65428 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Executive Order 13175 

This proposed rule will not have 

Tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian Tribal governments. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

This action does not impose a new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 

U.S.C. 3501–3521. 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Drug traffic control, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR 

part 1308 is proposed to be amended to 

read as follows: 

PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF 

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 

1. The authority citation for 21 CFR 

part 1308 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), 

unless otherwise noted. 

2. Section 1308.15 is amended by 

redesignating paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) 

as paragraphs (e)(2) and (3), and adding 

a new paragraph (e)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1308.15 Schedule V. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) Ezogabine—2779 

* * * * * 

Dated: October 14, 2011. 

Michele M. Leonhart, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2011–27253 Filed 10–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Prisons 

28 CFR Part 524 

[BOP–1155–P] 

RIN 1120–AB55 

Classification and Program Review 

AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Department 

of Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau 

of Prisons (Bureau) proposes to revise 

its regulations on classification and 

program review to ensure that 

classification and program review 

procedures adequately address inmate 

needs. This proposed rule also adds a 

new type of review, the ‘‘progress 

review.’’ A progress review will be an 

abbreviated program review meant to 

focus on an inmate’s programming 

activities. This shortened version of the 

more thorough program review will 

facilitate more efficiently-used staff and 

inmate time, in that it will primarily 

focus on any new or changed aspects of 

an inmate’s initial classification and 

participation in recommended 

programs. Inmates who have 36 months 

or more until their projected release 

date will receive alternating program 

and progress reviews at least once every 

180 calendar days, a practice that will 

allow the Bureau to more efficiently 

utilize staff time and resources. The 

process will also allow staff to devote 

more time and resources to the reviews 

of inmates who are closer to their 

release dates, enabling the Bureau to 

better fulfill its mission to prepare 

inmates for eventual release into 

communities within the United States. 

DATES: Comments due by December 20, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

submitted to the Rules Unit, Office of 

General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 

First Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20534. You may also comment via the 

Internet to BOP at 

BOPRULES@BOP.GOV or by using the 

http://www.regulations.gov comment 

form for this regulation. When 

submitting comments electronically you 

must include the BOP Docket No. in the 

subject box. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Qureshi, Office of General 

Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) 

307–2105. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Posting of Public Comments 

Please note that all comments 

received are considered part of the 

public record and are made available for 

public inspection online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Such information 

includes personal identifying 

information (such as your name, 

address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by 

the commenter. 

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 has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted on http:// 

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. 

Proposed Rule 

In this document, we propose to 

revise the regulations which set forth 

the classification and program review 

rules and to add a new level of review: 

progress reviews. 

Section 524.10 Purpose 

In this proposed section, we explain 

that the purpose of this subpart is to 

explain the Bureau’s process for 

classifying newly committed inmates, 

conducting program reviews, and 

conducting progress reviews. We have 

only revised the introductory paragraph 

of this section, to add the concept of 

progress reviews (which will be 

explained below). The three types of 

reviews listed here will be conducted 

for all inmates except: (1) Pretrial 

inmates, who are covered in 28 CFR part 

551; and (2) inmates committed for 

study and observation. 

Pretrial inmate reviews are not 

described in this subpart because they 

are specifically covered in 28 CFR 

551.107. According to that regulation, 

pretrial inmates are scheduled for an 

initial review by the unit team within 21 

calendar days of the inmate’s arrival at 

the institution, and later reviews are 

conducted at least once every 90 days. 

Inmates committed for study and 

observation do not receive the reviews 

described because they do not receive 

program or work assignments while in 

this status. Such inmates are typically 

committed to the Bureau to determine 

competency to stand trial or for other 

mental health or medical assessments, 

and are inappropriate for assignment to 

work or other Bureau programs. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 65429 

Section 524.11 Types of Reviews 

We propose adding this new section 

to provide descriptions of each type of 

review that is covered in this subpart. 

This section explains that the purpose 

of an initial classification is to develop 

a program plan for the inmate during 

his/her incarceration. The plan will 

ordinarily include work and 

programming activities to help the 

inmate develop skills to transition into 

prison life and to ultimately make a 

successful transition back into the 

community. 

A program review consists of a 

thorough review of the inmate’s initial 

classification and of the inmate’s 

participation in recommended 

programs, and it facilitates 

recommendation of new programs based 

on skills the inmate has gained during 

incarceration. 

A progress review, which will be the 

new type of review added by this rule 

revision, is an abbreviated program 

review to focus on an inmate’s 

programming activities. This shortened 

version of the more thorough program 

review will facilitate more efficientlyused staff and inmate time, in that it 

will primarily focus on any new or 

changed aspects of an inmate’s initial 

classification and participation in 

recommended programs. 

