Inmate Financial Responsibility Program: Procedures, 102022-102031 [2024-29692]
Download as PDF
102022
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
August 2024, to determine whether low
points exist, and, before further flight, do all
applicable related investigative and
corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Israel
Aerospace Industries Ltd., Service Bulletin
368–34–106, dated August 2024.
Issued on December 11, 2024.
Victor Wicklund,
Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–29619 Filed 12–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
(h) Additional AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or
responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the International Validation
Branch, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (i) of this AD and
email to: AMOC@faa.gov. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the responsible
Flight Standards Office.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any
requirement in this AD to obtain instructions
from a manufacturer, the instructions must
be accomplished using a method approved
by the Manager, International Validation
Branch, FAA; or the Civil Aviation Authority
of Israel (CAAI); or the CAAI’s authorized
Designee. If approved by the CAAI Designee,
the approval must include the Designee’s
authorized signature.
(i) Additional Information
For more information about this AD,
contact Joe Salameh, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 206–
231–3536; email: Joe.Salameh@faa.gov.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
(j) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
the material listed in this paragraph under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as
applicable to do the actions required by this
AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. Service
Bulletin 368–34–106, dated August 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For Israel Aerospace Industry Ltd.
material identified in this AD, contact Israel
Aerospace Industries, Ltd., Ben-Gurion
International Airport, Israel 70100; telephone
972–39359826; email tmazor@iai.co.il.
(4) You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
206–231–3195.
(5) You may view this material at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA,
visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/
ibr-locations or email fr.inspection@nara.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
00:13 Dec 17, 2024
Jkt 265001
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 545
[BOP–1178]
RIN 1120–AB78
Inmate Financial Responsibility
Program: Procedures
Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking would update and
streamline regulations regarding the
Inmate Financial Responsibility
Program (IFRP).
DATES: Written comments must be
postmarked and electronic comments
must be submitted on or before February
18, 2025. Commenters should be aware
that the electronic Federal Docket
Management System will not accept
comments after Midnight Eastern Time
on the last day of the comment period.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to provide
comment regarding this rulemaking, you
must submit comments, identified by
the agency name and reference Docket
No. BOP 1178, by one of the two
methods below.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
website instructions for submitting
comments. The electronic Federal
Docket Management System at
www.regulations.gov will accept
electronic comments until 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the comment due date.
Mail: Paper comments that duplicate
an electronic submission are
unnecessary. If you wish to submit a
paper comment in lieu of electronic
submission, please direct the mail/
shipment to: Rules Administrator,
Legislative and Correctional Issues
Branch, Office of General Counsel,
Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street NW,
Washington, DC 20534. To ensure
proper handling, please reference the
agency name and Docket No. BOP 1178
on your correspondence. Mailed items
must be postmarked or otherwise
indicate a shipping date on or before the
submission deadline.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel J. Crooks III, Assistant General
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Counsel/Rules Administrator, Federal
Bureau of Prisons, at the address above
or at (202) 353–4885.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please
note that all comments received are
considered part of the public record and
generally will be made available for
public inspection online at
www.regulations.gov. If you want to
submit personal identifying information
(such as your name, address, etc.) as
part of your comment, but do not want
it to be posted online, you must include
the phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also locate
all the personal identifying information
you do not want posted online in the
first paragraph of your comment and
identify what information you want
redacted.
If you want to submit confidential
business information as part of your
comment but do not want it to be posted
online, you must include the phrase
‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also
prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted
within the comment. If a comment
contains so much confidential business
information that it cannot be effectively
redacted, all or part of that comment
may not be posted www.regulations.gov.
Personal identifying information
identified and located as set forth above
will be placed in the agency’s public
docket file, but not posted online.
Confidential business information
identified and located as set forth above
will not be placed in the public docket
file. If you wish to inspect the agency’s
public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
paragraph.
Background
The purpose of the Inmate Financial
Responsibility Program (Program or
IFRP), operated by the Bureau of Prisons
(Bureau) since 1987, is twofold: to
encourage federal inmates in Bureau
facilities to pay financial obligations;
and to support federal inmates in
developing financial planning skills.
Inmate participation in the IFRP is
non-compulsory. Subject to certain
exemptions listed in 28 CFR 545.10, all
sentenced federal inmates are eligible to
participate. During an inmate’s initial
classification, current Bureau policy
requires staff to review the inmate’s
financial obligations—by consulting the
inmate’s presentence investigation
report, judgment and commitment
order(s) and other court documents, and
any other available information—and
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
encourage inmates to satisfy any courtordered obligations either at the time of
this initial review or throughout the
inmate’s term of imprisonment. The
Bureau strongly recommends that all
inmates with financial obligations
participate in the IFRP, along with other
programs and activities designed to
reduce recidivism, such as work,
education, and drug rehabilitation
programs.
If an inmate chooses to participate in
the IFRP, Bureau staff will work with
the inmate to develop a financial plan,
which is documented and signed by the
inmate and includes financial
obligations paid in the following order
of priority:
1. Special assessments imposed by the
court under 18 U.S.C. 3013;
2. Court-ordered restitution, including
assessments related to bodily injury to
victims occurring as a result of the
offense, loss or destruction of victim
property, or other assessments as
indicated by the court;
3. Fines and court costs;
4. State or local court obligations
(such as child support or alimony, as
documented by a court order or letter
from the relevant state authority);
5. Other federal government
obligations (including fees imposed
under 18 U.S.C. 4001 for Cost of
Incarceration, other judgments in favor
of the United States, student loans,
Veterans Administration claims, tax
liabilities, and Freedom of Information
or Privacy Act fees).
Given the importance of satisfying
outstanding financial obligations and
reducing the amount of debt upon
release, there are effects of nonparticipation. Documented refusal by
inmates to participate in the IFRP, or to
comply with the provisions of their
agreed-upon financial plan, results in
the specific consequences currently
listed in 28 CFR 545.11(d), including
notification to the Parole Commission,
preclusion of furlough eligibility (other
than emergency or medical furlough),
preclusion of certain pay benefits or
increases, preclusion of eligibility for
premium work opportunities and/or
removal from a UNICOR work
assignment, commissary spending
restrictions, loss of release gratuity
(unless approved by the warden), and
loss of incentives (such as early release
and financial awards) otherwise
available to an inmate who participates
in residential drug treatment programs.
As the IFRP is currently operated,
Bureau staff review and reassess each
inmate’s financial plan and IFRP
payments during the inmate’s regularly
scheduled program review meeting;
these meetings generally occur every
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
180 days, although the interval becomes
90 days when the inmate is within 12
months of release. As part of that
review, Bureau staff first review the
total funds deposited into the inmate’s
commissary account over the previous
six-month period from any source. As
stated in 28 CFR 506.1, individual
inmate commissary accounts allow the
Bureau to maintain inmate monies
while the inmate is incarcerated. Funds
in inmate accounts can come from a
number of sources: the inmate may earn
pay from work assignments (including
compensation earned through UNICOR);
family members or friends may send
funds to the inmate; the inmate may
receive tax refunds or other governmentrelated issuances; or the inmate may
receive other types of income (such as
stock dividends, state benefits, litigation
settlements, and inheritance). All
money earned by the inmate from the
Bureau is automatically deposited into
the inmate’s commissary account.
Next, to determine whether future
payments under the IFRP plan should
be adjusted based on the inmate’s
financial activity over the previous sixmonth period under review, staff
subtract the total amount of any
payments an inmate has made during
the previous six-month period under the
IFRP plan (payments made toward the
inmate’s financial obligations) from the
amount deposited into the account over
that same time period. Under current
regulations in 28 CFR 545.11(b), when
performing this calculation to determine
the amount an inmate has available for
payment of financial obligations, staff
must also subtract a $75 per month
allowance for telephone communication
(a total of $450 for each six-month
period). That amount is not included in
the calculation of the total amount an
inmate has available for payments under
the IFRP.
Then, based on the foregoing
information, staff estimate the amount
the inmate is likely to have remaining
at the end of that six-month period.
Based on that amount, staff determine
whether to adjust the inmate’s financial
plan and IFRP payments. Under the
current regulation, the minimum
payment for inmates who do not have
a UNICOR work assignment, or who
have a UNICOR grade 5 work
assignment, is ordinarily $25 per
quarter. For inmates assigned a UNICOR
work assignment with a grade between
1 and 4, the minimum payment is
ordinarily expected to be 50 percent of
the inmate’s pay.
On January 10, 2023, the Federal
Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (the
‘‘January 2023 NPRM’’) in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
102023
Register relating to the Inmate Financial
Responsibility Program (IFRP). 88 FR
1331 (Jan. 10, 2023). In the January 2023
NPRM, the Bureau detailed its proposed
changes to the IFRP regulation. Among
the most significant changes were a
requirement that all inmates
participating in IFRP contribute a
percentage of their pay towards the IFRP
payment process; a requirement that all
inmates participating in IFRP contribute
75 percent of funds received from nonBureau sources (‘‘outside’’ or
‘‘community’’ deposits) toward the IFRP
payment process; and changes to the
effects of IFRP non-participation,
including noting that, as per Program
Statement 5410.01, First Step Act of
2018—Time Credits: Procedures for
Implementation of 18 U.S.C. 3632(d)(4),
participation is a Productive Activity as
that relates to First Step Act (FSA) Time
Credits, as described in 18 U.S.C. 3624
and 3632(d)(4), and 28 CFR 523.40
through 523.44.
During the notice and comment
period for the January 2023 NPRM, the
Bureau received more than 1,300
comments from members of the public,
including inmates, inmates’ families
and friends, advocacy organizations,
and governmental officials. The large
volume of comments received
demonstrated to us that changes to the
IFRP are of significant interest to the
public. To ensure we obtain the benefit
of the public’s comments on additional
suggested revisions to the IFRP, the
Bureau now publishes this
supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking (SNPRM). While the
provisions proposed in this SNPRM
maintain some features of the January
2023 NPRM, it differs in several
material respects. The Bureau welcomes
public comment on this alternative IFRP
framework that considers an individual
inmate’s financial circumstances.
Comments submitted on the January
2023 NPRM should not be resubmitted
as new comments to this SNPRM. All
relevant comments on the January 2023
NPRM and this SNPRM will be
addressed when a final rule is issued.
Supplemental Proposed Rule
This supplemental proposed rule
would make changes to update,
streamline, and clarify IFRP regulations
in sections 28 CFR 545.11(a) through
(d), as follows:
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(a)
The current IFRP regulation provides
that an inmate’s financial plan will
include the following obligations,
ordinarily paid in the priority order as
listed: (1) special assessments under 18
U.S.C. 3013; (2) court-ordered
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
102024
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
restitution; (3) fines and court costs; (4)
state or local court obligations; and (5)
other federal government obligations.
The January 2023 NPRM did not
propose any alteration to this list of
obligations. In this SNPRM, the Bureau
is proposing to modify this list by
altering paragraph (4) to read ‘‘child,
spousal, or other familial support
obligations,’’ and adding a new
paragraph (6) for ‘‘other (non-family
support) state or local court
obligations’’.
As initially proposed in 1986, no state
or local financial obligations were
included in the list of financial
obligations collectible through IFRP. See
NPRM, Control, Custody, Care,
Treatment and Instruction of Inmates,
Financial Responsibility Program, 51 FR
42167–01 (Nov. 21, 1986). However, in
response to public comments received
on the initial proposed rule, the Bureau
added ‘‘other court ordered obligations’’
to the list:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
We agree with several commenters who
suggested the Bureau add family financial
obligations and child support to its priority
list of obligations. Based on public comment,
and because court-ordered child support or
alimony or other court-ordered judgments
against an inmate are financial obligations
similar to those in the proposed rule, the
Bureau of Prisons is adding new
§ 545.11(a)(6), other court-ordered
obligations.
Final Rule, Control, Custody, Care,
Treatment and Instruction of Inmates;
Inmate Financial Responsibility
Program, 52 FR 10528–01 (Apr. 1, 1987).
In 1991, the Bureau published a final
rule that combined two categories of
obligations into one (‘‘other federal
government obligations’’), adjusted the
paragraph numbering, and adopted the
verbiage (‘‘State or local court
obligations’’) that it has continued to
use to the present. Final Rule, Control,
Custody, Care, Treatment and
Instruction of Inmates; Financial
Responsibility Program, 56 FR 23476–01
(May 21, 1991).
