[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86-90]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31496]




[[Page 85]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Department of Justice





_______________________________________________________________________



Bureau of Prisons



_______________________________________________________________________



28 CFR Parts 540, 542, and 545



Inmate Control, Custody, Care, etc.; Rules and Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 1 / Tuesday, January 2, 1996 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 86]]


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Bureau of Prisons

28 CFR Part 542

[BOP-1014-F]
RIN 1120-AA20


Administrative Remedy Program

AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Prisons, Justice.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau of Prisons is revising its 
regulations on the Administrative Remedy Program. These regulations 
describe the process through which inmates may seek formal review of 
any issue related to their confinement. The changes are deemed 
necessary in order to attend to increased numbers of remedy requests 
occasioned by the continued growth of the inmate population. Specific 
procedural changes include increases in the time limits set for inmate 
filing of requests and for Bureau responses; additional specifications 
for the provision of assistance to inmates; and increased access to 
Administrative Remedy indexes.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Office of General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, HOLC Room 754, 
320 First Street, NW., Washington, DC 20534.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy Nanovic, Office of General 
Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) 514-6655.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) is amending 
its regulations on the Administrative Remedy Procedure for Inmates. A 
proposed rule on this subject was published in the Federal Register on 
October 3, 1994 (59 FR 50179). The Bureau received comment from six 
individuals. In general, the comments expressed dissatisfaction in 
varying degrees on the following points: informal resolution, time 
limits, handling of appeals and responses by staff, and administrative 
matters (such as the posting of the proposed rule at the institution). 
A summary of the comments and the Bureau's responses follow.
    The proposed rule had included increased time limits for submission 
of an initial remedy request by an inmate (20 calendar days following 
the date on which the basis for the request had occurred, rather than 
the 15 calendar days then currently specified). The proposed rule also 
increased the time limits for agency responses at the institution level 
(20 rather than 15 calendar days) and at the Central Office level (40 
rather than 30 calendar days).
    There were no objections to the increased time limit for submission 
of an initial remedy request by an inmate. Several commenters, however, 
objected to the extension of the time limits for Bureau response, 
stating these were too long, or were ``slanted completely in favor of 
the BOP.''
    Commenters recommended a variety of procedural changes intended to 
extend the effective filing time for submission of inmate appeals by 
linking the filing time to an event other than the date of the Bureau's 
response. For example, commenters suggested that the filing time should 
exclude any time past the date the appeal is handed over to the 
institution mailroom, or the filing time for an appeal should not begin 
until the inmate has actually received a Bureau response.
    The Bureau believes it is not currently practicable to date stamp 
outgoing mail or to verify the date inmates receive Bureau responses. 
The proposed filing times include adequate adjustment for mail time. 
The Bureau also believes that the extended response times for its staff 
