Inmate Work and Performance Pay Program: Reduction in Pay for Drug- and Alcohol-Related Disciplinary Offenses, 64505-64507 [E6-18447]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 212 / Thursday, November 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules
programming opportunities will
continue to exist.
Despite anecdotal successes, research
has found no significant difference in
recidivism rates between inmates who
complete boot camp programs and
similar offenders who serve their
sentences in traditional institutions.
There is a national trend among
correctional agencies to phase out boot
camp programs, as a result of many
years of experience. (See National
Institute of Justice Research for Practice
Report, ‘‘Correctional Boot Camps:
Lessons From a Decade of Research,’’
June 2003).
The Bureau has determined that
completion of boot camp programs does
not tend to result in lower rates of
recidivism as compared to offenders
with similar background characteristics
who did not participate in the program.
(See National Institute of Justice Report,
‘‘Multisite Evaluation of Shock
Incarceration,’’ September 1994).
Moreover, the costs associated with
maintaining the federal boot camp
programs exceed the costs of operating
ordinary minimum security camps, as a
result of (1) the staff resources necessary
to maintain the intensive core
programming that make up the ‘‘shock
incarceration’’ or ‘‘intensive
confinement’’ experience, and (2) the
high costs of housing offenders for
extended periods of time in Community
Corrections Centers, where the per
capita costs are higher than those of
housing offenders in minimum security
camps.
While there are some cost savings due
to the early release of offenders who
successfully complete the program,
these savings are minimal compared to
the additional costs of operating the
program, which create a net increased
cost to the agency of more than $1
million per year.
The lack of significant beneficial
results has led the Bureau to the
conclusion that it can no longer justify
the expenditure of public funds to
operate the ICC program.
It is important to note that the phase
out of the ICC does not represent a
change in the Bureau’s mission; the
Bureau remains fully committed to
operating safe and secure institutions
and to providing opportunities for
inmates to gain the skills and the
training necessary for a successful,
crime-free, return to the community.
The Bureau has renewed its emphasis
on allocating its resources to support
programs that are proven effective. The
ICC program has some attractive
features, but it does not reduce
recidivism. The Bureau operates several
programs that are proven to significantly
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:48 Nov 01, 2006
Jkt 211001
reduce recidivism. Research conducted
over the past 20 years has demonstrated
convincingly that inmates who
participate in the Bureau’s major inmate
programs are substantially less likely to
recidivate as compared to similar
inmates who do not participate. These
programs include Residential Substance
Abuse Treatment, Vocational Training
and Apprenticeship, Education and
Federal Prison Industries (operated
without appropriated funds). There are
also other inmate programs, such as
skills building and values development,
that have been found, preliminarily, to
affect inmate misconduct which is a
valid predictor of recidivism. These
programs are being carefully reviewed
to determine their impact on recidivism.
Therefore, for the aforementioned
reasons, we propose to remove our rules
in Subpart D of 28 CFR part 524.
Executive Order 12866
This regulation has been drafted and
reviewed in accordance with Executive
Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review’’, section 1(b), Principles of
Regulation. The Director, Bureau of
Prisons has determined that this rule is
a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), and
accordingly this rule has been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Executive Order 13132
This regulation will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Under Executive
Order 13132, this rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications for
which we would prepare a Federalism
Assessment.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Director of the Bureau of Prisons,
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation.
By approving it, the Director certifies
that it will not have a significant
economic impact upon a substantial
number of small entities because: This
rule is about the correctional
management of offenders committed to
the custody of the Attorney General or
the Director of the Bureau of Prisons,
and its economic impact is limited to
the Bureau’s appropriated funds.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
This rule will not cause State, local
and tribal governments, or the private
sector, to spend $100,000,000 or more in
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64505
any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. We do not need to take
action under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by § 804 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996. This rule will not result in an
annual effect on the economy of
$100,000,000 or more; a major increase
in costs or prices; or significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
on the ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and
export markets.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 524
Prisoners.
Harley G. Lappin,
Director, Bureau of Prisons.
Under rulemaking authority vested in
the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and delegated to the Director, Bureau of
Prisons, we propose to amend 28 CFR
part 524 as set forth below.