The Bureau believes that
disaggregating familial support
obligations from other state and local
obligations is beneficial for several
reasons. First, it will allow for the
prioritization of family support over
other types of state and local obligations
in the way initially contemplated. The
Bureau believes that it is more
important that—to the extent an
inmate’s money is being sent to a state
or local entity—it should go first
towards supporting children or others
1 Dear Colleague Letter (Apr. 20, 2023), available
at https://www.justice.gov/d9/press-releases/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
for whom an order of support has been
entered, rather than the state or local
government for other purposes. Second,
the Bureau (as a federal agency) believes
that other federal obligations should be
prioritized over non-family support
state and local obligations, such as
criminal fines and fees or fees imposed
in civil cases or administrative
proceedings.
Third, the Department of Justice in an
April 2023 Dear Colleague Letter noted
that, in certain circumstances, unjust
imposition and enforcement of fines and
fees violate the civil rights of adults and
youth accused of felonies,
misdemeanors, quasi-criminal
ordinance violations, and civil
infractions.1 State and local fines and
fees make up a miniscule portion (as of
February 2024, less than one half of a
percent) of the financial obligations
subject to collection through IFRP.
Nevertheless, as a Department
component, the Bureau wants to ensure
that it is operating consistent with the
Department’s guidance on this topic,
and is not collecting fines and fees
imposed by states and localities in ways
that may have violated the civil rights
of those in Bureau custody. The Bureau
will provide more specific guidance to
Bureau employees, in the program
statement implementing this regulation,
on how to ensure that a fine or fee
imposed by a state or local entity was
lawfully imposed, such as verifying that
an ability-to-pay determination was
conducted. Fines and fees that that BOP
determines were unfairly or improperly
imposed will not be collected through
IFRP. The Bureau welcomes public
comment on what steps the Bureau
should take to ensure that fines and fees
imposed by states and localities were
not done so in a way that is inconsistent
with the constitutional and statutory
provisions described in the Dear
Colleague Letter. Given that these same
concerns are not present in the familial
support context, it makes sense to
separate those types of obligations as
their own category not subject to this
guidance.
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(b)
1. Introductory paragraph. The
Bureau still intends to make the two
changes to the introductory paragraph
that were detailed in the January 2023
NPRM. These changes were: (1) the
deletion of language that was intended
to serve as guidance for Bureau
employees, and (2) the addition of
language requiring that any payment
plan laid out in the inmate’s judgment
and commitment order (J&C) be
implemented as the inmate’s IFRP
payment plan.
One purpose of the IFRP is to promote
inmate financial understanding and selfregulation. To meet that goal, staff work
with inmates to structure a reasonable
payment plan that is attainable for the
inmate, in light of any funds coming
into the account (whether from inmate
work assignment pay or through outside
sources) and any reasonable
expenditures required by the inmate. As
discussed in this SNPRM, BOP is
proposing to retain a version of the
monetary set-aside that is part of the
current regulation, without tying it to a
monthly amount or to a specific purpose
(e.g., phone calls).
2. Addition of language regarding
one-time payment. In this SNPRM, the
Bureau proposes to add language to the
rule that (1) encourages all inmates to
make a payment towards fully satisfying
their financial obligation(s) at the time
of initial classification and program
review; and (2) would require inmates
with commissary account balances
above $250 to make a one-time
payment. This proposal differs from the
January 2023 NPRM in an important
way. While the January 2023 NPRM
encouraged all inmates to make a onetime payment at the time of initial
classification, it did not require any
inmate to do so. In this SNPRM, inmates
with commissary balances greater than
or equal to $250 at the time of initial
classification would be required to make
a one-time payment from available
funds in their commissary accounts to
satisfy any identified financial
obligations. Currently, guidance to
Bureau staff notes that in certain
circumstances, including when an
inmate’s total financial obligation is
$100 or less, the inmate should be
encouraged to make a one-time payment
to satisfy that obligation The purpose of
this revision is to make clear that all
inmates, regardless of the size of the
financial obligation, would be
encouraged—and in some
circumstances required—to make a onetime payment.
The proposed rule would require an
inmate with more than a certain amount
of money in their commissary account
to make a one-time payment equal to a
specific percentage of funds in the
account:
attachments/2023/04/20/doj_fines_and_fees_dear_
colleague_letter_final_with_signatures_0.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
102025
TABLE 1
Commissary account balance
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
$0.01–$249.99 .........................................
$250.00–$5,000.00 ..................................
$5,000.01 or more ...................................
Percentage deducted for one-time initial payment
0%.
50% of the amount between $250 and $5,000.
50% of the amount between $250 and $5,000 plus 100% of the amount above $5,000.
As depicted in the above chart,
inmates with $249.99 or less in their
commissary accounts would not be
required to make an initial payment
toward financial obligations. An inmate
with between $250.00 and $5,000.00 in
their account would be expected to pay
50 percent of the amount within that
range towards IFRP. Finally, inmates
with $5,000.01 or more in their accounts
would be expected to pay (1) 50 percent
of the amount between $250.00 and
$5,000.00, and (2) 100% of the amount
in excess of $5,000.00 toward financial
obligations. In determining these
account balance thresholds, the Bureau
reviewed data on commissary account
balances, which showed that the
overwhelming majority of inmates
maintain balances of $1,000 or less. In
fact, as of December 4, 2024,
approximately 77 percent of
commissary account balances are
$249.99 or less, and only 2 percent of
commissary accounts have balances
greater than $5,000.
The way this is intended to work is
illustrated through the following
examples:
Example 1: Inmate John Doe, who
owes a $100 special assessment
imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013,
and federal restitution of $5,000, attends
his initial classification and program
review meeting with a commissary
account balance of $150. He would not
be required to make an initial IFRP
payment, although he may choose to do
so if, for example, he wants to fully pay
off his $100 special assessment.
Example 2: Inmate James Roe, who
also owes a $100 special assessment
imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013,
and federal restitution of $5,000, attends
his initial classification and program
review meeting with a commissary
account balance of $500. He would be
required to make a one-time IFRP
payment of $125 (50% of the amount
above $250), although as with John Doe,
he may also pay more at this time if he
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:05 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
chooses. This would leave James Roe
with an account balance of $375.
Example 3: Inmate Jane Smith also
owes a $100 special assessment
imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013,
and federal restitution of $5,000. She
attends her initial classification and
program review meeting with a
commissary account balance of $6,000.
She would be expected to pay a total of
$3,375 (50% of the amount between
$250 and $5,000 ($2,375), plus $1,000—
the amount in her account in excess of
$5,000).
Because inmate financial plans
developed under the IFRP focus on
incoming deposits into the inmate’s
commissary account, part of the intent
of this provision is to prevent the
inmate from accumulating a significant
account balance prior to initial
classification and program review, and
then using that large initial balance to
evade making any future payments.
Initial classification and program review
is the first opportunity Bureau staff have
to assess an inmate’s financial
obligations and available resources.
While for some inmates this will occur
relatively quickly after they enter
Bureau custody, other inmates may have
spent substantial time in Bureau
custody pre-trial and accumulated
significant funds in their commissary
account. Similarly, inmates may enter
Bureau custody following sentencing
with a significant deposit or deposits
made before their initial classification
and review meeting occurs.
The Bureau recognizes that newly
sentenced and designated inmates need
to maintain some funds to aid in the
transition into custody, including by
maintaining family contact and
purchasing commissary items that may
help ease that transition. Thus, the
proposed rule would not require an
initial payment from inmates with less
than $250 in their commissary accounts,
and would apply a 50 percent deduction
to amounts in excess of $250, up to
$5,000. Inmates would still be left with
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
funds for purchases, while also learning
that payment of financial obligations
based on their financial means is an
expected part of their term of
imprisonment and that they would not
be permitted to maintain significant
balances (in excess of $5,000) and stay
in compliance with IFRP. It is also
important to note that nothing in this
proposed rule would prevent an inmate
from making a larger payment than
would be required under the proposed
rule. Rather, the intent of the proposed
rule is to set a minimum expectation for
payment of financial obligations.
The Bureau believes that setting the
threshold for this initial payment at a
$250 commissary account balance
adequately protects the ability of
inmates in custody at Bureau facilities
to maintain contact with members of the
community and purchase
supplementary items from institution
commissaries.2 The proposed rule is
also focused on the account balance at
the time of the initial program review
meeting, meaning (particularly for pretrial inmates) the inmate may have
already purchased and banked phone
minutes, or minutes used to access the
electronic messaging (TRULINCS). They
may also have purchased items from the
commissary that they still have,
including non-consumable items like
shoes, an MP3 player, or a locker
organizer.
Using Mr. Roe as an example, the
$375 remaining in his commissary
account following his initial IFRP
payment would be enough to purchase
(all prices current as of October 29,
2024, except where noted):
2 In accordance with BOP Program Statement
4500.12, Trust Fund/Deposit Fund Manual, each
Bureau facility establishes its list of items to sell in
the commissary. Consumable items and medical
items sold shall complement, not supplement, diet
and medical care provided to the inmate
population. These examples are provided for
illustrative purposes only. Commissary price lists
are available on each BOP facility’s public website.
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
102026
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2
Expenditure
Total cost
1,800 phone minutes for domestic calls 3 ..................................................................................................
500 minutes of access to TRULINCS public messaging service ..............................................................
Commissary purchases at FCI Lompoc I, to include: ...............................................................................
—radio ($31.25) & earbuds ($5.15).
—stamps ($12.60/book).
—alarm clock ($9.95).
—shower shoes ($1.95).
—sunglasses ($5.95).
—combination lock ($7.65).
—foot powder ($2.70).
—ibuprofen ($2.60).
—thermal mug ($4.00).
Total Cost ....................................................................................................................................
$216.80
Remaining Account Balance .......................................................................................................
$158.20
Even with these purchases, which
includes a purchase of the maximum
number of minutes Mr. Roe could spend
on the phone over the next six months,
he still would have $158.20 remaining
of his initial $500 balance to either save,
or spend on additional commissary
items (including snacks and hobbycraft
materials). And, going forward, his
account balance would be
supplemented by any pay received for a
work assignment or additional deposits
made from outside sources.
The Bureau is sensitive to the fact that
this initial period of time at a designated
institution can be a significant
adjustment for many in its custody.
Accordingly, the Bureau specifically
invites comment on the $250 threshold
from the public, and will consider
responses received on this issue in
formulating its final rule.
3. Revision of language regarding
payment plans. The Bureau also
proposes to modify language included
in the current rule indicating that the
minimum payment for inmates who do
not work in UNICOR positions and
those who work in UNICOR positions at
the grade 5 level would be $25 per
quarter, and that inmates assigned to
UNICOR grades 1 through 4 work
assignments would be expected to allot
50% of their monthly pay to IFRP
payments.
In the January 2023 NPRM, the
Bureau proposed implementing IFRP
payment plans that would require (1)
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
$108 ($.06/minute).
$25 ($.05/minute).
$83.80.
3 Rates effective as of January 1, 2025. BOP policy
generally limits inmates to 300 minutes of phone
time per month. See BOP Program Statement
5264.08, Inmate Telephone Regulations, p.9. An
additional 100 minutes are permitted during the
months of November and December, and individual
calls are limited to 15 minutes. Id. Pursuant to the
First Step Act of 2018, codified in pertinent part at
18 U.S.C. 3632(d)(1)(A), inmates in Bureau custody
who are successfully participating in evidencebased recidivism reduction programming receive up
to 510 minutes of phone time per month. These
inmates are not subject to the 300-minutes per
month limit, and they are not required to pay for
these minutes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:05 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
inmates in UNICOR work assignments
grade 1 through 4 to allot 50 percent of
their monthly pay to the IFRP payment
process; (2) inmates in non-UNICOR
and UNICOR grade 5 work assignments
to allot 25 percent of their monthly pay
to the IFRP payment process; and (3) all
inmates to pay 75 percent of deposits
placed in their commissary account by
non-institution (community) sources
toward the IFRP payment process. In
this SNPRM, the Bureau is still
proposing to require that inmates make
IFRP payments from both sources of
funds (pay for work and commissary
deposits). However, this SNPRM
features the following proposals:
• The regulation would indicate that,
in the absence of some other courtordered payment plan, inmates would
be expected to allot 10% of pay (to
include performance pay, bonus pay,
and special bonus pay) received from
any work assignment, whether
institution or UNICOR, toward the IFRP
payment process.
• The regulation would also clarify
that all inmates, in the absence of some
other court-ordered payment plan,
would be expected to allot a specific
percentage of each deposit from noninstitution (community) resources to the
IFRP payment process. The percentage
that the inmate would be expected to
allot will be adjustable, and would be
based on the total amount of funds
deposited into the inmate’s commissary
account over the prior six months.
• Inmates with six-month deposit
totals below a certain amount, and
whose account balances are also below
a certain amount, would be exempt from
the required percentage.