are realistic and reasonable. Good reason exists for the different 
filing time limits. While the inmate is responsible for preparing his 
or her individual request(s) or appeal(s), Bureau staff must prepare 
responses to whatever requests or appeals have been submitted from the 
inmate population. Furthermore, in those instances where staff need 
more time to respond to an appeal, staff may currently claim an 
extension as allowed by the regulations (see Sec. 542.14). In claiming 
the extension, staff notify the inmate in writing. Increasing the 
initial time limit for response should reduce the necessity for 
claiming extensions. In either case, the actual time taken to respond 
would likely be the same. With the increased time limit, staff would 
spend less time completing the administrative paperwork necessary for 
claiming extensions.
    Some commenters expressed the belief that the mandatory filing of a 
complaint initially at the institutional level was cumbersome and 
unnecessary. One commenter recommended that an inmate be allowed to 
make an appeal ``directly to the level of management that has 
jurisdiction and the authority to make the decision.''
    The Bureau believes that such amendment is not necessary. The 
principle underlying the administrative remedy procedure is that the 
resolution of problems can be remedied at the lowest possible level. If 
informal resolution is successful, the formal administrative remedy 
procedure would not be necessary. Moreover, those few issues that can 
only be remedied at certain levels are permitted, per policy, to go 
directly to that level. Similarly, responses to emergency appeals are 
expedited. The administrative remedy procedure typically is used to 
address questions regarding the application of policy to individual 
inmates. Provisions for appeal help ensure consistency in application 
and can also serve to measure the adequacy of policy. The primary 
vehicle for inmate participation in the general formulation of Bureau 
policy remains through the rulemaking process (for example, through 
comment on the October 3, 1994 proposed rule).
    Some commenters recommended that either a receipt for a filed 
complaint be given by the correctional counselor who ``accepts'' the 
complaint or that the inmate be allowed to file the initial request 
with the institution's administrative remedy coordinator. These 
commenters expressed the concern that extensive delays may occur before 
the counselor forwards the administrative remedy to the institution's 
administrative remedy coordinator. The Bureau believes that no change 
is necessary, as the counselor is responsible for forwarding the 
administrative remedy to the appropriate staff in a timely manner and 
internal instructions to staff require that this occur ordinarily no 
later than the next business day.
    Two commenters objected to the form of receipt acknowledgements or 
responses returned to the inmate. One of these commenters expressed 
concern that because the receipt acknowledgements are not signed, these 
receipts do not prove that the appeals ever left the institution. In 
response, the Bureau notes that receipts from the regional and central 
offices are generated electronically from those offices. Therefore, a 
receipt acknowledgement indicates that the administrative remedy 
reached its intended destination.
    The second commenter objected to the provisions in 
Sec. 542.11(a)(4) relating to the delegation of signatory authority, 
which had been previously issued as an administrative amendment. This 
commenter stated that, at a minimum, the regulation should require that 
the name and title of the person signing the response be typed below 
the signature rather than have the person sign ``for'' the official as 
is the Bureau's practice in this administrative detail. The commenter 
presumably believes this change is important in the pursuit of further 
judicial action involving an 