SUBCHAPTER B—INMATE ADMISSION,
CLASSIFICATION, AND TRANSFER
PART 524—CLASSIFICATION OF
INMATES
1. The authority for part 524
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3521–
3528, 3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 4046,
4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses
committed on or after November 1, 1987),
5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, 1984 as to
offenses committed after that date), 5039; 21
U.S.C. 848; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510.
2. Subpart D—Intensive Confinement
Center Program is removed and
reserved.
[FR Doc. E6–18437 Filed 11–1–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 545
[BOP Docket No. BOP 1132–P]
RIN 1120–AB33
Inmate Work and Performance Pay
Program: Reduction in Pay for Drugand Alcohol-Related Disciplinary
Offenses
Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
64506
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 212 / Thursday, November 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules
SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau
of Prisons (Bureau) proposes to amend
regulations on inmate work and
performance pay to require that inmates
receiving performance pay who are
found through the disciplinary process
(found in 28 CFR part 541) to have
committed a level 100 or 200 series
drug-or alcohol-related prohibited act
will automatically have their
performance pay reduced to
maintenance pay level and will be
removed from any assigned work detail
outside the secure perimeter of the
institution.
DATES: Comments are due by January 2,
2007.
ADDRESSES: Our e-mail address is
BOPRULES@BOP.GOV. Comments
should be submitted to the Rules Unit,
Office of General Counsel, Bureau of
Prisons, 320 First Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20534. You may view
an electronic version of this rule at
www.regulations.gov. You may also
comment on this regulation via the
Internet at BOPRULES@BOP.GOV or by
using the www.regulations.gov comment
form for this regulation. When
submitting comments electronically you
must include the BOP Docket No. in the
subject box.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Qureshi, Office of General
Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202)
307–2105.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this
document, the Bureau amends
regulations on inmate work and
performance pay to require that inmates
receiving performance pay who are
found through the disciplinary process
(found in 28 CFR part 541) to have
committed a level 100 or 200 series
drug-or alcohol-related prohibited act
will automatically have their
performance pay reduced to
maintenance pay level and will be
removed from any assigned work detail
outside the secure perimeter of the
institution.
The presence of even minute
quantities of drug or alcohol contraband
poses serious problems to the security,
discipline, and good order of a
correctional institution. By requiring a
reduction in performance pay as a result
of a level 100 or 200 series drug-or
alcohol-related prohibited act, this rule
provides a disincentive that is
commensurate with the seriousness of
those types of prohibited acts.
We currently have similar rules
removing inmates from certain programs
as a collateral consequence of
disciplinary action. For instance, 28
CFR 345.52(g), pertaining to inmates
earning Federal Prison Industries
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:48 Nov 01, 2006
Jkt 211001
premium pay, provides for automatic
removal from premium pay status if an
inmate is found by a DHO to have
committed any level 100 or 200 series
offense. Likewise, with regard to the
Bureau’s drug abuse treatment program,
28 CFR 550.56(d) states that the drug
abuse treatment coordinator may
remove from the program an inmate
found to have committed any level 100
or 200 offense.
Also, under 28 CFR 544.73 (b)(1)(ii),
if an inmate commits a prohibited act
during enrollment in the Bureau’s
Literacy Program, that inmate is
considered not to be making
‘‘satisfactory progress’’ towards
obtaining a General Educational
Development (GED) credential, which
could result in loss of good conduct
time credit under 28 CFR 523.20.
Like the aforementioned rules, this
rule provides an additional disincentive
for inmates in an effort to target and
eliminate the use and/or introduction of
drugs or alcohol into Bureau
institutions.
Executive Order 12866
This rule falls within a category of
actions that the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) has determined to
constitute ‘‘significant regulatory
actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 and, accordingly, it was
reviewed by OMB.
The Bureau has assessed the costs and
benefits of this rule as required by
Executive Order 12866 Section 1(b)(6)
and has made a reasoned determination
that the benefits of this rule justify its
costs. This rule will have the benefit of
strengthening ongoing efforts to target
and eliminate the use and/or
introduction of drugs or alcohol into
Bureau institutions. There will be no
new costs associated with this
rulemaking.
Executive Order 13132
This regulation will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, under
Executive Order 13132, we determine
that this rule does not have sufficient
Federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Director of the Bureau of Prisons,
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation
and by approving it certifies that it will
not have a significant economic impact
upon a substantial number of small
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
entities for the following reasons: This
rule pertains to the correctional
management of offenders committed to
the custody of the Attorney General or
the Director of the Bureau of Prisons,
and its economic impact is limited to
the Bureau’s appropriated funds.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
This rule will not result in the
expenditure by State, local and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by § 804 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996. This rule will not result in an
annual effect on the economy of
$100,000,000 or more; a major increase
in costs or prices; or significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
on the ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and
export markets.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 545
Prisoners.
Harley G. Lappin,
Director, Bureau of Prisons.
Under rulemaking authority vested in
the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 301; 28
U.S.C. 509, 510 and delegated to the
Director, Bureau of Prisons in 28 CFR
0.96, we propose to amend 28 CFR part
545 as set forth below.
Subchapter C—Institutional Management
PART 545—WORK AND
COMPENSATION
1. Revise the authority citation for 28
CFR part 545 to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3013,
3571, 3572, 3621, 3622, 3624, 3663, 4001,
4042, 4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to
offenses committed on or after November 1,
1987), 4126, 5006–5024 (Repealed October
12, 1984 as to offenses committed after that
date), 5039; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510.
2. In § 545.25, add paragraph (e) to
read as follows:
§ 545.25
Eligibility for performance pay.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Inmates receiving performance pay
who are found through the disciplinary
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 212 / Thursday, November 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules
process (part 541 of this subchapter) to
have committed a level 100 or 200 series
drug-or alcohol-related prohibited act
will automatically have their
performance pay reduced to
maintenance pay level and will be
removed from any assigned work detail
outside the secure perimeter of the
institution.
[FR Doc. E6–18447 Filed 11–1–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 550
[Docket No. BOP–1139–P]
RIN 1120–AB41
Drug Abuse Treatment Program:
Eligibility of D.C. Code Offenders for
Early Release Consideration
Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau
of Prisons (Bureau) proposes to extend
early release consideration to D.C. Code
offenders pursuant to D.C. Code § 24–
403.01.
DATES:
Comments due by January 2,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Qureshi, Office of General
Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202)
307–2105, e-mail
BOPRULES@BOP.GOV.
On July 1,
2004 (69 FR 39887), we published a
proposed rule revising all the
regulations on the Drug Abuse
Treatment Program in 28 CFR part 550,
subpart F (2004 proposed rule). We now
propose to revise 28 CFR 550.55(a) of
the 2004 proposed rule to extend early
release consideration to D.C. Code
offenders pursuant to D.C. Code § 24–
403.01.
The 2004 proposed rule, § 550.55(a),
stated that inmates may be eligible for
early release by a period not to exceed
12 months if they were sentenced to a
term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C.
Chapter 227, Subchapter D for a
nonviolent offense and successfully
complete a residential drug abuse
treatment program, as described in
§ 550.53, during their current
commitment.
We now propose to modify § 550.55(a)
from the 2004 proposed rule to state that
inmates may be eligible for early release
by a period not to exceed 12 months if
they were sentenced to a term of
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:48 Nov 01, 2006
Jkt 211001
imprisonment under either 18 U.S.C.
Chapter 227, Subchapter D for a
nonviolent offense; or D.C. Code § 24–
403.01 for a nonviolent offense,
meaning an offense other than those in
D.C. Code § 23–1331(4). There has been
no change to the provision in the 2004
rule stating that in addition to the above
criteria, inmates must successfully
complete a residential drug abuse
treatment program, as described in
§ 550.53, during their current
commitment.
Statutory Authority
The Residential Drug Abuse Program
(RDAP) is available to all eligible
inmates pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C.
3621(b) and (e). Section 3621(b)
generally obligates the Bureau to
provide ‘‘substance abuse treatment for
each prisoner the Bureau determines
has a treatable condition of addiction or
abuse.’’ Section 3621(e)(1) states that the
Bureau ‘‘shall, subject to the availability
of appropriations, provide residential
substance abuse treatment * * * for all
eligible prisoners.’’
Further, under § 3621(e)(2)(B), the
period a prisoner convicted of a
nonviolent offense remains in custody
after successfully completing a
treatment program may be reduced by
the Bureau of Prisons, but such
reduction may not be more than one
year from the term the prisoner must
otherwise serve.