• Inmates who accumulate significant
account balances, which the Bureau
defines as a balance equal to or greater
than $5,000, would be expected to allot
all amounts in their accounts in excess
of $5,000 to the IFRP payment process.
Further, the regulation would explain
that exceptions to the stated allotments
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
must be approved by the inmate’s unit
manager, in consultation with the
associate warden of the inmate’s
institution, and documented in writing.
Changes to Pay
This SNPRM proposes a specified
percentage—10 percent—of inmate pay
for work assignments that would be
allotted towards the IFRP payment
process. This percentage would apply to
all inmate work assignments, including
UNICOR, and to all forms of
compensation received for work,
including hourly pay and bonuses. As is
currently done for UNICOR pay for
IFRP-participating inmates, the
percentage deduction would be made
prior to the disbursement of pay to
individual inmate trust accounts.
The Bureau believes it is important
that all inmates who are able to work
have some of their pay remitted toward
payment of their financial obligations.
As a reentry tool, this obligation helps
establish the expectation that earning
income carries the requirement that one
contribute financially to certain societal
and personal obligations.4 Outside the
Bureau, these contributions might take
the form of payroll taxes, garnishments
for child support, or other deductions.
By introducing the concept of a ‘‘payroll
deduction’’ for all IFRP-participating
inmates, this would ensure that all
inmates who can work are making some
consistent contribution, even a small
one, to their financial obligations.
4 Additionally, on November 8, 2023, the Bureau
published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register proposing to modify regulations
on compensation for inmate workers in accordance
with Section 605(c) of the First Step of 2018 (FSA),
Public Law 115–391, December 21, 2018, 132 Stat.
5194. The proposed amendments to the regulations
governing UNICOR and performance pay would
require that 15 percent of an inmate’s pay be
reserved (i.e., encumbered) to assist the inmate with
costs associated with release from prison. 88 FR
77064.
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Changes to Assessment of Outside
Deposits
The most significant difference
between this SNPRM and the January
2023 NPRM is how ‘‘outside’’ or
‘‘community’’ deposits into the inmate’s
commissary account will be considered
for IFRP purposes. Currently, the IFRP
regulation permits Bureau staff to
‘‘consider’’ these deposits in developing
the inmate’s financial plan, but a lack of
more specific guidance has resulted in
disparate application and widespread
use of a $25/quarter minimum payment
option. In this SNPRM, the Bureau
proposes specific guidance for both
Bureau staff and inmates for how any
outside deposits would be assessed for
IFRP financial planning purposes. The
essence of the system proposed in this
rulemaking is that those inmates who
have more funds would be expected to
102027
pay more of each ‘‘outside’’ deposit
toward their financial obligations.
Under this proposed rule, Bureau staff
reviewing an inmate’s IFRP
participation would review the total
value of deposits placed into the
inmate’s account over the past six
months. Depending on that total value,
a specific percentage of each future
deposit received would be paid toward
IFRP. The specific percentages are
reflected in the chart below:
TABLE 3
Total value of deposits over prior
six months
$.01–$249.99 ..................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
$250–$999.99 .................................
$1,000–$2,499.99 ...........................
$2,500–$4,999.99 ...........................
≥$5,000 ...........................................
Percentage of future outside deposits deducted and paid toward IFRP
0% if account balance is $249.99 or smaller.
25% if account balance is $250 or larger.
25%.
35%.
55%.
100%.
As noted previously, in developing
this SNPRM the Bureau reviewed
commissary account data, and
determined that setting these thresholds
would best balance the competing
interests discussed in this SNPRM.
Under this SNPRM, inmates who
receive no deposits or deposits less than
$249.99 over a six-month period, and
who have account balances of $249.99
or less, will not be required to pay any
percentage of their outside deposits
toward IFRP until such time as their
payment plan is re-assessed (i.e.,
generally during their next program
review). An inmate in this category who
receives a $1,200 outside deposit while
his 0% financial plan is in effect will
not be required to pay any of that
deposit toward IFRP. However, when
his plan is re-assessed during his next
program review, he will then fall into
the $1,000–$2,499.99 category based on
his deposit activity over the prior six
months, and 35 percent of outside
deposits he receives going forward—
regardless of the size of each individual
deposit—will be paid toward his
financial obligations.
The way this system works is further
illustrated in the following examples:
Example 1: Inmate John Doe, who
owes federal restitution, attends his
regularly scheduled program review.
During this review, his Case Manager
reviews Bureau systems to determine (1)
the total amount deposited into Mr.
Doe’s commissary account over the
prior six months; and (2) Mr. Doe’s
commissary account balance.
The Case Manager’s review indicates
that Mr. Doe has a current commissary
account balance of $600, as well as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
deposits over the prior six months of
$600 ($100/month). Thus, his IFRP
payment obligation would be 25 percent
of each outside deposit he receives
while this payment plan is in effect.
After Mr. Doe agrees to this financial
plan, the Case Manager would enter this
financial plan into the Bureau’s
SENTRY system. While this financial
plan is in effect, every time a deposit is
made to Mr. Doe’s commissary account,
25 percent would be withheld and paid
toward his restitution obligation.
Example 2: Inmate Jane Smith, who
also owes federal restitution, attends her
program review meeting. Her Case
Manager determines that Ms. Smith has
an account balance of $200, as well as
total deposits over the prior six months
of only $100. Thus, Ms. Smith’s
financial plan would reflect that no
percentage would be withheld from
outside deposits she receives while the
financial plan is in effect.
Example 3: Inmate William Brown,
who owes a federal assessment, has $0
in deposits into his account over the
previous six months. He attends his
program review meeting, and has a
commissary account balance of $300.
Because his account balance is greater
than $250, his payment plan will
specify that 25 percent of each future
outside deposit will be paid towards
IFRP. While this plan is in effect, Mr.
Brown receives a $1,200 tax refund
deposit; $300 of this deposit will be
paid toward his federal assessment
through IFRP.
Example 4: Inmate James Roe, who
owes a federal tax debt, has been on a
0% payment plan for multiple cycles
because he receives less than $249.99 in
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
deposits every six months, and his
account balance is less than $250 at the
time of his program review. While this
plan is in effect, Mr. Roe receives a
deposit of $5,000 from an inheritance,
all of which he keeps. At his next
program review, however, Mr. Roe’s
payment plan will be adjusted so that
100 percent of each outside deposit he
receives, until such time as his financial
plan is modified again or he satisfies his
financial obligation, will be paid toward
IFRP.
In each of these examples, the
inmates’ financial plans would also
indicate that 10 percent of their work
compensation would be paid toward the
IFRP payment process.
The Bureau’s intent in making this
revision is to try to require inmates with
greater financial resources to pay more
toward their financial obligations.
Admittedly, this system is not perfect.
This proposal uses past deposit history
to set a percentage of future deposits
taken for IFRP. The Bureau elected to
focus on total value of deposits (rather
than account balances) because the total
deposits figure more accurately depicts
the individual inmate’s financial
circumstances and because it is already
reported by the Bureau’s SENTRY
system and used as part of the current
IFRP system to develop payment plans.
If IFRP was designed around account
balances, there would be a significant
incentive for inmates to spend down
their account balances in advance of the
time at which their financial plan is
established or reviewed, in order to
evade financial responsibility
obligations. Instead, by utilizing the
total value of deposits, the Bureau will
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
102028
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
be relying on a figure that gives the
complete picture of how much money
the inmate has available to spend,
including on satisfying their financial
obligations.
As the Bureau explained in its
January 2023 NPRM, it faces significant
technological, administrative, and other
challenges in establishing any kind of
variable-rate system. The Bureau
considered a system similar to
progressive taxation, which would
apply a lower marginal rate to amounts
below a certain threshold, and higher
marginal rate to amounts above that
threshold. This type of proposal would
offer several benefits. It would allow the
Bureau to target large account balances
while still preserving a minimum
amount of funds for an inmate’s daily
and future use. It is also more equitable,
recognizing that an inmate with an
account balance of $100 and minimal
incoming deposits is differently situated
than one with an account balance of
$10,000 or one with numerous deposits.
However, the Bureau also determined
that there were significant
technological, administrative, and other
disadvantages associated with this
alternative approach. First, there is the
risk that inmates might maintain
deliberately small account balances
through unlawful or illegitimate means
(including having money held by other
inmates), or otherwise engage in
‘‘structuring’’ of deposits and other
transactions, to avoid paying a higher
percentage toward IFRP. In addition, a
system that set cut points based on the
balance in an inmate’s account
presented the risk of unfairness by
treating inmates with similar balances
differently. For example, an inmate
whose account balance totaled $499
might be expected to pay 25 percent of
future deposits towards IFRP, while an
inmate whose account balances totaled
$500.01 might be expected to pay 50
percent of community deposits towards
IFRP.
A ‘‘progressive’’ system tied to
deposit amounts could mitigate this
latter concern. For instance, such a
system might set a marginal rate of 25%
for the first $500 in community deposits
during a time period, with a rate of 75%
for any deposits over $500 during the
same span. In that scenario, an inmate
who deposited $500 in a 365-day period
would pay $125 (25% of the $500). An
inmate who deposited $501 in a 365-day
period would pay $125.50 (25% of the
first $500, and 75% of the amount—
$1—over $500).
This solution, however, brings
technological and administrative
challenges for the Bureau. The Bureau
lacks a fully automated process to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
‘‘freeze’’ funds or make IFRP
withdrawals from an inmate’s account,
which prevents the Bureau from
implementing any plan that would
automatically adjust amounts withheld
from individual deposits as the amount
in the account increases or decreases, or
an individual deposit is above or below
a certain point. With the number of
deposits received by the Bureau each
day, the Trust Fund system would have
to query each individual account, its
balance or deposit history, the inmate’s
IFRP status, and tie that to a specific
percentage of the deposit to withhold.
Under the current IFRP model, an
individual inmate’s IFRP financial plan
is first manually entered by a unit team
member, and payments are withdrawn
and paid to the correct payee by a Trust
Fund staff member pursuant to the
terms of the financial plan the inmate
has agreed to. In developing the
financial plan, unit team staff look at the
prior 180 days of financial activity in
the inmate’s account to determine what
percentage the inmate would be
expected to pay; the inmate then signs
the financial plan and agrees to abide by
that plan until the next review. If the
financial plan involved variable rates of
withholding of deposits, it would be
more difficult for both Bureau staff to
explain and for inmates to understand
what they would be paying.
This SNPRM tries to strike a middle
ground between setting a single, flat rate
that applies to all inmates regardless of
their financial means, and a highly
sophisticated system that would
automatically adjust withholding
amounts based on various factors (e.g.,
account balance, total sum of deposits
over a specific period). Under the
proposed rule, most inmates would
keep a majority of their outside
deposits; only those inmates who
receive significant deposits (e.g., $2,500
or more over a six-month period) would
be assessed at a rate of 55 percent or
higher. The Bureau plans to engage in
significant notification and educational
efforts for parties impacted by these
IFRP changes when it issues its final
rule and associated implementing
policy. As part of those efforts, the
Bureau anticipates informing members
of the public (including ‘‘outside’’
depositors) that funds deposited into the
account of an IFRP-participating inmate
may be paid toward the inmate’s
financial obligations, in accordance
with the terms of the inmate’s agreed-to
IFRP payment plan.
Importantly, financial plans are
subject to review and adjustment at a
minimum during every program review
meeting. Accordingly, an inmate who
receives a single large deposit may see
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
their financial plan percentage increase
for the next six months. However, once
their deposits return to lower amounts,
that percentage can be adjusted
downward by Bureau staff.
Changes to Set-Aside Amounts
In developing this SNPRM, the
Bureau’s overarching intent is to
establish that inmates with more money
are expected to pay more towards their
financial obligations. Under the current
IFRP regulation, when developing an
inmate’s financial plan, Bureau staff are
required to subtract $450 (i.e., $75 × 6
months, inmate telephone exclusion)
from consideration in evaluating the
inmate’s available financial resources.
This SNPRM would retain a version
of the set-aside, but it does not
explicitly tie it to telephone use for two
reasons. First, Bureau inmates have
multiple avenues, including telephone
calls, electronic messaging, and video
visiting (where available), to maintain
contact with family and other members
of the community, so restricting the setaside consideration to just phone calls
no longer reflects current realities.
Second, the Bureau recognizes that
inmates may choose to prioritize other
purchases, including, for example, overthe-counter medications purchased from
commissary, preferred hygiene
products, hobbycraft materials, or
materials for college or correspondence
courses.