Section 524.12 Process for Reviews 

This proposed section describes the 

process for all three types of reviews. 

An inmate will be notified at least 

48 hours before his/her scheduled 

appearance before the unit team for 

initial classification, program reviews, 

or progress reviews. An inmate may 

submit a written waiver of the 48-hour 

notice requirement to the unit team. 

These concepts have not been 

significantly changed from the current 

regulations. 

This section also reiterates the current 

regulation provisions in § 524.11 to the 

effect that if the inmate refuses to 

appear at a review, the inmate may be 

subject to disciplinary action. However, 

the proposed rule also adds a new 

requirement for staff that is a protection 

of the inmate’s interests: Staff must 

document on the appropriate review 

report the inmate’s refusal and, if 

known, the reasons for refusal, and give 

a copy of this report to the inmate. 

Receiving such a written report of the 

staff’s understanding of the inmate’s 

refusal will preserve that information 

for any subsequent disciplinary action 

that may occur. 

This section also contains a chart 

which describes when each type of 

review will be conducted. The 

requirement for an initial classification 

to be conducted, ordinarily within 

28 days for inmates who are newly 

committed, has not changed. Also 

unchanged is the requirement for a 

program review to be conducted at least 

once every 90 calendar days when an 

inmate is within twelve months of the 

projected release date. 

The chart also explains that inmates 

who have 36 months or more until their 

projected release date will receive 

alternating program and progress 

reviews at least once every 180 calendar 

days. This replaces the previous 

requirement that only program reviews 

be conducted every 180 calendar days, 

although inmates who have less than 

36 months and more than twelve 

months left until their projected release 

date will continue to receive program 

reviews every 180 calendar days. 

The proposed rule will thus create a 

new process whereby inmates who are 

far from their projected release date 

(36 months or more) will receive 

progress reviews instead of program 

reviews approximately once a year. 

As of January 29, 2011, the Bureau 

had 177,780 sentenced inmates in 

custody. Of these, 83,039 had 36 months 

or more left before their projected 

release dates. Therefore, approximately 

46.7% of all sentenced inmates in 

Bureau custody require program reviews 

twice a year under the current rule but 

would only require an annual program 

review and an annual progress review 

under the proposed new rule. The 

Bureau estimates that progress reviews 

will take half the amount of time that is 

required for full program reviews, 

meaning that each switch from a 

program review to a progress review 

will save approximately 15 minutes. 

Given the approximate number of 

inmates who would receive progress 

reviews instead of program reviews 

under the proposed rule, the Bureau 

would save approximately 20,760 hours 

of staff time over the course of a year. 

The inmates affected by the rule 

change will still continue to receive 

program reviews, but instead of 

receiving a full program review twice a 

year, they will receive the full program 

review once a year, as well as a progress 

review six months later. This practice 

will reduce the burden on staff time and 

increase the efficiency and efficacy of 

the inmate review process. The process 

will also allow staff to devote more time 

and resources to the reviews of inmates 

who are closer to their release dates, 

enabling the Bureau to better fulfill its 

mission to prepare inmates for eventual 

release into communities within the 

United States. 

The rule also states that inmates 

subject to an order of removal/ 

deportation/exclusion will receive less 

frequent program reviews. The small 

class of inmates that are under such an 

order tend to require less directed 

guidance and evaluation of their 

participation in BOP programs. 

However, if such inmates require 

guidance, they may request it from 

institution staff or Unit Team. 

Current § 524.11(c) describes Program 

Review Reports. We delete this 

language, as the process for program and 

progress reviews is covered in revised 

§§ 524.11 and 524.12. 

Finally, this section makes no 

substantive change to the language of 

the current regulation indicating that 

each sentenced inmate who is 

physically and mentally able to 

maintain a work/program assignment is 

assigned to a program at the time of 

initial classification. This section states 

that the inmate may choose not to 

participate, unless the program is a 

work assignment or is required by 

Bureau policy, by court order, or by 

statute, but that refusal to participate 

may result in disciplinary action. 

Executive Order 12866 

This regulation has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, section 1(b), ‘‘Principles of 

Regulation.’’ The Director, Bureau of 

Prisons, has determined that this 

proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866, section 3(f), and 

accordingly this proposed rule has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

Executive Order 13132 

This proposed regulation will not 

have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, under 

EO 13132, we determine that this 

proposed rule does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 605(b)), reviewed this proposed 

regulation and, by approving it, certifies 

that it will not have a significant 

economic impact upon a substantial 

number of small entities for the 

following reasons: This rule pertains to 

the correctional management of 

offenders committed to the custody of 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
65430 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

the Attorney General or the Director of 

the Bureau of Prisons, and its economic 

impact is limited to the Bureau’s 

appropriated funds. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100,000,000 or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions were 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined by § 804 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996. 