Early Release Regulation
In 1995, the Bureau published a
regulation to implement the early
release incentive which defined the
term ‘‘crime of violence’’ and provided
a framework for Bureau employees to
make early release determinations. See
60 FR 27692 (May 25, 1995) (previously
codified at 28 CFR 550.58). Instructive
policy was issued in Program Statement
5162.02, Definition of Term, ‘‘Crimes of
Violence.’’ In the regulation and policy,
the Bureau defined the term ‘‘crime of
violence’’ pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
924(c)(3). Subsequently, there was a
split among Circuit Courts regarding the
validity of this approach. The split
prompted the Bureau to revise the
regulation in 1997 to explicitly rely
upon the discretion allotted to the
Director of the Bureau to grant a
sentence reduction. See 62 FR 53690
(Oct. 15, 1997) (codified at 28 CFR
550.58(a), currently in 550.55). The
revised regulation was designed to
achieve consistent administration of the
early release incentive and to clearly
demonstrate that the Bureau now relied
upon the discretion of the Director to
determine eligibility for certain program
benefits.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
64507
The revised regulation and policy
resulted in another split among the
Circuit Courts which was resolved by
the Supreme Court’s decision in Lopez
v. Davis, 531 U.S. 230 (2001). In Lopez,
the Supreme Court held that the revised
regulation found at 28 CFR 550.58
(currently in § 550.55) is a permissible
exercise of the Bureau’s discretion
under § 3621(e)(2)(B) for assessing
program benefit eligibility.
D.C. Code Offenders—Eligibility for
Early Release
The Bureau initially codified its rules
regarding its Drug Abuse Treatment
Programs on January 7, 1994.
Subsequently, on May 25, 1995, the
Bureau amended its rules on Drug
Abuse Treatment Programs to allow for
the consideration of early release of
eligible inmates who successfully
completed the RDAP. Excluded from
this category of eligible inmates were
inmates in Bureau custody not serving
a sentence for a federal offense (e.g.,
D.C. Code offenders, contractual
borders, INS detainees, and pretrial
inmates).
However, D.C. Code § 24–403.01(d–1),
amended on May 24, 2005, states that
D.C. Code offenders sentenced under
D.C. Code § 24–403.01 for a nonviolent
offense are eligible for early release
consideration in accordance with 18
U.S.C. 3621(e)(2). Accordingly, the
Director now extends early release
eligibility pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
3621(e)(2) to D.C. Code offenders for
successful completion of the RDAP.
Eligibility for early release for D.C.
Code offenders participating in the
Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP)
requires a determination that the inmate
has not committed a crime of violence
as defined by D.C. Code § 23–1331(4).
The National Capital Revitalization
and Self-Government Improvement Act
of 1997, approved August 5, 1997, (Pub.
L. 105–33; 111 Stat. 740)
(‘‘Revitalization Act’’) dictates that D.C.
Code felony offenders ‘‘shall be subject
to any law or regulation applicable to
persons committed for violations of
laws of the United States consistent
with the sentence imposed, and the
Bureau of Prisons shall be responsible
for the custody, care, subsistence,
education, treatment and training of
such persons.’’ D.C. Code § 24–101(b).
Therefore, as with federal offenders, it is
also within the Director’s discretion, as
provided by 18 U.S.C. 3621(e), to
determine D.C. Code offenders’
eligibility for early release according to
the same criteria used for federal
offenders. This criteria, which appears
in current § 550.58, gives the following
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 212 (Thursday, November 2, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64505-64507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18447]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 545
[BOP Docket No. BOP 1132-P]
RIN 1120-AB33
Inmate Work and Performance Pay Program: Reduction in Pay for
Drug- and Alcohol-Related Disciplinary Offenses
AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 64506]]
SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) proposes to
amend regulations on inmate work and performance pay to require that
inmates receiving performance pay who are found through the
disciplinary process (found in 28 CFR part 541) to have committed a
level 100 or 200 series drug-or alcohol-related prohibited act will
automatically have their performance pay reduced to maintenance pay
level and will be removed from any assigned work detail outside the
secure perimeter of the institution.
DATES: Comments are due by January 2, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Our e-mail address is BOPRULES@BOP.GOV. Comments should be
submitted to the Rules Unit, Office of General Counsel, Bureau of
Prisons, 320 First Street, NW., Washington, DC 20534. You may view an
electronic version of this rule at www.regulations.gov. You may also
comment on this regulation via the Internet at BOPRULES@BOP.GOV or by
using the www.regulations.gov comment form for this regulation. When
submitting comments electronically you must include the BOP Docket No.
in the subject box.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Qureshi, Office of General
Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) 307-2105.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this document, the Bureau amends
regulations on inmate work and performance pay to require that inmates
receiving performance pay who are found through the disciplinary
process (found in 28 CFR part 541) to have committed a level 100 or 200
series drug-or alcohol-related prohibited act will automatically have
their performance pay reduced to maintenance pay level and will be
removed from any assigned work detail outside the secure perimeter of
the institution.
The presence of even minute quantities of drug or alcohol
contraband poses serious problems to the security, discipline, and good
order of a correctional institution. By requiring a reduction in
performance pay as a result of a level 100 or 200 series drug-or
alcohol-related prohibited act, this rule provides a disincentive that
is commensurate with the seriousness of those types of prohibited acts.
We currently have similar rules removing inmates from certain
programs as a collateral consequence of disciplinary action. For
instance, 28 CFR 345.52(g), pertaining to inmates earning Federal
Prison Industries premium pay, provides for automatic removal from
premium pay status if an inmate is found by a DHO to have committed any
level 100 or 200 series offense. Likewise, with regard to the Bureau's
drug abuse treatment program, 28 CFR 550.56(d) states that the drug
abuse treatment coordinator may remove from the program an inmate found
to have committed any level 100 or 200 offense.
Also, under 28 CFR 544.73 (b)(1)(ii), if an inmate commits a
prohibited act during enrollment in the Bureau's Literacy Program, that
inmate is considered not to be making ``satisfactory progress'' towards
obtaining a General Educational Development (GED) credential, which
could result in loss of good conduct time credit under 28 CFR 523.20.
Like the aforementioned rules, this rule provides an additional
disincentive for inmates in an effort to target and eliminate the use
and/or introduction of drugs or alcohol into Bureau institutions.
Executive Order 12866
This rule falls within a category of actions that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has determined to constitute ``significant
regulatory actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and,
accordingly, it was reviewed by OMB.
The Bureau has assessed the costs and benefits of this rule as
required by Executive Order 12866 Section 1(b)(6) and has made a
reasoned determination that the benefits of this rule justify its
costs. This rule will have the benefit of strengthening ongoing efforts
to target and eliminate the use and/or introduction of drugs or alcohol
into Bureau institutions. There will be no new costs associated with
this rulemaking.
Executive Order 13132
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, under Executive Order 13132,
we determine that this rule does not have sufficient Federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this regulation and by
approving it certifies that it will not have a significant economic
impact upon a substantial number of small entities for the following
reasons: This rule pertains to the correctional management of offenders
committed to the custody of the Attorney General or the Director of the
Bureau of Prisons, and its economic impact is limited to the Bureau's
appropriated funds.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by Sec. 804 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will
not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more;
a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on
the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-
based companies in domestic and export markets.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 545
Prisoners.
Harley G. Lappin,
Director, Bureau of Prisons.
Under rulemaking authority vested in the Attorney General in 5
U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510 and delegated to the Director, Bureau of
Prisons in 28 CFR 0.96, we propose to amend 28 CFR part 545 as set
forth below.
Subchapter C--Institutional Management
PART 545--WORK AND COMPENSATION
1. Revise the authority citation for 28 CFR part 545 to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3013, 3571, 3572, 3621, 3622,
3624, 3663, 4001, 4042, 4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses
committed on or after November 1, 1987), 4126, 5006-5024 (Repealed
October 12, 1984 as to offenses committed after that date), 5039; 28
U.S.C. 509, 510.
2. In Sec. 545.25, add paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 545.25 Eligibility for performance pay.
* * * * *
(e) Inmates receiving performance pay who are found through the
disciplinary
[[Page 64507]]
process (part 541 of this subchapter) to have committed a level 100 or
200 series drug-or alcohol-related prohibited act will automatically
have their performance pay reduced to maintenance pay level and will be
removed from any assigned work detail outside the secure perimeter of
the institution.
[FR Doc. E6-18447 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-P
