[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 206 (Monday, October 26, 1998)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 57060-57062] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 98-28629] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Parole Commission 28 CFR Part 2 Paroling, Recommitting, and Supervising Federal Prisoners: Prisoners Serving Sentences under the District of Columbia Code AGENCY: United States Parole Commission, Justice. ACTION: Interim rule; amendments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Parole Commission is amending the Point Assignment Table it uses to determine the suitability for parole of prisoners serving sentences under the District of Columbia Code. The amended Point Assignment Table is intended to clarify the scoring instructions pertaining to prisoners whose crimes involve violence, and to make it clear that a prisoner who has negative institutional behavior can improve his record and gain credit for subsequent program achievement. These amendments are intended to ensure that the Point Assignment Table serves as a reliable measure of risk in the case of violent offenders, as well as an accurate of measure of a prisoner's institutional record. DATES: Effective Date: October 26, 1998. Comments must be received by December 1, 1998. ADDRESSES: Send comments to Office of General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela A. Posch, Office of General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 [[Page 57061]] Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815, telephone, (301) 492- 5959. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Section 11231 of the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-33) the U.S. Parole Commission assumed, on August 5, 1998, the jurisdiction and authority of the Board of Parole of the District of Columbia to grant and deny parole, and to impose conditions upon an order of parole, in the case of any imprisoned felon who is eligible for parole or reparole under the District of Columbia Code. At 63 FR 39176, Part IV (July 21, 1998), the Commission published interim regulations, with a request for public comments, to govern this new function. These regulations contain a Point Assignment Table that measures the risk of recidivism, the seriousness of the risk, and the institutional record presented by each parole applicant. See 28 CFR 2.80(f). Use of the Point Assignment Table since August 5, 1998 has shown the need for clarification in some of the application instructions. The amended Point Assignment Table will: (1) Clarify that points scored under Category III for ``high level violence'' are always added to points scored under Category II for ``violence in current offense;'' (2) clarify Category III by explaining that ``other high level violence'' means any offense involving ``high level violence'' except a homicide or attempted murders; (3) amend Category IV by distinguishing between ``aggravated'' and ``ordinary'' negative institutional behavior; and (4) amend Category V by deleting the requirement for ``acceptable institutional behavior'' so that Category V does not conflict with the provision in Sec. 2.80(d) that permits the deduction of points for positive program achievement despite prior ``negative institutional behavior'' during the same time period. (This provision is intended to encourage prisoners to improve their conduct.) It is to be emphasized that these are not substantive changes to the Point Assignment Table, which has been implemented by the Commission since August 5, 1998, in a manner consistent with the amended instructions. As implemented since August 5, 1998, the Point Assignment Table at Sec. 2.80 appears to be fulfilling the purpose of providing an improved measure of the risk to the public safety presented by candidates for parole. Preliminary figures show that decisions to override the Point Assignment Table and deny parole notwithstanding a favorable Total Point Score have occurred in approximately ten percent of the cases decided since August 5, 1998. On the other hand, approximately 40 percent of the cases decided under the revised Point Assignment Table were granted parole. (These are prisoners without significant prior records or aggravated current offense factors.) This is consistent with historical rates of parole, on both state and federal levels, in the United States. The interim regulations, including the Point Assignment Table at Sec. 2.80, remain open for public comment, and will be subject to revision by the Commission as further experience is gained. Good Cause Finding The Commission is making these amendments effective on the date of this publication for good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This is because the Point Assignment Table is currently being implemented, and the amendments are intended to clarify the Commission's current decisionmaking practice. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Statement The U.S. Parole Commission has determined that this amended interim rule is not a significant rule within the meaning of Executive Order 12866, and the amended interim rule has, accordingly, not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. The amended interim rule will not have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b). List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2 Administrative practice and procedure, Probation and parole, Prisoners. The Amendment Accordingly, the U.S. Parole Commission is adopting the following amendments to 28 CFR part 2. PART 2--[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 28 CFR Part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority: 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1) and 4204(a)(6). Subpart C--District of Columbia Code Prisoners and Parolees 2. The Point Assignment Table at Sec. 2.80(f) is revised to read as follows: Sec. 2.80 Guidelines for D.C. Code Offenders. * * * * * (f) Point assignment table. * * * * * Point Assignment Table ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (Salient Category I: Risk of recidivism factor score) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10-8 (Very Good Risk)...................................... +0 7-6 (Good Risk):....................................... +1 5-4 (Fair Risk):....................................... +2 3-0 (Poor Risk):....................................... +3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Category II: Current or Prior Violence (Type of Risk) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: Use the highest applicable subcategory. If no subcategory is applicable, score = 0. A. Violence in current offense, and any felony violence in two or more prior offenses................................ +4 B. Violence in current offense, and any felony violence in one prior offense......................................... +3 C. Violence in current offense............................. +2 D. No violence in current offense and any felony violence in two or more prior offenses............................. +2 E. Possession of firearm in current offense if current offense is not scored as a crime of violence.............. +2 F. No violence in current offense and any felony violence in one prior offense...................................... +1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 57062]] Category III: Death of Victim or High Level Violence ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: Use highest applicable subcategory. If no subcategory is applicable, score = 0. A current offense that involved high level violence must be scored under both Category II (A, B, or C) and under Category III. A. Current offense was high level or other violence with death of victim resulting:................................ +3 B. Current offense involved attempted murder:.............. +2 C. Current offense involved high level violence (other than homicide or attempted murder):............................ +1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Base Point Score (Total of Categories I-III) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Category IV: Negative Institutional Behavior ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: Use the highest applicable subcategory. If no subcategory is applicable, score = 0. A. Aggravated negative institutional behavior involving: (1) assault upon a correctional staff member, with bodily harm inflicted or threatened, (2) possession of a deadly weapon, (3) setting a fire so as to risk human life, (4) introduction of drugs for purposes of distribution, or (5) participating in a violent demonstration or riot:................................................. +2 B. Ordinary negative institutional behavior................ +1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Category V: Program Achievement ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: Use the highest applicable subcategory. If no subcategory is applicable, score = 0. A. No program achievement:................................. 0 B. Ordinary program achievement:........................... -1 C. Superior program achievement:........................... -2 Total Point Score (Total of Categories I-V).......... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * * * * * Dated: October 20, 1998. Michael J. Gaines, Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission. [FR Doc. 98-28629 Filed 10-23-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-31-P