[[Page 87]]
inmate's complaint. The Bureau believes its standard procedures for the 
exercise of delegated authority is adequate and no further amendment is 
necessary in this matter.
    One commenter objected to the omission of a requirement that staff 
responses be in good faith, honest, and straightforward, as is required 
for inmate submissions (see Sec. 542.11(b)). There is no necessity to 
address this matter in these regulations because Bureau staff are 
trained professionals governed by the Standards of Conduct for Bureau 
employees, which are sufficient to support the integrity of staff 
responses.
    One commenter objected to a variety of specific administrative 
procedures. Section 542.14(c)(2) states that the inmate shall place a 
single complaint or a reasonable number of closely related issues on 
the appropriate form. This is intended to facilitate indexing of remedy 
requests and to simplify the resolution process by presenting remedy 
requests as discrete matters. The commenter claimed that inmate access 
to forms at one institution was limited by requiring one form to be 
filled out and submitted before staff would issue another to the same 
inmate. We note that this institution practice does not necessarily 
limit access (i.e., it merely requires the inmate to follow through on 
one complaint before starting another). Nevertheless, because the 
Bureau does not wish to encourage such a perception, the Bureau is 
issuing internal instructions to staff advising against such 
institutional administrative practice.
    This same commenter also objected to limiting the length of inmate 
complaints by only allowing one additional page per form. The Bureau 
believes that limiting additions to one page is useful and reasonable. 
This emphasis on brevity along with the above-mentioned requirement 
limiting the inmate to the presentation of a single complaint or a 
reasonable number of closely related issues is intended to encourage 
inmates to submit their concerns in a straightforward manner. The 
commenter also objected to requirements in Sec. 542.14(c)(3) regarding 
the submission of exhibits with a request. The commenter suggested that 
the provision was ambiguous as to the number of required copies at 
different stages of the remedy appeals process. The Bureau's procedure 
is to require only one copy of an exhibit with the request. If the 
inmate appeals a response, the inmate is responsible for furnishing a 
copy of the exhibit with the appeal along with copies of the 
previously-submitted complaints.
    One commentator objected to the provision in Sec. 542.17 allowing 
the administrative remedy coordinator at any level to reject a request 
or appeal. This commenter, presumably focusing on an example at the 
institution level, stated that only the Warden may sign responses and 
consequently should be the only one to reject the request or appeal. 
The Bureau wishes to note that the very purpose of Sec. 542.17 is to 
provide the administrative remedy coordinator with this authority. 
Paragraph (b) of this section provides the inmate with the opportunity 
to correct the defects, when possible, so that the matter can be 
resubmitted.
    Three commenters raised questions about the lack of detail provided 
in these regulations for the informal resolution of complaints. Two 
commenters objected to the lack of a specified time limit for informal 
resolution. One commenter recommended 48 hours as a reasonable time 
period for that purpose. Another commenter stated that paperwork 
associated with informal resolution at one particular institution 
appeared to be duplicative of the paperwork generated for an initial 
request submitted after an adverse decision on the informal resolution.
    In response, the Bureau notes that by its very definition, 
procedures for informal resolution should not be formalized. The 
informal resolution policy is not explicitly detailed in these 
regulations in order to preserve maximum flexibility for institution 
staff in attempting to resolve complaints. As for the particular 
informal resolution procedures at particular institutions, the Bureau 
wishes to preserve the Warden's discretion in formulating these 
procedures and adds language to the rule providing for the exercise of 
the Warden's discretion.
    In response to the concerns over the lack of a specified time limit 
for informal resolution, the Bureau has revised the provisions in 
Sec. 542.14(a) to include informal resolution under the deadline for 
the submission of an initial filing. This is intended to encourage 
quick informal resolution. Because a lengthy period of time for 
attempted informal resolution constitutes a valid reason for the 
granting of an extension in filing time, including informal resolution 
under this deadline should not unduly impair the inmate's ability to 
file the initial request in instances where the informal resolution 
attempt has failed.
    Two commenters raised concerns about the posting of the proposed 
rule changes at one particular Bureau institution, stating that their 
access to the proposed rule, and consequently their ability to timely 
comment on it, were intentionally hindered. We have been assured by 
institution staff that pursuant to Bureau policy, the proposed rule was 
posted in the inmate law library and was also maintained by unit case 
managers. Inmates at this institution were advised through postings in 
their housing units that they could review the proposed rule either in 
the inmate law library or through a request to the case manager. The 
two commenters stated that their requests to review the proposed rule 
were not answered in a timely fashion. The Bureau believes that the 
institution's posting procedures do not constitute intentional 
hinderance to public comment. The two requests in question came from 
inmates in the same housing areas, which suggests that any problem was 
of a local, not systemic, nature. In addition, the proposed rule was 
also available at the institution's law library. In any event, the 
Bureau has considered these comments in finalizing these regulations.
    One commenter, expressing general dissatisfaction with Bureau 
regulations, stated that Bureau regulations were so poorly written that 
two different institutions would interpret them differently on the same 
day to fit their particular desire. It is the Bureau's intent that the 
Administrative Remedy Program helps to ensure the consistent 
application of Bureau rules and policies by allowing for hierarchial 
review of inmate complaints.
    The Bureau of Prisons has determined that this rule is not a 
significant regulatory action for the purpose of E.O. 12866, and 
accordingly this rule was not reviewed by the Office of Management and 
Budget. After review of the law and regulations, the Director, Bureau 
of Prisons has certified that this rule, for the purpose of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354), does not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 542