Under the SNPRM, an inmate who
receives less than $250 in deposits over
the six months prior to program review
would generally not be required to pay
any percentage of their outside deposits
towards IFRP. The only circumstance in
which this inmate would be required to
pay a percentage of his outside deposits
is if the inmate has accumulated a
commissary account balance of $250 or
more at the time of program review. In
the Bureau’s view, if the inmate has
$250 in their commissary account,
regardless of their deposit activity over
that time period, then the rationale
behind the set-aside is satisfied, and the
inmate should pay a percentage of his
future incoming deposits towards IFRP
obligations. Importantly, that percentage
would not be 100 percent, except for
those inmates who receive more than
$5,000 over a six-month period. Inmates
who participate in IFRP would be
guaranteed to keep a minimum of $250,
and for all but the most well-off
inmates, they would also be entitled to
keep a majority of their external
deposits in excess of that $250 amount
as well.
We will briefly revisit the example of
John Doe, who had an account balance
of $600 and was placed on an IFRP
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
payment plan that would withhold 25
percent of future ‘‘outside’’ deposits.
While that plan is in effect, Mr. Doe
receives $100 every month deposited
into his account by family members. For
each deposit, he would be able to spend
$75 on things like phone calls,
electronic messaging, and commissary,
in addition to the $600 he already had
in his account. Meanwhile, $25 of each
deposit would be paid towards his
federal restitution. Given costs for
phone calls ($.06/minute, with a limit of
300 minutes per month) and electronic
messaging access ($.05/minute), Mr. Doe
would have sufficient funds remaining
after his IFRP payment is deducted to
maintain contact with his family and
friends through either of these methods.
With respect to commissary spending,
Mr. Doe would likewise have sufficient
funds to purchase items in the
commissary at FCI Lompoc I like aspirin
($1.90), hydrocortisone cream ($1.55),
and antifungal foot cream ($2.70).
By exempting inmates with minimal
funds (i.e., less than $250) from the
requirement regarding outside deposits,
inmates will still be able to
communicate with family and purchase
some commissary items. While inmates
with limited financial means may have
to make choices about how to spend
their funds, the exemption would
ensure that they will all have some
funds available.
Specific Treatment of High-Value
Accounts
In the Bureau’s experience, the vast
majority of inmates carry commissary
account balances of under $5,000. As of
November 2024, for example, only two
percent of BOP’s inmate population of
over 158,000 inmates had a commissary
account balance of $5,000 or more. This
SNPRM proposes to specifically target
Bureau inmates who have significant
account balances, which the Bureau
defines as a balance greater than or
equal to $5,000, and who also owe
financial obligations. These inmates
would be expected to allot all funds in
excess of $5,000 held in their
commissary accounts towards payment
of financial obligations, in addition to
100 percent of all ‘‘external’’ deposits
received during times when their
accounts are at or above that $5,000
threshold.
As previously noted, only two percent
of inmates have account balances of
$5,000 or above, and an even smaller
subset of that percentage owes any
financial obligations, and thus would be
subject to this provision. By imposing
this requirement only on those inmates
who maintain significant balances, the
Bureau is communicating the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
expectation that inmates would not be
able to use their commissary accounts to
shield their funds from being used to
satisfy their financial obligations.
Example: Inmate James Roe owes
federal restitution of $100,000. He
attends his program review meeting
with a commissary account balance of
$9,000, and deposits over the prior six
months totaling $1,000. He would be
expected to make a one-time payment of
$4,000 (the amount in his commissary
account in excess of $5,000), and would
be placed on an IFRP payment plan that
withholds 10% of his pay and 100% of
his outside deposits.
The Bureau recognizes that this
approach may lead some inmates who
have the available means to seek to
deposit their funds in non-Bureau,
external accounts. In these
circumstances, alternative financial
collection methods can be pursued by
federal, state, and/or local authorities.
This approach may also lead some
inmates to decline to participate in
IFRP, but that decision would subject
them to the consequences of nonparticipation detailed in 28 CFR
545.11(d).
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(c)
In the January 2023 NPRM, the
Bureau stated its intention to revise the
proposed rule to explain that the
inmate’s financial plan would be
reviewed at a minimum during the
inmate’s program review meeting. This
SNPRM keeps this intended revision,
and makes clear that the percentage of
non-institution (community) resources
deducted for IFRP payments may be
revised at this time, based on the total
value of deposits into the inmate’s
commissary account over the prior six
months. Modifications to an inmate’s
financial plan may be made at times
other than the inmate’s program review
meeting if, for example, the inmate
receives a significant deposit or loses a
source of community support.
The Bureau is also interested in
receiving comments on the topic of
whether an inmate should be exempt
from IFRP participation for a certain
length of time prior to reentry. For
example, the inmate could be exempt
from IFRP participation during the 90 or
180 days prior to either (1) the inmate’s
transition to a residential reentry center
or home confinement, or (2) expiration
of the inmate’s term of imprisonment, if
the inmate is not participating in
community confinement.
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(d)
Paragraph (d) of 28 CFR 545.11 lists
the effects of non-participation in the
IFRP. In the January 2023 NPRM, the
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
102029
Bureau proposed to revise this
paragraph to remove two listed
consequences, as they are no longer in
use, and to add one new consequence.
This SNPRM keeps the changes
proposed by the January 2023 NPRM
and clarifies how this paragraph will be
structured. As detailed below, the
Bureau continues to invite comments
specifically on the linkage between IFRP
and time credits under the First Step
Act.
1. Deletion of language requiring
quartering in lowest housing status as
an effect of non-participation in IFRP.
First, the Bureau still proposes to
remove current paragraph (d)(7), which
requires that if an inmate refuses to
participate in or comply with the
provisions of the IFRP, the inmate be
quartered in the lowest housing status
available (dormitory or double-bunking,
for example).
2. Deletion of language prohibiting
placement in community-based
programs as an effect of nonparticipation in IFRP. Second, the
Bureau still proposes to remove current
paragraph (d)(8), which states that if an
inmate refuses to participate in or
comply with the provisions of the IFRP,
the inmate would not be placed in a
community-based program.
3. Relationship between IFRP and
Time Credits under the First Step Act.
The Bureau has taken very seriously the
comments it received in response to the
January 2023 NPRM that expressed
concerns that conditioning FSA Time
Credits on IFRP participation may take
away from the FSA’s spirit and intent to
encourage individuals in custody to
prepare for reentry. However, the
Bureau maintains that participation in
IFRP demonstrates acceptance of
responsibility and is an important step
in preparing for reentry. Accordingly,
the Bureau has proposed a number of
the reforms to the IFRP program
described above aimed at minimizing
the perceived burden of IFRP
participation on those eligible for FSA
Time Credits and addresses the concern
that participation may leave individuals
without necessary resources. These
proposed reforms include the
exemption of individuals with limited
funds ($249.99 or less) from IFRP
payments and the newly proposed
progressive payment system for outside
deposits. We therefore invite additional
comments on the relationship between
IFRP and FSA Time Credits in light of
the Bureau’s efforts to address the stated
concerns through these and other
reforms proposed in this rulemaking.
4. Conforming amendments. Finally,
the Bureau proposes to renumber
current paragraphs (d)(9) and (d)(11) to
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
102030
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
paragraphs (d)(7) and (d)(8)
respectively; to remove current
paragraph (d)(10); which is currently
listed as ‘‘reserved’’; and to make
amendments to redesignate the
numbered list in this regulation to
conform to the changes described in this
proposed rule.
Regulatory Certifications
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094 (Regulatory Review)
This proposed rule does not fall
within a category of actions that the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined constitutes a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
and, accordingly, it was not reviewed by
OMB. The economic impact of this
proposed rule is limited to an existing
BOP program that applies to sentenced
inmates in the custody of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons, and does not apply
to inmates in study/observation; pretrial
detainees; or inmates in holdover status
pending designation.
Executive Order 13132—Federalism
This proposed rule 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, in
accordance with Executive Order 13132,
it is determined that this proposed rule
does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation
of a Federalism Assessment.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform (Plain Language)
This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards set forth in
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988 to specify provisions in
clear language. Pursuant to section
3(b)(1)(I) of the Executive Order,
nothing in this proposed rule or any
previous rule (or in any administrative
policy, directive, ruling, notice,
guideline, guidance, or writing) directly
relating to the program that is the
subject of this proposed rule is intended
to create any legal or procedural rights
enforceable against the United States.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
more in any one year (as adjusted for
inflation), 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.
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 certifies that it will not have a
significant economic impact upon a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons: This regulation
pertains to the correctional management
of inmates committed to the custody of
the Attorney General or the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons. Its economic
impact is limited to the Bureau’s
appropriated funds, and the funds held
by individuals in Bureau custody who
owe the types of financial obligations
collectible through this Program. The
Department anticipates that changes
made by this proposed rule will result
in additional monies collected through
the Inmate Financial Responsibility
Program and paid toward inmates’
financial obligations, although the exact
amount is unknown; in fiscal year 2023,
the total collected from inmates through
the Program was in excess of $9.2
million (https://www.bop.gov/resources/
victim_resources.jsp).
Congressional Review Act
This proposed rule is not a major rule
as defined by the Congressional Review
Act, 5 U.S.C. 804.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 545
Prisoners, Work and Compensation.
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, the Bureau proposes to amend 28
CFR part 545 as follows:
SUBCHAPTER C—INSTITUTIONAL
MANAGEMENT
PART 545—WORK AND
COMPENSATION
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR
part 545 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3013,
3571, 3572, 3621, 3622, 3624, 3632, 3663,
3771, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
committed after that date), 5039; 28 U.S.C.
509, 510.
2. In 28 CFR 545.11:
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (5);
■ b. Add paragraph (a)(6);
■ c. Revise paragraphs (b), (c), and (d)(7)
through (9); and
■ d. Remove paragraphs (d)(10) and
(11).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 545.11
Procedures.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(4) Child, spousal, or other familial
support obligations;
(5) Other federal government
obligations; and
(6) Other (non-family support) state or
local court obligations.
(b) Payment of financial obligations.
The inmate is responsible for making
satisfactory progress in meeting the
inmate’s financial responsibility plan
and for providing documentation of
these payments to unit team staff.
Ordinarily, a plan for payment of
financial obligations set out in the
inmate’s Judgment & Commitment order
(J&C) or other court order should be
implemented as the inmate’s financial
plan. In the event the J&C or other court
order does not prescribe a payment plan
or schedule, the following will apply.
(1) Initial classification. During the
initial classification and review of the
inmate’s financial obligations, unit team
staff will also review the inmate’s
individual commissary account balance,
and encourage the inmate to make a
payment to satisfy any financial
obligations in full. The inmate can make
this payment through his/her
commissary account or from other
financial resources. For a payment made
through a non-Bureau resource, the
inmate is required to provide
documentation of the payment to unit
team staff. If the inmate is unwilling or
unable to fully satisfy any financial
obligation at the time of initial
classification and review, the inmate
will be required to make a one-time
single payment toward his/her financial
obligation(s) if his/her commissary
account balance is greater than or equal
to $250. The amount of this one-time
payment will be based on the amount of
money in the inmate’s commissary
account at the time of initial
classification and review:
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
102031
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(1)
Commissary account balance
$0.01–$249.99 .........................................
$250.00–$5,000.00 ..................................
$5,000.01 or more ...................................
Percentage deducted for one-time initial payment
0%.
50% of the amount between $250 and $5,000.
50% of the amount between $250 and $5,000 and 100% of the amount above $5,000.
(2) Financial plans. For an inmate
who is unwilling or unable to make a
single payment to satisfy the inmate’s
entire financial obligation(s) at the time
of the initial classification and review,
Bureau staff will establish a financial
plan for the inmate. These financial
plans shall be structured as follows:
(i) Allotment of institution resources.
The inmate will be required to pay 10
percent of all pay received for an
institution or UNICOR work assignment
to the IFRP payment process. This
includes performance pay, bonus pay,
and special bonus pay.
(ii) Allotment of non-institution
(community) resources. The inmate will
be expected to allot a specified
percentage of all deposits received from
non-institution (community) resources
toward the IFRP payment process.
(iii) Establishing financial plan at
program review. During program review,
BOP staff will review the inmate’s
commissary account balance, and total
value of deposits into the inmate’s
commissary account over the prior six
months. Based on the total value of
deposits over the prior six months, BOP
staff will place the inmate on a financial
plan that specifies that a certain
percentage of each future deposit from
non-institution (community) resources
will be deducted and paid toward the
IFRP payment process. The specific
percentages are reflected in the
following table:
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(2)(iii)
Total value of deposits over prior six
months
$.01–$249.99 ...........................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
$250.00–$999.99 .....................................
$1,000–$2,499.99 ....................................
$2,500–$4,999.99 ....................................
≥$5,000 ....................................................
Percentage of future outside deposits deducted and paid toward IFRP
0% if commissary account balance is $249.99 or smaller.
25% if commissary account balance is $250.00 or larger.
25%.
35%.
55%.
100%.
(iv) Balances greater than or equal to
$5,000. For any inmate who has a
commissary account balance greater
than or equal to $5,000 at the time of
review of the inmate’s participation
and/or progress in the IFRP, the inmate
will be expected to pay all of the
amount in the account, in excess of
$5,000, toward the IFRP payment
process.
(3) Exceptions to allotment amounts.
Any allotment that differs from that
described in part (2) of this subpart
must be approved by the unit manager,
after consultation with the associate
warden, and documented in writing.
(c) Monitoring. Participation and/or
progress in the IFRP, including the
inmate’s financial plan, will be
reviewed, at a minimum, during an
inmate’s program review meeting. The
percentage of non-institution
(community) resources deducted for
IFRP payments may be revised at this
time, based on the total value of
deposits into the inmate’s commissary
account over the prior six months.
Modifications to an inmate’s financial
plan may be made at times other than
the inmate’s program review meeting.
(d) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:38 Dec 16, 2024
Jkt 265001
(7) The inmate will not receive a
release gratuity unless approved by the
warden;
(8) The inmate will not receive an
incentive for participation in residential
drug treatment programs; and
(9) The inmate will not be eligible to
earn or apply First Step Act Time
Credits, as described in 18 U.S.C. 3624
and 3632(d)(4), and 28 CFR 523.40
through 523.44.
Colette S. Peters,
Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons.
[FR Doc. 2024–29692 Filed 12–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AS25
Updates to Waiver of Charges for
Copayments
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
medical regulations to allow VA to
initiate a waiver request for debt
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
accumulated from health care
copayments on behalf of veterans in
certain circumstances and to remove the
requirement that veterans submit VA
Form 5655 when seeking a waiver of
copayment debt.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 18, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be
submitted through www.regulations.gov.
Except as provided below, comments
received before the close of the
comment period will be available at
www.regulations.gov for public viewing,
inspection, or copying, including any
personally identifiable or confidential
business information that is included in
a comment. We post the comments
received before the close of the
comment period on
www.regulations.gov as soon as possible
after they have been received. VA will
not post public comments on
www.regulations.gov that make threats
to individuals or institutions or suggest
that the commenter will take actions to
harm an individual. VA encourages
individuals not to submit duplicative
comments. We will post acceptable
comments from multiple unique
commenters even if the content is
identical or nearly identical to other
comments. Any public comment
E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM
17DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 102022-102031]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29692]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 545
[BOP-1178]
RIN 1120-AB78
Inmate Financial Responsibility Program: Procedures
AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking would update
and streamline regulations regarding the Inmate Financial
Responsibility Program (IFRP).
DATES: Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must
be submitted on or before February 18, 2025. Commenters should be aware
that the electronic Federal Docket Management System will not accept
comments after Midnight Eastern Time on the last day of the comment
period.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to provide comment regarding this rulemaking,
you must submit comments, identified by the agency name and reference
Docket No. BOP 1178, by one of the two methods below.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
website instructions for submitting comments. The electronic Federal
Docket Management System at www.regulations.gov will accept electronic
comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the comment due date.
Mail: Paper comments that duplicate an electronic submission are
unnecessary. If you wish to submit a paper comment in lieu of
electronic submission, please direct the mail/shipment to: Rules
Administrator, Legislative and Correctional Issues Branch, Office of
General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 First Street NW, Washington, DC
20534. To ensure proper handling, please reference the agency name and
Docket No. BOP 1178 on your correspondence. Mailed items must be
postmarked or otherwise indicate a shipping date on or before the
submission deadline.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel J. Crooks III, Assistant
General Counsel/Rules Administrator, Federal Bureau of Prisons, at the
address above or at (202) 353-4885.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please note that all comments received are
considered part of the public record and generally will be made
available for public inspection online at www.regulations.gov. If you
want to submit personal identifying information (such as your name,
address, etc.) as part of your comment, but do not want it to be posted
online, you must include the phrase ``PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph of your comment. You must also
locate all the personal identifying information you do not want posted
online in the first paragraph of your comment and identify what
information you want redacted.
If you want to submit confidential business information as part of
your comment but do not want it to be posted online, you must include
the phrase ``CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted within the comment. If a comment
contains so much confidential business information that it cannot be
effectively redacted, all or part of that comment may not be posted
www.regulations.gov.
Personal identifying information identified and located as set
forth above will be placed in the agency's public docket file, but not
posted online. Confidential business information identified and located
as set forth above will not be placed in the public docket file. If you
wish to inspect the agency's public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph.
Background
The purpose of the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program (Program
or IFRP), operated by the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) since 1987, is
twofold: to encourage federal inmates in Bureau facilities to pay
financial obligations; and to support federal inmates in developing
financial planning skills.
Inmate participation in the IFRP is non-compulsory. Subject to
certain exemptions listed in 28 CFR 545.10, all sentenced federal
inmates are eligible to participate. During an inmate's initial
classification, current Bureau policy requires staff to review the
inmate's financial obligations--by consulting the inmate's presentence
investigation report, judgment and commitment order(s) and other court
documents, and any other available information--and
[[Page 102023]]
encourage inmates to satisfy any court-ordered obligations either at
the time of this initial review or throughout the inmate's term of
imprisonment. The Bureau strongly recommends that all inmates with
financial obligations participate in the IFRP, along with other
programs and activities designed to reduce recidivism, such as work,
education, and drug rehabilitation programs.
If an inmate chooses to participate in the IFRP, Bureau staff will
work with the inmate to develop a financial plan, which is documented
and signed by the inmate and includes financial obligations paid in the
following order of priority:
1. Special assessments imposed by the court under 18 U.S.C. 3013;
2. Court-ordered restitution, including assessments related to
bodily injury to victims occurring as a result of the offense, loss or
destruction of victim property, or other assessments as indicated by
the court;
3. Fines and court costs;
4. State or local court obligations (such as child support or
alimony, as documented by a court order or letter from the relevant
state authority);
5. Other federal government obligations (including fees imposed
under 18 U.S.C. 4001 for Cost of Incarceration, other judgments in
favor of the United States, student loans, Veterans Administration
claims, tax liabilities, and Freedom of Information or Privacy Act
fees).
Given the importance of satisfying outstanding financial
obligations and reducing the amount of debt upon release, there are
effects of non-participation. Documented refusal by inmates to
participate in the IFRP, or to comply with the provisions of their
agreed-upon financial plan, results in the specific consequences
currently listed in 28 CFR 545.11(d), including notification to the
Parole Commission, preclusion of furlough eligibility (other than
emergency or medical furlough), preclusion of certain pay benefits or
increases, preclusion of eligibility for premium work opportunities
and/or removal from a UNICOR work assignment, commissary spending
restrictions, loss of release gratuity (unless approved by the warden),
and loss of incentives (such as early release and financial awards)
otherwise available to an inmate who participates in residential drug
treatment programs.
As the IFRP is currently operated, Bureau staff review and reassess
each inmate's financial plan and IFRP payments during the inmate's
regularly scheduled program review meeting; these meetings generally
occur every 180 days, although the interval becomes 90 days when the
inmate is within 12 months of release. As part of that review, Bureau
staff first review the total funds deposited into the inmate's
commissary account over the previous six-month period from any source.
As stated in 28 CFR 506.1, individual inmate commissary accounts allow
the Bureau to maintain inmate monies while the inmate is incarcerated.
Funds in inmate accounts can come from a number of sources: the inmate
may earn pay from work assignments (including compensation earned
through UNICOR); family members or friends may send funds to the
inmate; the inmate may receive tax refunds or other government-related
issuances; or the inmate may receive other types of income (such as
stock dividends, state benefits, litigation settlements, and
inheritance). All money earned by the inmate from the Bureau is
automatically deposited into the inmate's commissary account.
Next, to determine whether future payments under the IFRP plan
should be adjusted based on the inmate's financial activity over the
previous six-month period under review, staff subtract the total amount
of any payments an inmate has made during the previous six-month period
under the IFRP plan (payments made toward the inmate's financial
obligations) from the amount deposited into the account over that same
time period. Under current regulations in 28 CFR 545.11(b), when
performing this calculation to determine the amount an inmate has
available for payment of financial obligations, staff must also
subtract a $75 per month allowance for telephone communication (a total
of $450 for each six-month period). That amount is not included in the
calculation of the total amount an inmate has available for payments
under the IFRP.
Then, based on the foregoing information, staff estimate the amount
the inmate is likely to have remaining at the end of that six-month
period. Based on that amount, staff determine whether to adjust the
inmate's financial plan and IFRP payments. Under the current
regulation, the minimum payment for inmates who do not have a UNICOR
work assignment, or who have a UNICOR grade 5 work assignment, is
ordinarily $25 per quarter. For inmates assigned a UNICOR work
assignment with a grade between 1 and 4, the minimum payment is
ordinarily expected to be 50 percent of the inmate's pay.
On January 10, 2023, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (Bureau)
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (the ``January 2023 NPRM'')
in the Federal Register relating to the Inmate Financial Responsibility
Program (IFRP). 88 FR 1331 (Jan. 10, 2023). In the January 2023 NPRM,
the Bureau detailed its proposed changes to the IFRP regulation. Among
the most significant changes were a requirement that all inmates
participating in IFRP contribute a percentage of their pay towards the
IFRP payment process; a requirement that all inmates participating in
IFRP contribute 75 percent of funds received from non-Bureau sources
(``outside'' or ``community'' deposits) toward the IFRP payment
process; and changes to the effects of IFRP non-participation,
including noting that, as per Program Statement 5410.01, First Step Act
of 2018--Time Credits: Procedures for Implementation of 18 U.S.C.
3632(d)(4), participation is a Productive Activity as that relates to
First Step Act (FSA) Time Credits, as described in 18 U.S.C. 3624 and
3632(d)(4), and 28 CFR 523.40 through 523.44.
During the notice and comment period for the January 2023 NPRM, the
Bureau received more than 1,300 comments from members of the public,
including inmates, inmates' families and friends, advocacy
organizations, and governmental officials. The large volume of comments
received demonstrated to us that changes to the IFRP are of significant
interest to the public. To ensure we obtain the benefit of the public's
comments on additional suggested revisions to the IFRP, the Bureau now
publishes this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM).
While the provisions proposed in this SNPRM maintain some features of
the January 2023 NPRM, it differs in several material respects. The
Bureau welcomes public comment on this alternative IFRP framework that
considers an individual inmate's financial circumstances. Comments
submitted on the January 2023 NPRM should not be resubmitted as new
comments to this SNPRM. All relevant comments on the January 2023 NPRM
and this SNPRM will be addressed when a final rule is issued.
Supplemental Proposed Rule
This supplemental proposed rule would make changes to update,
streamline, and clarify IFRP regulations in sections 28 CFR 545.11(a)
through (d), as follows:
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(a)
The current IFRP regulation provides that an inmate's financial
plan will include the following obligations, ordinarily paid in the
priority order as listed: (1) special assessments under 18 U.S.C. 3013;
(2) court-ordered
[[Page 102024]]
restitution; (3) fines and court costs; (4) state or local court
obligations; and (5) other federal government obligations. The January
2023 NPRM did not propose any alteration to this list of obligations.
In this SNPRM, the Bureau is proposing to modify this list by altering
paragraph (4) to read ``child, spousal, or other familial support
obligations,'' and adding a new paragraph (6) for ``other (non-family
support) state or local court obligations''.
As initially proposed in 1986, no state or local financial
obligations were included in the list of financial obligations
collectible through IFRP. See NPRM, Control, Custody, Care, Treatment
and Instruction of Inmates, Financial Responsibility Program, 51 FR
42167-01 (Nov. 21, 1986). However, in response to public comments
received on the initial proposed rule, the Bureau added ``other court
ordered obligations'' to the list:
We agree with several commenters who suggested the Bureau add
family financial obligations and child support to its priority list
of obligations. Based on public comment, and because court-ordered
child support or alimony or other court-ordered judgments against an
inmate are financial obligations similar to those in the proposed
rule, the Bureau of Prisons is adding new Sec. 545.11(a)(6), other
court-ordered obligations.
Final Rule, Control, Custody, Care, Treatment and Instruction of
Inmates; Inmate Financial Responsibility Program, 52 FR 10528-01 (Apr.
1, 1987). In 1991, the Bureau published a final rule that combined two
categories of obligations into one (``other federal government
obligations''), adjusted the paragraph numbering, and adopted the
verbiage (``State or local court obligations'') that it has continued
to use to the present. Final Rule, Control, Custody, Care, Treatment
and Instruction of Inmates; Financial Responsibility Program, 56 FR
23476-01 (May 21, 1991).
The Bureau believes that disaggregating familial support
obligations from other state and local obligations is beneficial for
several reasons. First, it will allow for the prioritization of family
support over other types of state and local obligations in the way
initially contemplated. The Bureau believes that it is more important
that--to the extent an inmate's money is being sent to a state or local
entity--it should go first towards supporting children or others for
whom an order of support has been entered, rather than the state or
local government for other purposes. Second, the Bureau (as a federal
agency) believes that other federal obligations should be prioritized
over non-family support state and local obligations, such as criminal
fines and fees or fees imposed in civil cases or administrative
proceedings.
Third, the Department of Justice in an April 2023 Dear Colleague
Letter noted that, in certain circumstances, unjust imposition and
enforcement of fines and fees violate the civil rights of adults and
youth accused of felonies, misdemeanors, quasi-criminal ordinance
violations, and civil infractions.\1\ State and local fines and fees
make up a miniscule portion (as of February 2024, less than one half of
a percent) of the financial obligations subject to collection through
IFRP. Nevertheless, as a Department component, the Bureau wants to
ensure that it is operating consistent with the Department's guidance
on this topic, and is not collecting fines and fees imposed by states
and localities in ways that may have violated the civil rights of those
in Bureau custody. The Bureau will provide more specific guidance to
Bureau employees, in the program statement implementing this
regulation, on how to ensure that a fine or fee imposed by a state or
local entity was lawfully imposed, such as verifying that an ability-
to-pay determination was conducted. Fines and fees that that BOP
determines were unfairly or improperly imposed will not be collected
through IFRP. The Bureau welcomes public comment on what steps the
Bureau should take to ensure that fines and fees imposed by states and
localities were not done so in a way that is inconsistent with the
constitutional and statutory provisions described in the Dear Colleague
Letter. Given that these same concerns are not present in the familial
support context, it makes sense to separate those types of obligations
as their own category not subject to this guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Dear Colleague Letter (Apr. 20, 2023), available at https://www.justice.gov/d9/press-releases/attachments/2023/04/20/doj_fines_and_fees_dear_colleague_letter_final_with_signatures_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(b)
1. Introductory paragraph. The Bureau still intends to make the two
changes to the introductory paragraph that were detailed in the January
2023 NPRM. These changes were: (1) the deletion of language that was
intended to serve as guidance for Bureau employees, and (2) the
addition of language requiring that any payment plan laid out in the
inmate's judgment and commitment order (J&C) be implemented as the
inmate's IFRP payment plan.
One purpose of the IFRP is to promote inmate financial
understanding and self-regulation. To meet that goal, staff work with
inmates to structure a reasonable payment plan that is attainable for
the inmate, in light of any funds coming into the account (whether from
inmate work assignment pay or through outside sources) and any
reasonable expenditures required by the inmate. As discussed in this
SNPRM, BOP is proposing to retain a version of the monetary set-aside
that is part of the current regulation, without tying it to a monthly
amount or to a specific purpose (e.g., phone calls).
2. Addition of language regarding one-time payment. In this SNPRM,
the Bureau proposes to add language to the rule that (1) encourages all
inmates to make a payment towards fully satisfying their financial
obligation(s) at the time of initial classification and program review;
and (2) would require inmates with commissary account balances above
$250 to make a one-time payment. This proposal differs from the January
2023 NPRM in an important way. While the January 2023 NPRM encouraged
all inmates to make a one-time payment at the time of initial
classification, it did not require any inmate to do so. In this SNPRM,
inmates with commissary balances greater than or equal to $250 at the
time of initial classification would be required to make a one-time
payment from available funds in their commissary accounts to satisfy
any identified financial obligations. Currently, guidance to Bureau
staff notes that in certain circumstances, including when an inmate's
total financial obligation is $100 or less, the inmate should be
encouraged to make a one-time payment to satisfy that obligation The
purpose of this revision is to make clear that all inmates, regardless
of the size of the financial obligation, would be encouraged--and in
some circumstances required--to make a one-time payment.
The proposed rule would require an inmate with more than a certain
amount of money in their commissary account to make a one-time payment
equal to a specific percentage of funds in the account:
[[Page 102025]]
Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage deducted for one-time
Commissary account balance initial payment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0.01-$249.99........................ 0%.
$250.00-$5,000.00.................... 50% of the amount between $250
and $5,000.
$5,000.01 or more.................... 50% of the amount between $250
and $5,000 plus 100% of the
amount above $5,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As depicted in the above chart, inmates with $249.99 or less in
their commissary accounts would not be required to make an initial
payment toward financial obligations. An inmate with between $250.00
and $5,000.00 in their account would be expected to pay 50 percent of
the amount within that range towards IFRP. Finally, inmates with
$5,000.01 or more in their accounts would be expected to pay (1) 50
percent of the amount between $250.00 and $5,000.00, and (2) 100% of
the amount in excess of $5,000.00 toward financial obligations. In
determining these account balance thresholds, the Bureau reviewed data
on commissary account balances, which showed that the overwhelming
majority of inmates maintain balances of $1,000 or less. In fact, as of
December 4, 2024, approximately 77 percent of commissary account
balances are $249.99 or less, and only 2 percent of commissary accounts
have balances greater than $5,000.
The way this is intended to work is illustrated through the
following examples:
Example 1: Inmate John Doe, who owes a $100 special assessment
imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013, and federal restitution of $5,000,
attends his initial classification and program review meeting with a
commissary account balance of $150. He would not be required to make an
initial IFRP payment, although he may choose to do so if, for example,
he wants to fully pay off his $100 special assessment.
Example 2: Inmate James Roe, who also owes a $100 special
assessment imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013, and federal restitution
of $5,000, attends his initial classification and program review
meeting with a commissary account balance of $500. He would be required
to make a one-time IFRP payment of $125 (50% of the amount above $250),
although as with John Doe, he may also pay more at this time if he
chooses. This would leave James Roe with an account balance of $375.
Example 3: Inmate Jane Smith also owes a $100 special assessment
imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013, and federal restitution of $5,000.
She attends her initial classification and program review meeting with
a commissary account balance of $6,000. She would be expected to pay a
total of $3,375 (50% of the amount between $250 and $5,000 ($2,375),
plus $1,000--the amount in her account in excess of $5,000).
Because inmate financial plans developed under the IFRP focus on
incoming deposits into the inmate's commissary account, part of the
intent of this provision is to prevent the inmate from accumulating a
significant account balance prior to initial classification and program
review, and then using that large initial balance to evade making any
future payments. Initial classification and program review is the first
opportunity Bureau staff have to assess an inmate's financial
obligations and available resources. While for some inmates this will
occur relatively quickly after they enter Bureau custody, other inmates
may have spent substantial time in Bureau custody pre-trial and
accumulated significant funds in their commissary account. Similarly,
inmates may enter Bureau custody following sentencing with a
significant deposit or deposits made before their initial
classification and review meeting occurs.
The Bureau recognizes that newly sentenced and designated inmates
need to maintain some funds to aid in the transition into custody,
including by maintaining family contact and purchasing commissary items
that may help ease that transition. Thus, the proposed rule would not
require an initial payment from inmates with less than $250 in their
commissary accounts, and would apply a 50 percent deduction to amounts
in excess of $250, up to $5,000. Inmates would still be left with funds
for purchases, while also learning that payment of financial
obligations based on their financial means is an expected part of their
term of imprisonment and that they would not be permitted to maintain
significant balances (in excess of $5,000) and stay in compliance with
IFRP. It is also important to note that nothing in this proposed rule
would prevent an inmate from making a larger payment than would be
required under the proposed rule. Rather, the intent of the proposed
rule is to set a minimum expectation for payment of financial
obligations.
The Bureau believes that setting the threshold for this initial
payment at a $250 commissary account balance adequately protects the
ability of inmates in custody at Bureau facilities to maintain contact
with members of the community and purchase supplementary items from
institution commissaries.\2\ The proposed rule is also focused on the
account balance at the time of the initial program review meeting,
meaning (particularly for pre-trial inmates) the inmate may have
already purchased and banked phone minutes, or minutes used to access
the electronic messaging (TRULINCS). They may also have purchased items
from the commissary that they still have, including non-consumable
items like shoes, an MP3 player, or a locker organizer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In accordance with BOP Program Statement 4500.12, Trust
Fund/Deposit Fund Manual, each Bureau facility establishes its list
of items to sell in the commissary. Consumable items and medical
items sold shall complement, not supplement, diet and medical care
provided to the inmate population. These examples are provided for
illustrative purposes only. Commissary price lists are available on
each BOP facility's public website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Mr. Roe as an example, the $375 remaining in his commissary
account following his initial IFRP payment would be enough to purchase
(all prices current as of October 29, 2024, except where noted):
[[Page 102026]]
Table 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expenditure Total cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,800 phone minutes for domestic calls \3\ $108 ($.06/minute).
500 minutes of access to TRULINCS public $25 ($.05/minute).
messaging service.
Commissary purchases at FCI Lompoc I, to $83.80.
include:.
--radio ($31.25) & earbuds ($5.15)....
--stamps ($12.60/book)................
--alarm clock ($9.95).................
--shower shoes ($1.95)................
--sunglasses ($5.95)..................
--combination lock ($7.65)............
--foot powder ($2.70).................
--ibuprofen ($2.60)...................
--thermal mug ($4.00).................
-----------------------------
Total Cost........................ $216.80
-----------------------------
Remaining Account Balance......... $158.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even with these purchases, which includes a purchase of the maximum
number of minutes Mr. Roe could spend on the phone over the next six
months, he still would have $158.20 remaining of his initial $500
balance to either save, or spend on additional commissary items
(including snacks and hobbycraft materials). And, going forward, his
account balance would be supplemented by any pay received for a work
assignment or additional deposits made from outside sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Rates effective as of January 1, 2025. BOP policy generally
limits inmates to 300 minutes of phone time per month. See BOP
Program Statement 5264.08, Inmate Telephone Regulations, p.9. An
additional 100 minutes are permitted during the months of November
and December, and individual calls are limited to 15 minutes. Id.
Pursuant to the First Step Act of 2018, codified in pertinent part
at 18 U.S.C. 3632(d)(1)(A), inmates in Bureau custody who are
successfully participating in evidence-based recidivism reduction
programming receive up to 510 minutes of phone time per month. These
inmates are not subject to the 300-minutes per month limit, and they
are not required to pay for these minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bureau is sensitive to the fact that this initial period of
time at a designated institution can be a significant adjustment for
many in its custody. Accordingly, the Bureau specifically invites
comment on the $250 threshold from the public, and will consider
responses received on this issue in formulating its final rule.
3. Revision of language regarding payment plans. The Bureau also
proposes to modify language included in the current rule indicating
that the minimum payment for inmates who do not work in UNICOR
positions and those who work in UNICOR positions at the grade 5 level
would be $25 per quarter, and that inmates assigned to UNICOR grades 1
through 4 work assignments would be expected to allot 50% of their
monthly pay to IFRP payments.
In the January 2023 NPRM, the Bureau proposed implementing IFRP
payment plans that would require (1) inmates in UNICOR work assignments
grade 1 through 4 to allot 50 percent of their monthly pay to the IFRP
payment process; (2) inmates in non-UNICOR and UNICOR grade 5 work
assignments to allot 25 percent of their monthly pay to the IFRP
payment process; and (3) all inmates to pay 75 percent of deposits
placed in their commissary account by non-institution (community)
sources toward the IFRP payment process. In this SNPRM, the Bureau is
still proposing to require that inmates make IFRP payments from both
sources of funds (pay for work and commissary deposits). However, this
SNPRM features the following proposals:
The regulation would indicate that, in the absence of some
other court-ordered payment plan, inmates would be expected to allot
10% of pay (to include performance pay, bonus pay, and special bonus
pay) received from any work assignment, whether institution or UNICOR,
toward the IFRP payment process.
The regulation would also clarify that all inmates, in the
absence of some other court-ordered payment plan, would be expected to
allot a specific percentage of each deposit from non-institution
(community) resources to the IFRP payment process. The percentage that
the inmate would be expected to allot will be adjustable, and would be
based on the total amount of funds deposited into the inmate's
commissary account over the prior six months.
Inmates with six-month deposit totals below a certain
amount, and whose account balances are also below a certain amount,
would be exempt from the required percentage.
Inmates who accumulate significant account balances, which
the Bureau defines as a balance equal to or greater than $5,000, would
be expected to allot all amounts in their accounts in excess of $5,000
to the IFRP payment process.
