and parolees must adhere to numerous court orders, such as drug treatment, community service and restitution.

The importance of crime records for post- release supervision has received greater attention in recent years. In part this is because of policies dealing with registration and movement of sex offenders, as well as high profile criminal cases.

The rape and murder of a 24-year-old woman in Denver by Donta Page, a convicted felon from Maryland, became the "poster crime" for the compact. Page had been released from a Maryland prison and sent on a suspended sentence to Colorado for drug treatment. He was in Denver without any notice to state or local authorities. Since he was not technically on probation or parole, such notice was not required at that time.

"I am confident that as the new compact gets implemented over the next year, it will improve the safety in our communities," says Idaho Senator Denton Darrington, NCSL's ex-officio representative on the commission that is overseeing compact compliance. "I carried and sold this in my state by stressing that for the price of one inmate a year, we can more safely supervise offenders who are in our state."

States are expected this year to begin considering a parallel juvenile compact. The Interstate Compact for Juveniles also updates procedures for state-to-state movement of minors under court supervision. This includes monitoring, supervising and returning juvenile delinquents and children in need of supervision.

Representative Michael Lawlor of Connecticut, who served on the drafting committees for both the Interstate Compact on Adult Supervision and the Compact for Juveniles, says the two address basically the same issues, with the juvenile agreement also addressing the special placement and service needs of youths.

"Like the adult compact, it is designed to protect the public," Lawlor says, "while also ensuring the welfare of juveniles."

These compacts avoid the drawbacks of other approaches that include disjunctive state laws or federal initiatives that could take control away from states, supporters say.