    Prisoners.
Kathleen M. Hawk,
Director, Bureau of Prisons.

    Accordingly, pursuant to the rulemaking authority vested in the 
Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and delegated to the Director, 
Bureau of Prisons in 28 CFR 0.96(p), it is proposed to amend part 542 
in subchapter C of 28 CFR, chapter V as set forth below.

SUBCHAPTER C--INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT

    1. 28 CFR part 542 is revised to read as follows: 
    
[[Page 88]]


PART 542--ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

Subpart A--[Reserved]

Subpart B--Administrative Remedy Program

Sec.
542.10  Purpose and scope.
542.11  Responsibility.
542.12  Excluded matters.
542.13  Informal resolution.
542.14  Initial filing.
542.15  Appeals.
542.16  Assistance.
542.17  Resubmission.
542.18  Response time.
542.19  Access to indexes and responses.

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4042, 
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; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510; 28 
CFR 0.95-0.99.

Subpart A--[Reserved]

Subpart B--Administrative Remedy Program


Sec. 542.10  Purpose and scope.

    The Administrative Remedy Program is a process through which 
inmates may seek formal review of an issue which relates to any aspect 
of their confinement, except as excluded in Sec. 542.12, if less formal 
procedures have not resolved the matter. This Program applies to all 
inmates confined in institutions operated by the Bureau of Prisons, to 
inmates designated to contract Community Corrections Centers (CCCs) 
under Bureau of Prisons' responsibility, and to former inmates for 
issues that arose during their confinement, but does not apply to 
inmates confined in other non-federal facilities.


Sec. 542.11  Responsibility.

    (a) The Community Corrections Manager (CCM), Warden, Regional 
Director, and General Counsel are responsible for the implementation 
and operation of the Administrative Remedy Program at the Community 
Corrections Center (CCC), institution, regional and Central Office 
levels, respectively, and shall:
    (1) Establish procedures for receiving, recording, reviewing, 
investigating, and responding to Administrative Remedy Requests 
(Requests) or Appeals (Appeals) submitted by an inmate;
    (2) Acknowledge receipt of a Request or Appeal by returning a 
receipt to the inmate;
    (3) Conduct an investigation into each Request or Appeal;
    (4) Respond to and sign all Requests or Appeals filed at their 
levels. At the regional level, signatory authority may be delegated to 
the Deputy Regional Director. At the Central Office level, signatory 
authority may be delegated to the National Inmate Appeals 
Administrator. Signatory authority extends to staff designated as 
acting in the capacities specified in this Sec. 542.11, but may not be 
further delegated without the written approval of the General Counsel.
    (b) Inmates have the responsibility to use this Program in good 
faith and in an honest and straightforward manner.


Sec. 542.12  Excluded matters.

    (a) An inmate may not use this Program to submit a Request or 
Appeal on behalf of another inmate. This program is intended to address 
concerns that are personal to the inmate making the Request or Appeal, 
but shall not prevent an inmate from obtaining assistance in preparing 
a Request or Appeal, as provided in Sec. 542.16 of this part.
    (b) Requests or Appeals will not be accepted under the 
Administrative Remedy Program for claims for which other administrative 
procedures have been established, including tort claims, Inmate 
Accident Compensation claims, and Freedom of Information or Privacy Act 
requests. Staff shall inform the inmate in writing of the appropriate 
administrative procedure if the Request or Appeal is not acceptable 
under the Administrative Remedy Program.


Sec. 542.13  Informal resolution.

    (a) Informal Resolution. Except as provided in Sec. 542.13(b), an 
inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff, and 
staff shall attempt to informally resolve the issue before an inmate 
submits a Request for Administrative Remedy. Each Warden shall 
establish procedures to allow for the informal resolution of inmate 
complaints.
    (b) Exceptions. Inmates in CCCs are not required to attempt 
informal resolution. An informal resolution attempt is not required 
prior to submission to the Regional or Central Office as provided for 
in Sec. 542.14(d) of this part. An informal resolution attempt may be 
waived in individual cases at the Warden or institution Administrative 
Remedy Coordinator's discretion when the inmate demonstrates an 
acceptable reason for bypassing informal resolution.


Sec. 542.14  Initial filing.