Further, the regulation would explain that exceptions to the stated
allotments must be approved by the inmate's unit manager, in
consultation with the associate warden of the inmate's institution, and
documented in writing.
Changes to Pay
This SNPRM proposes a specified percentage--10 percent--of inmate
pay for work assignments that would be allotted towards the IFRP
payment process. This percentage would apply to all inmate work
assignments, including UNICOR, and to all forms of compensation
received for work, including hourly pay and bonuses. As is currently
done for UNICOR pay for IFRP-participating inmates, the percentage
deduction would be made prior to the disbursement of pay to individual
inmate trust accounts.
The Bureau believes it is important that all inmates who are able
to work have some of their pay remitted toward payment of their
financial obligations. As a reentry tool, this obligation helps
establish the expectation that earning income carries the requirement
that one contribute financially to certain societal and personal
obligations.\4\ Outside the Bureau, these contributions might take the
form of payroll taxes, garnishments for child support, or other
deductions. By introducing the concept of a ``payroll deduction'' for
all IFRP-participating inmates, this would ensure that all inmates who
can work are making some consistent contribution, even a small one, to
their financial obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Additionally, on November 8, 2023, the Bureau published a
notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register proposing to
modify regulations on compensation for inmate workers in accordance
with Section 605(c) of the First Step of 2018 (FSA), Public Law 115-
391, December 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5194. The proposed amendments to
the regulations governing UNICOR and performance pay would require
that 15 percent of an inmate's pay be reserved (i.e., encumbered) to
assist the inmate with costs associated with release from prison. 88
FR 77064.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 102027]]
Changes to Assessment of Outside Deposits
The most significant difference between this SNPRM and the January
2023 NPRM is how ``outside'' or ``community'' deposits into the
inmate's commissary account will be considered for IFRP purposes.
Currently, the IFRP regulation permits Bureau staff to ``consider''
these deposits in developing the inmate's financial plan, but a lack of
more specific guidance has resulted in disparate application and
widespread use of a $25/quarter minimum payment option. In this SNPRM,
the Bureau proposes specific guidance for both Bureau staff and inmates
for how any outside deposits would be assessed for IFRP financial
planning purposes. The essence of the system proposed in this
rulemaking is that those inmates who have more funds would be expected
to pay more of each ``outside'' deposit toward their financial
obligations.
Under this proposed rule, Bureau staff reviewing an inmate's IFRP
participation would review the total value of deposits placed into the
inmate's account over the past six months. Depending on that total
value, a specific percentage of each future deposit received would be
paid toward IFRP. The specific percentages are reflected in the chart
below:
Table 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of future outside
Total value of deposits over prior deposits deducted and paid toward
six months IFRP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$.01-$249.99...................... 0% if account balance is $249.99 or
smaller.
25% if account balance is $250 or
larger.
$250-$999.99...................... 25%.
$1,000-$2,499.99.................. 35%.
$2,500-$4,999.99.................. 55%.
>=$5,000.......................... 100%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted previously, in developing this SNPRM the Bureau reviewed
commissary account data, and determined that setting these thresholds
would best balance the competing interests discussed in this SNPRM.
Under this SNPRM, inmates who receive no deposits or deposits less than
$249.99 over a six-month period, and who have account balances of
$249.99 or less, will not be required to pay any percentage of their
outside deposits toward IFRP until such time as their payment plan is
re-assessed (i.e., generally during their next program review). An
inmate in this category who receives a $1,200 outside deposit while his
0% financial plan is in effect will not be required to pay any of that
deposit toward IFRP. However, when his plan is re-assessed during his
next program review, he will then fall into the $1,000-$2,499.99
category based on his deposit activity over the prior six months, and
35 percent of outside deposits he receives going forward--regardless of
the size of each individual deposit--will be paid toward his financial
obligations.
The way this system works is further illustrated in the following
examples:
Example 1: Inmate John Doe, who owes federal restitution, attends
his regularly scheduled program review. During this review, his Case
Manager reviews Bureau systems to determine (1) the total amount
deposited into Mr. Doe's commissary account over the prior six months;
and (2) Mr. Doe's commissary account balance.
The Case Manager's review indicates that Mr. Doe has a current
commissary account balance of $600, as well as deposits over the prior
six months of $600 ($100/month). Thus, his IFRP payment obligation
would be 25 percent of each outside deposit he receives while this
payment plan is in effect. After Mr. Doe agrees to this financial plan,
the Case Manager would enter this financial plan into the Bureau's
SENTRY system. While this financial plan is in effect, every time a
deposit is made to Mr. Doe's commissary account, 25 percent would be
withheld and paid toward his restitution obligation.
Example 2: Inmate Jane Smith, who also owes federal restitution,
attends her program review meeting. Her Case Manager determines that
Ms. Smith has an account balance of $200, as well as total deposits
over the prior six months of only $100. Thus, Ms. Smith's financial
plan would reflect that no percentage would be withheld from outside
deposits she receives while the financial plan is in effect.
Example 3: Inmate William Brown, who owes a federal assessment, has
$0 in deposits into his account over the previous six months. He
attends his program review meeting, and has a commissary account
balance of $300. Because his account balance is greater than $250, his
payment plan will specify that 25 percent of each future outside
deposit will be paid towards IFRP. While this plan is in effect, Mr.
Brown receives a $1,200 tax refund deposit; $300 of this deposit will
be paid toward his federal assessment through IFRP.
Example 4: Inmate James Roe, who owes a federal tax debt, has been
on a 0% payment plan for multiple cycles because he receives less than
$249.99 in deposits every six months, and his account balance is less
than $250 at the time of his program review. While this plan is in
effect, Mr. Roe receives a deposit of $5,000 from an inheritance, all
of which he keeps. At his next program review, however, Mr. Roe's
payment plan will be adjusted so that 100 percent of each outside
deposit he receives, until such time as his financial plan is modified
again or he satisfies his financial obligation, will be paid toward
IFRP.
In each of these examples, the inmates' financial plans would also
indicate that 10 percent of their work compensation would be paid
toward the IFRP payment process.
The Bureau's intent in making this revision is to try to require
inmates with greater financial resources to pay more toward their
financial obligations. Admittedly, this system is not perfect. This
proposal uses past deposit history to set a percentage of future
deposits taken for IFRP. The Bureau elected to focus on total value of
deposits (rather than account balances) because the total deposits
figure more accurately depicts the individual inmate's financial
circumstances and because it is already reported by the Bureau's SENTRY
system and used as part of the current IFRP system to develop payment
plans. If IFRP was designed around account balances, there would be a
significant incentive for inmates to spend down their account balances
in advance of the time at which their financial plan is established or
reviewed, in order to evade financial responsibility obligations.
Instead, by utilizing the total value of deposits, the Bureau will
[[Page 102028]]
be relying on a figure that gives the complete picture of how much
money the inmate has available to spend, including on satisfying their
financial obligations.
As the Bureau explained in its January 2023 NPRM, it faces
significant technological, administrative, and other challenges in
establishing any kind of variable-rate system. The Bureau considered a
system similar to progressive taxation, which would apply a lower
marginal rate to amounts below a certain threshold, and higher marginal
rate to amounts above that threshold. This type of proposal would offer
several benefits. It would allow the Bureau to target large account
balances while still preserving a minimum amount of funds for an
inmate's daily and future use. It is also more equitable, recognizing
that an inmate with an account balance of $100 and minimal incoming
deposits is differently situated than one with an account balance of
$10,000 or one with numerous deposits.
However, the Bureau also determined that there were significant
technological, administrative, and other disadvantages associated with
this alternative approach. First, there is the risk that inmates might
maintain deliberately small account balances through unlawful or
illegitimate means (including having money held by other inmates), or
otherwise engage in ``structuring'' of deposits and other transactions,
to avoid paying a higher percentage toward IFRP. In addition, a system
that set cut points based on the balance in an inmate's account
presented the risk of unfairness by treating inmates with similar
balances differently. For example, an inmate whose account balance
totaled $499 might be expected to pay 25 percent of future deposits
towards IFRP, while an inmate whose account balances totaled $500.01
might be expected to pay 50 percent of community deposits towards IFRP.
A ``progressive'' system tied to deposit amounts could mitigate
this latter concern. For instance, such a system might set a marginal
rate of 25% for the first $500 in community deposits during a time
period, with a rate of 75% for any deposits over $500 during the same
span. In that scenario, an inmate who deposited $500 in a 365-day
period would pay $125 (25% of the $500). An inmate who deposited $501
in a 365-day period would pay $125.50 (25% of the first $500, and 75%
of the amount--$1--over $500).
This solution, however, brings technological and administrative
challenges for the Bureau. The Bureau lacks a fully automated process
to ``freeze'' funds or make IFRP withdrawals from an inmate's account,
which prevents the Bureau from implementing any plan that would
automatically adjust amounts withheld from individual deposits as the
amount in the account increases or decreases, or an individual deposit
is above or below a certain point. With the number of deposits received
by the Bureau each day, the Trust Fund system would have to query each
individual account, its balance or deposit history, the inmate's IFRP
status, and tie that to a specific percentage of the deposit to
withhold. Under the current IFRP model, an individual inmate's IFRP
financial plan is first manually entered by a unit team member, and
payments are withdrawn and paid to the correct payee by a Trust Fund
staff member pursuant to the terms of the financial plan the inmate has
agreed to. In developing the financial plan, unit team staff look at
the prior 180 days of financial activity in the inmate's account to
determine what percentage the inmate would be expected to pay; the
inmate then signs the financial plan and agrees to abide by that plan
until the next review. If the financial plan involved variable rates of
withholding of deposits, it would be more difficult for both Bureau
staff to explain and for inmates to understand what they would be
paying.
This SNPRM tries to strike a middle ground between setting a
single, flat rate that applies to all inmates regardless of their
financial means, and a highly sophisticated system that would
automatically adjust withholding amounts based on various factors
(e.g., account balance, total sum of deposits over a specific period).
Under the proposed rule, most inmates would keep a majority of their
outside deposits; only those inmates who receive significant deposits
(e.g., $2,500 or more over a six-month period) would be assessed at a
rate of 55 percent or higher. The Bureau plans to engage in significant
notification and educational efforts for parties impacted by these IFRP
changes when it issues its final rule and associated implementing
policy. As part of those efforts, the Bureau anticipates informing
members of the public (including ``outside'' depositors) that funds
deposited into the account of an IFRP-participating inmate may be paid
toward the inmate's financial obligations, in accordance with the terms
of the inmate's agreed-to IFRP payment plan.
Importantly, financial plans are subject to review and adjustment
at a minimum during every program review meeting. Accordingly, an
inmate who receives a single large deposit may see their financial plan
percentage increase for the next six months. However, once their
deposits return to lower amounts, that percentage can be adjusted
downward by Bureau staff.
Changes to Set-Aside Amounts
In developing this SNPRM, the Bureau's overarching intent is to
establish that inmates with more money are expected to pay more towards
their financial obligations. Under the current IFRP regulation, when
developing an inmate's financial plan, Bureau staff are required to
subtract $450 (i.e., $75 x 6 months, inmate telephone exclusion) from
consideration in evaluating the inmate's available financial resources.
This SNPRM would retain a version of the set-aside, but it does not
explicitly tie it to telephone use for two reasons. First, Bureau
inmates have multiple avenues, including telephone calls, electronic
messaging, and video visiting (where available), to maintain contact
with family and other members of the community, so restricting the set-
aside consideration to just phone calls no longer reflects current
realities. Second, the Bureau recognizes that inmates may choose to
prioritize other purchases, including, for example, over-the-counter
medications purchased from commissary, preferred hygiene products,
hobbycraft materials, or materials for college or correspondence
courses.
Under the SNPRM, an inmate who receives less than $250 in deposits
over the six months prior to program review would generally not be
required to pay any percentage of their outside deposits towards IFRP.
The only circumstance in which this inmate would be required to pay a
percentage of his outside deposits is if the inmate has accumulated a
commissary account balance of $250 or more at the time of program
review. In the Bureau's view, if the inmate has $250 in their
commissary account, regardless of their deposit activity over that time
period, then the rationale behind the set-aside is satisfied, and the
inmate should pay a percentage of his future incoming deposits towards
IFRP obligations. Importantly, that percentage would not be 100
percent, except for those inmates who receive more than $5,000 over a
six-month period. Inmates who participate in IFRP would be guaranteed
to keep a minimum of $250, and for all but the most well-off inmates,
they would also be entitled to keep a majority of their external
deposits in excess of that $250 amount as well.
