Proposed Rule2024-29692
Inmate Financial Responsibility Program: Procedures
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 17, 2024
Issuing agencies
Justice DepartmentPrisons Bureau
Abstract
This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking would update and streamline regulations regarding the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program (IFRP).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[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 [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[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: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the
website instructions for submitting comments. The electronic Federal
Docket Management System at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. 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
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.
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 <a href="https://www.justice.gov/d9/press-releases/attachments/2023/04/20/doj_fines_and_fees_dear_colleague_letter_final_with_signatures_0.pdf">https://www.justice.gov/d9/press-releases/attachments/2023/04/20/doj_fines_and_fees_dear_colleague_letter_final_with_signatures_0.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> 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 (<a href="https://www.bop.gov/resources/victim_resources.jsp">https://www.bop.gov/resources/victim_resources.jsp</a>).
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
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 17, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.