    (a) Submission. The deadline for completion of informal resolution 
and submission of a formal written Administrative Remedy Request, on 
the appropriate form (BP-9), is 20 calendar days following the date on 
which the basis for the Request occurred.
    (b) Extension. Where the inmate demonstrates a valid reason for 
delay, an extension in filing time may be allowed. In general, valid 
reason for delay means a situation which prevented the inmate from 
submitting the request within the established time frame. Valid reasons 
for delay include the following: an extended period in-transit during 
which the inmate was separated from documents needed to prepare the 
Request or Appeal; an extended period of time during which the inmate 
was physically incapable of preparing a Request or Appeal; an unusually 
long period taken for informal resolution attempts; indication by an 
inmate, verified by staff, that a response to the inmate's request for 
copies of dispositions requested under Sec. 542.19 of this part was 
delayed.
    (c) Form.
    (1) The inmate shall obtain the appropriate form from CCC staff or 
institution staff (ordinarily, the correctional counselor).
    (2) The inmate shall place a single complaint or a reasonable 
number of closely related issues on the form. If the inmate includes on 
a single form multiple unrelated issues, the submission shall be 
rejected and returned without response, and the inmate shall be advised 
to use a separate form for each unrelated issue. For DHO and UDC 
appeals, each separate incident report number must be appealed on a 
separate form.
    (3) The inmate shall complete the form with all requested 
identifying information and shall state the complaint in the space 
provided on the form. If more space is needed, the inmate may use up to 
one letter-size (8\1/2\'' by 11'') continuation page. The inmate must 
provide an additional copy of any continuation page. The inmate must 
submit one copy of supporting exhibits. Exhibits will not be returned 
with the response. Because copies of exhibits must be filed for any 
appeal (see Sec. 542.15(b)(3)), the inmate is encouraged to retain a 
copy of all exhibits for his or her personal records.
    (4) The inmate shall date and sign the Request and submit it to the 
institution staff member designated to receive such Requests 
(ordinarily a correctional counselor). CCC inmates may mail their 
Requests to the CCM.
    (d) Exceptions to Initial Filing at Institution.
    (1) Sensitive Issues. If the inmate reasonably believes the issue 
is sensitive and the inmate's safety or well-being would be placed in 
danger if the 

[[Page 89]]
Request became known at the institution, the inmate may submit the 
Request directly to the appropriate Regional Director. The inmate shall 
clearly mark ``Sensitive'' upon the Request and explain, in writing, 
the reason for not submitting the Request at the institution. If the 
Regional Administrative Remedy Coordinator agrees that the Request is 
sensitive, the Request shall be accepted. Otherwise, the Request will 
not be accepted, and the inmate shall be advised in writing of that 
determination, without a return of the Request. The inmate may pursue 
the matter by submitting an Administrative Remedy Request locally to 
the Warden. The Warden shall allow a reasonable extension of time for 
such a resubmission.
    (2) DHO Appeals. DHO appeals shall be submitted initially to the 
Regional Director for the region where the inmate is currently located.
    (3) Control Unit Appeals. Appeals related to Executive Panel 
Reviews of Control Unit placement shall be submitted directly to the 
General Counsel.
    (4) Controlled Housing Status Appeals. Appeals related to the 
Regional Director's review of controlled housing status placement may 
be filed directly with the General Counsel.


Sec. 542.15  Appeals.

    (a) Submission. An inmate who is not satisfied with the Warden's 
response may submit an Appeal on the appropriate form (BP-10) to the 
appropriate Regional Director within 20 calendar days of the date the 
Warden signed the response. An inmate who is not satisfied with the 
Regional Director's response may submit an Appeal on the appropriate 
form (BP-11) to the General Counsel within 30 calendar days of the date 
the Regional Director signed the response. When the inmate demonstrates 
a valid reason for delay, these time limits may be extended. Valid 
reasons for delay include those situations described in Sec. 542.14(b) 
of this part. Appeal to the General Counsel is the final administrative 
appeal.
    (b) Form.
    (1) Appeals to the Regional Director shall be submitted on the form 
designed for regional Appeals (BP-10) and accompanied by one complete 
copy or duplicate original of the institution Request and response. 
Appeals to the General Counsel shall be submitted on the form designed 
for Central Office Appeals (BP-11) and accompanied by one complete copy 
or duplicate original of the institution and regional filings and their 
responses. Appeals shall state specifically the reason for appeal.
    (2) An inmate may not raise in an Appeal issues not raised in the 
lower level filings. An inmate may not combine Appeals of separate 
lower level responses (different case numbers) into a single Appeal.
    (3) An inmate shall complete the appropriate form with all 
requested identifying information and shall state the reasons for the 
Appeal in the space provided on the form. If more space is needed, the 
inmate may use up to one letter-size (8\1/2\'' x 11'') continuation 
page. The inmate shall provide two additional copies of any 
continuation page and exhibits with the regional Appeal, and three 
additional copies with an Appeal to the Central Office (the inmate is 
also to provide copies of exhibits used at the prior level(s) of 
appeal). The inmate shall date and sign the Appeal and mail it to the 
appropriate Regional Director, if a Regional Appeal, or to the National 
Inmate Appeals Administrator, Office of General Counsel, if a Central 
Office Appeal (see 28 CFR part 503 for addresses of the Central Office 
and Regional Offices).


Sec. 542.16  Assistance.

    (a) An inmate may obtain assistance from another inmate or from 
institution staff in preparing a Request or an Appeal. An inmate may 
also obtain assistance from outside sources, such as family members or 
attorneys. However, no person may submit a Request or Appeal on the 
inmate's behalf, and obtaining assistance will not be considered a 
valid reason for exceeding a time limit for submission unless the delay 
was caused by staff.
    (b) Wardens shall ensure that assistance is available for inmates 
who are illiterate, disabled, or who are not functionally literate in 
English. Such assistance includes provision of reasonable accommodation 
in order for an inmate with a disability to prepare and process a 
Request or an Appeal.


Sec. 542.17  Resubmission.

    (a) Rejections. The Coordinator at any level (CCM, institution, 
region, Central Office) may reject and return to the inmate without 
response a Request or an Appeal that is written by an inmate in a 
manner that is obscene or abusive, or does not meet any other 
requirement of this part.
    (b) Notice. When a submission is rejected, the inmate shall be 
provided a written notice, signed by the Administrative Remedy 
Coordinator, explaining the reason for rejection. If the defect on 
which the rejection is based is correctable, the notice shall inform 
the inmate of a reasonable time extension within which to correct the 
defect and resubmit the Request or Appeal.
    (c) Appeal of Rejections. When a Request or Appeal is rejected and 
the inmate is not given an opportunity to correct the defect and 
resubmit, the inmate may appeal the rejection, including a rejection on 
the basis of an exception as described in Sec. 542.14(d), to the next 
appeal level. The Coordinator at that level may affirm the rejection, 
may direct that the submission be accepted at the lower level (either 
upon the inmate's resubmission or direct return to that lower level), 
or may accept the submission for filing. The inmate shall be informed 
of the decision by delivery of either a receipt or rejection notice.


Sec. 542.18  Response time.

    If accepted, a Request or Appeal is considered filed on the date it 
is logged into the Administrative Remedy Index as received. Once filed, 
response shall be made by the Warden or CCM within 20 calendar days; by 
the Regional Director within 30 calendar days; and by the General 
Counsel within 40 calendar days. If the Request is determined to be of 
an emergency nature which threatens the inmate's immediate health or 
welfare, the Warden shall respond not later than the third calendar day 
after filing. If the time period for response to a Request or Appeal is 
insufficient to make an appropriate decision, the time for response may 
be extended once by 20 days at the institution level, 30 days at the 
regional level, or 20 days at the Central Office level. Staff shall 
inform the inmate of this extension in writing. Staff shall respond in 
writing to all filed Requests or Appeals. If the inmate does not 
receive a response within the time allotted for reply, including 
extension, the inmate may consider the absence of a response to be a 
denial at that level.


Sec. 542.19  Access to indexes and responses.

    Inmates and members of the public may request access to 
Administrative Remedy indexes and responses, for which inmate names and 
Register Numbers have been removed, as indicated below. Each 
institution shall make available its index, and the indexes of its 
regional office and the Central Office. Each regional office shall make 
available its index, the indexes of all institutions in its region, and 
the index of the Central Office. The Central Office shall make 
available its index and the indexes of all institutions and regional 
offices. Responses may be 

[[Page 90]]
requested from the location where they are maintained and must be 
identified by Remedy ID number as indicated on an index. Copies of 
indexes or responses may be inspected during regular office hours at 
the locations indicated above, or may be purchased in accordance with 
the regular fees established for copies furnished under the Freedom of 
Information Act (FOIA).

[FR Doc. 95-31496 Filed 12-29-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-P