We will briefly revisit the example of John Doe, who had an account
balance of $600 and was placed on an IFRP
[[Page 102029]]
payment plan that would withhold 25 percent of future ``outside''
deposits. While that plan is in effect, Mr. Doe receives $100 every
month deposited into his account by family members. For each deposit,
he would be able to spend $75 on things like phone calls, electronic
messaging, and commissary, in addition to the $600 he already had in
his account. Meanwhile, $25 of each deposit would be paid towards his
federal restitution. Given costs for phone calls ($.06/minute, with a
limit of 300 minutes per month) and electronic messaging access ($.05/
minute), Mr. Doe would have sufficient funds remaining after his IFRP
payment is deducted to maintain contact with his family and friends
through either of these methods. With respect to commissary spending,
Mr. Doe would likewise have sufficient funds to purchase items in the
commissary at FCI Lompoc I like aspirin ($1.90), hydrocortisone cream
($1.55), and antifungal foot cream ($2.70).
By exempting inmates with minimal funds (i.e., less than $250) from
the requirement regarding outside deposits, inmates will still be able
to communicate with family and purchase some commissary items. While
inmates with limited financial means may have to make choices about how
to spend their funds, the exemption would ensure that they will all
have some funds available.
Specific Treatment of High-Value Accounts
In the Bureau's experience, the vast majority of inmates carry
commissary account balances of under $5,000. As of November 2024, for
example, only two percent of BOP's inmate population of over 158,000
inmates had a commissary account balance of $5,000 or more. This SNPRM
proposes to specifically target Bureau inmates who have significant
account balances, which the Bureau defines as a balance greater than or
equal to $5,000, and who also owe financial obligations. These inmates
would be expected to allot all funds in excess of $5,000 held in their
commissary accounts towards payment of financial obligations, in
addition to 100 percent of all ``external'' deposits received during
times when their accounts are at or above that $5,000 threshold.
As previously noted, only two percent of inmates have account
balances of $5,000 or above, and an even smaller subset of that
percentage owes any financial obligations, and thus would be subject to
this provision. By imposing this requirement only on those inmates who
maintain significant balances, the Bureau is communicating the
expectation that inmates would not be able to use their commissary
accounts to shield their funds from being used to satisfy their
financial obligations.
Example: Inmate James Roe owes federal restitution of $100,000. He
attends his program review meeting with a commissary account balance of
$9,000, and deposits over the prior six months totaling $1,000. He
would be expected to make a one-time payment of $4,000 (the amount in
his commissary account in excess of $5,000), and would be placed on an
IFRP payment plan that withholds 10% of his pay and 100% of his outside
deposits.
The Bureau recognizes that this approach may lead some inmates who
have the available means to seek to deposit their funds in non-Bureau,
external accounts. In these circumstances, alternative financial
collection methods can be pursued by federal, state, and/or local
authorities. This approach may also lead some inmates to decline to
participate in IFRP, but that decision would subject them to the
consequences of non-participation detailed in 28 CFR 545.11(d).
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(c)
In the January 2023 NPRM, the Bureau stated its intention to revise
the proposed rule to explain that the inmate's financial plan would be
reviewed at a minimum during the inmate's program review meeting. This
SNPRM keeps this intended revision, and makes clear that the percentage
of non-institution (community) resources deducted for IFRP payments may
be revised at this time, based on the total value of deposits into the
inmate's commissary account over the prior six months. Modifications to
an inmate's financial plan may be made at times other than the inmate's
program review meeting if, for example, the inmate receives a
significant deposit or loses a source of community support.
The Bureau is also interested in receiving comments on the topic of
whether an inmate should be exempt from IFRP participation for a
certain length of time prior to reentry. For example, the inmate could
be exempt from IFRP participation during the 90 or 180 days prior to
either (1) the inmate's transition to a residential reentry center or
home confinement, or (2) expiration of the inmate's term of
imprisonment, if the inmate is not participating in community
confinement.
Proposed Changes to 28 CFR 545.11(d)
Paragraph (d) of 28 CFR 545.11 lists the effects of non-
participation in the IFRP. In the January 2023 NPRM, the Bureau
proposed to revise this paragraph to remove two listed consequences, as
they are no longer in use, and to add one new consequence. This SNPRM
keeps the changes proposed by the January 2023 NPRM and clarifies how
this paragraph will be structured. As detailed below, the Bureau
continues to invite comments specifically on the linkage between IFRP
and time credits under the First Step Act.
1. Deletion of language requiring quartering in lowest housing
status as an effect of non-participation in IFRP. First, the Bureau
still proposes to remove current paragraph (d)(7), which requires that
if an inmate refuses to participate in or comply with the provisions of
the IFRP, the inmate be quartered in the lowest housing status
available (dormitory or double-bunking, for example).
2. Deletion of language prohibiting placement in community-based
programs as an effect of non-participation in IFRP. Second, the Bureau
still proposes to remove current paragraph (d)(8), which states that if
an inmate refuses to participate in or comply with the provisions of
the IFRP, the inmate would not be placed in a community-based program.
3. Relationship between IFRP and Time Credits under the First Step
Act. The Bureau has taken very seriously the comments it received in
response to the January 2023 NPRM that expressed concerns that
conditioning FSA Time Credits on IFRP participation may take away from
the FSA's spirit and intent to encourage individuals in custody to
prepare for reentry. However, the Bureau maintains that participation
in IFRP demonstrates acceptance of responsibility and is an important
step in preparing for reentry. Accordingly, the Bureau has proposed a
number of the reforms to the IFRP program described above aimed at
minimizing the perceived burden of IFRP participation on those eligible
for FSA Time Credits and addresses the concern that participation may
leave individuals without necessary resources. These proposed reforms
include the exemption of individuals with limited funds ($249.99 or
less) from IFRP payments and the newly proposed progressive payment
system for outside deposits. We therefore invite additional comments on
the relationship between IFRP and FSA Time Credits in light of the
Bureau's efforts to address the stated concerns through these and other
reforms proposed in this rulemaking.
4. Conforming amendments. Finally, the Bureau proposes to renumber
current paragraphs (d)(9) and (d)(11) to
[[Page 102030]]
paragraphs (d)(7) and (d)(8) respectively; to remove current paragraph
(d)(10); which is currently listed as ``reserved''; and to make
amendments to redesignate the numbered list in this regulation to
conform to the changes described in this proposed rule.
Regulatory Certifications
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 (Regulatory Review)
This proposed rule does not fall within a category of actions that
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined constitutes a
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 and, accordingly, it was not reviewed by OMB. The economic impact
of this proposed rule is limited to an existing BOP program that
applies to sentenced inmates in the custody of the Federal Bureau of
Prisons, and does not apply to inmates in study/observation; pretrial
detainees; or inmates in holdover status pending designation.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This proposed rule 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, in accordance with Executive
Order 13132, it is determined that this proposed rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform (Plain Language)
This proposed rule meets the applicable standards set forth in
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to specify
provisions in clear language. Pursuant to section 3(b)(1)(I) of the
Executive Order, nothing in this proposed rule or any previous rule (or
in any administrative policy, directive, ruling, notice, guideline,
guidance, or writing) directly relating to the program that is the
subject of this proposed rule is intended to create any legal or
procedural rights enforceable against the United States.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed 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 (as adjusted for
inflation), 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.
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
certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact upon a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
regulation pertains to the correctional management of inmates committed
to the custody of the Attorney General or the Director of the Bureau of
Prisons. Its economic impact is limited to the Bureau's appropriated
funds, and the funds held by individuals in Bureau custody who owe the
types of financial obligations collectible through this Program. The
Department anticipates that changes made by this proposed rule will
result in additional monies collected through the Inmate Financial
Responsibility Program and paid toward inmates' financial obligations,
although the exact amount is unknown; in fiscal year 2023, the total
collected from inmates through the Program was in excess of $9.2
million (https://www.bop.gov/resources/victim_resources.jsp).
Congressional Review Act
This proposed rule is not a major rule as defined by the
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 545
Prisoners, Work and Compensation.
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, the Bureau proposes to amend 28 CFR part 545 as
follows:
SUBCHAPTER C--INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT
PART 545--WORK AND COMPENSATION
0
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR part 545 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3013, 3571, 3572, 3621,
3622, 3624, 3632, 3663, 3771, 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.
0
2. In 28 CFR 545.11:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (5);
0
b. Add paragraph (a)(6);
0
c. Revise paragraphs (b), (c), and (d)(7) through (9); and
0
d. Remove paragraphs (d)(10) and (11).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 545.11 Procedures.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) Child, spousal, or other familial support obligations;
(5) Other federal government obligations; and
(6) Other (non-family support) state or local court obligations.
(b) Payment of financial obligations. The inmate is responsible for
making satisfactory progress in meeting the inmate's financial
responsibility plan and for providing documentation of these payments
to unit team staff. Ordinarily, a plan for payment of financial
obligations set out in the inmate's Judgment & Commitment order (J&C)
or other court order should be implemented as the inmate's financial
plan. In the event the J&C or other court order does not prescribe a
payment plan or schedule, the following will apply.
(1) Initial classification. During the initial classification and
review of the inmate's financial obligations, unit team staff will also
review the inmate's individual commissary account balance, and
encourage the inmate to make a payment to satisfy any financial
obligations in full. The inmate can make this payment through his/her
commissary account or from other financial resources. For a payment
made through a non-Bureau resource, the inmate is required to provide
documentation of the payment to unit team staff. If the inmate is
unwilling or unable to fully satisfy any financial obligation at the
time of initial classification and review, the inmate will be required
to make a one-time single payment toward his/her financial
obligation(s) if his/her commissary account balance is greater than or
equal to $250. The amount of this one-time payment will be based on the
amount of money in the inmate's commissary account at the time of
initial classification and review:
[[Page 102031]]
Table 1 to Paragraph (b)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage deducted for one-time
Commissary account balance initial payment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0.01-$249.99........................ 0%.
$250.00-$5,000.00.................... 50% of the amount between $250
and $5,000.
$5,000.01 or more.................... 50% of the amount between $250
and $5,000 and 100% of the
amount above $5,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Financial plans. For an inmate who is unwilling or unable to
make a single payment to satisfy the inmate's entire financial
obligation(s) at the time of the initial classification and review,
Bureau staff will establish a financial plan for the inmate. These
financial plans shall be structured as follows:
(i) Allotment of institution resources. The inmate will be required
to pay 10 percent of all pay received for an institution or UNICOR work
assignment to the IFRP payment process. This includes performance pay,
bonus pay, and special bonus pay.
(ii) Allotment of non-institution (community) resources. The inmate
will be expected to allot a specified percentage of all deposits
received from non-institution (community) resources toward the IFRP
payment process.
(iii) Establishing financial plan at program review. During program
review, BOP staff will review the inmate's commissary account balance,
and total value of deposits into the inmate's commissary account over
the prior six months. Based on the total value of deposits over the
prior six months, BOP staff will place the inmate on a financial plan
that specifies that a certain percentage of each future deposit from
non-institution (community) resources will be deducted and paid toward
the IFRP payment process. The specific percentages are reflected in the
following table:
Table 2 to Paragraph (b)(2)(iii)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of future outside
Total value of deposits over prior deposits deducted and paid toward
six months IFRP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$.01-$249.99......................... 0% if commissary account balance
is $249.99 or smaller.
25% if commissary account balance
is $250.00 or larger.
$250.00-$999.99...................... 25%.
$1,000-$2,499.99..................... 35%.
$2,500-$4,999.99..................... 55%.
>=$5,000............................. 100%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iv) Balances greater than or equal to $5,000. For any inmate who
has a commissary account balance greater than or equal to $5,000 at the
time of review of the inmate's participation and/or progress in the
IFRP, the inmate will be expected to pay all of the amount in the
account, in excess of $5,000, toward the IFRP payment process.
(3) Exceptions to allotment amounts. Any allotment that differs
from that described in part (2) of this subpart must be approved by the
unit manager, after consultation with the associate warden, and
documented in writing.
(c) Monitoring. Participation and/or progress in the IFRP,
including the inmate's financial plan, will be reviewed, at a minimum,
during an inmate's program review meeting. The percentage of non-
institution (community) resources deducted for IFRP payments may be
revised at this time, based on the total value of deposits into the
inmate's commissary account over the prior six months. Modifications to
an inmate's financial plan may be made at times other than the inmate's
program review meeting.
(d) * * *
* * * * *
(7) The inmate will not receive a release gratuity unless approved
by the warden;
(8) The inmate will not receive an incentive for participation in
residential drug treatment programs; and
(9) The inmate will not be eligible to earn or apply First Step Act
Time Credits, as described in 18 U.S.C. 3624 and 3632(d)(4), and 28 CFR
523.40 through 523.44.
Colette S. Peters,
Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons.
[FR Doc. 2024-29692 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-P