This rule will not result in an annual 

effect on the economy of $100,000,000 

or more; a major increase in costs or 

prices; or significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and 

export markets. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 524 

Classification of inmates. 

Thomas R. Kane, 

Acting Director, Bureau of Prisons. 

Under rulemaking authority vested in 

the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C 301 and 

28 U.S.C. 509, 510, and delegated to the 

Director, Bureau of Prisons, in 28 CFR 

0.96, we propose to amend 28 CFR part 

524 as set forth below. 

SUBCHAPTER B—INMATE ADMISSION, 

CLASSIFICATION, AND TRANSFER 

PART 524—CLASSIFICATION OF 

INMATES 

1. Revise the authority citation for 28 

CFR Part 524 to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3521– 

3528, 3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 4046, 

4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses 

committed on or after November 1, 1987), 

5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, 1984 as to 

offenses committed after that date), 5039; 21 

U.S.C. 848; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510. 

2. Revise subpart B to read as follows: 

Subpart B—Classification and Program 

Review of Inmates 

Sec. 

524.10 Purpose. 

524.11 Types of reviews. 

524.12 Process for reviews. 

Subpart B—Classification and 

Program Review 

§ 524.10 Purpose. 

The purpose of this subpart is to 

explain the Bureau of Prisons’ (Bureau) 

process for classifying newly committed 

inmates, conducting program reviews, 

and conducting progress reviews. This 

process applies to all inmates except: 

(a) Pretrial inmates, covered in 28 

CFR Part 551; and 

(b) Inmates committed for study and 

observation. 

§ 524.11 Types of reviews. 

(a) Initial classification. The purpose 

of an initial classification is to develop 

a program plan for the inmate during 

his/her incarceration. The plan will 

ordinarily include work and 

programming activities to help the 

inmate develop skills to transition into 

prison life and to ultimately make a 

successful transition back into the 

community. 

(b) Program reviews. A program 

review consists of a thorough review of 

the inmate’s initial classification and of 

his/her participation in recommended 

programs, and it facilitates 

recommendation of new programs based 

on skills or interests the inmate has 

gained during incarceration. 

(c) Progress reviews. A progress 

review is an abbreviated program review 

that focuses on an inmate’s progress 

with his/her programming activities. 

§ 524.12 Process for reviews. 

(a) Inmate appearance before unit 

team: 

(1) Notification before review. An 

inmate will be notified at least 48 hours 

before his/her scheduled appearance 

before the unit team for initial 

classification, program reviews, or 

progress reviews. 

(2) Waiver of notification. An inmate 

may submit a written waiver of the 48- 

hour notice requirement to the unit 

team. 

(3) Refusal to appear. If the inmate 

refuses to appear at an initial 

classification, a program review, or a 

progress review, staff must document 

the inmate’s refusal and, if known, the 

reasons for refusal, on the appropriate 

review report and must give a copy of 

this report to the inmate. Failure to 

attend initial classification and program 

reviews may result in disciplinary 

action. 

(b) When reviews are conducted: 

Inmates who . . . Will receive . . . Timeframe 

Are newly committed, following a 

sentencing or violation of supervision.

an initial classification ................... ordinarily within 28 calendar days of arrival at the institution designated for service of sentence. 

Have 36 months or more left until 

their projected release date.

an alternating program review and 

progress review.

at least once every 180 calendar days. 

Have less than 36 but more than 12 

months left until their projected release date.

a program review .......................... at least once every 180 calendar days. 

Are within 12 months of their projected release date and subject to 

an order of removal/deportation/ 

exclusion.

a program review .......................... at least once every 180 calendar days until their release. 

Are within 12 months of their projected release date.a program review .......................... at least once every 90 calendar days. 

(c) Program participation: Each 

sentenced inmate who is physically and 

mentally able to maintain a work/ 

program assignment will be given a 

work/program assignment at initial 

classification. The inmate may choose 

not to participate in the program, unless 

it is a work assignment or is required by 

Bureau policy, by court order, or by 

statute. If the program is a work 

assignment or is required by Bureau 

policy, by court order, or by statute, 

then an inmate’s refusal to participate 

may result in disciplinary action. 

[FR Doc. 2011–27179 Filed 10–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–05–P 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS