[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25794-25795]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-11980]
[[Page 25793]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part XI
Department of Justice
_______________________________________________________________________
Bureau of Prisons
_______________________________________________________________________
28 CFR Part 540
Visiting: Notification to Visitors; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 1999 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 25794]]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 540
[BOP 1071-F]
RIN 1120-AA67
Visiting: Notification to Visitors
AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
ACTION: Final Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau of Prisons is amending its
regulations on visiting to make the inmate responsible for having a
release authorization form mailed to the inmate's proposed visitor in
instances where a background investigation is necessary before the
visitor can be approved. This amendment is intended to increase
consistency in Bureau operations and to reduce the cost to the
government in processing additions to an inmate's visitor's list.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Rules Unit, 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 is amending its
regulations on visiting (28 CFR part 540, subpart D). A proposed rule
on this subject was published in the Federal Register September 11,
1997 (62 FR 47894) which requested comment by November 10, 1997. The
Bureau received seven identical comments on the proposed rule. A
summary of these comments and the Bureau's response follow.
The commenters all identified themselves as inmates at one
particular Federal correctional facility. The commenters stated that
they had been informed that all of their visitors (including immediate
family members) needed to complete and return a release authorization
form before being allowed to visit. The commenters stated that to the
best of their knowledge all visitors had to complete and submit the
form. This statement presumably rebuts the assertion in the proposed
rule that the authorization form is necessary when background
information is necessary (for example, when the proposed visitor is not
a member of the immediate family).
The commenters stated that they did not want the responsibility of
sending the forms and then receiving and transmitting the forms to
institution staff. The commenters further stated that they disapproved
of the forms as being intrusive in the lives of other people and that
they believed their sending the form to potential visitors constituted
their personal stamp of approval to the form. The commenters stated
that they wanted the Bureau to have total responsibility for sending
and receiving the forms.
The commenters also objected to the proposal on the grounds that it
constituted an imposition on indigent inmates. The commenters noted
that under Bureau policy inmates without funds were eligible to receive
a certain amount of stamps for their legal and social mail (see 28 CFR
540.21(d) and (e)). The commenters maintained that sending the
authorization forms constituted a business or information gathering use
and consequently was an unwarranted imposition upon such inmates.
Finally, the commenters complained about implementation of existing
procedures, stating that they were aware of instances in which visitors
came to Bureau institutions and were refused admittance presumably
because the returned forms were not properly filed.
In response, the Bureau notes that the regulations in 28 CFR
540.51(b)(3) state that if a background investigation is necessary
before approving a visitor, the inmate may be held responsible for
having a release authorization form forwarded to the proposed visitor.
Ordinarily background information is obtained from potential visitors
who are not members of the inmate's immediate family. Exception to this
procedure may be made when warranted. However, the expectation is that
immediate family members generally do not have to provide background
information. If an inmate believes that the practice at an institution
is not in conformance with Bureau policy, the inmate may bring the
matter to the attention of the appropriate Bureau officials through the
Administrative Remedy Program (see 28 CFR part 242).
As for the regulatory revision proper, former Sec. 540.51(b)(3)
already provided that the inmate could be held responsible for
forwarding the authorization form to the potential visitor. As noted in
the proposed rule, paragraph (b)(3) was being revised in the interest
of reducing costs to the government and for the sake of consistency.
There is no change in the regulations with respect to the return of
completed forms. Completed forms will continue to be returned to Bureau
staff for processing.
Regarding the release authorization form itself, the form is in
compliance with information collection standards. Sending the form to a
potential visitor therefore need not represent the personal views of
the individual sender.
Regarding the impact on inmates without funds, the Bureau believes
that the amendment does not unduly burden the inmate because
correspondence which conveys the release authorization form to a
potential visitor can also serve broader social contact purposes.
Upon due consideration, the Bureau is adopting the proposed
revision to Sec. 540.51(b)(3) as final without change. Members of the
public may submit further comments concerning this rule by writing the
previously cited address. These comments will be considered but will
receive no comment in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866
This rule falls within a category of actions that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has determined not to constitute
``significant regulatory actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 and, accordingly, it was not reviewed by OMB.
Executive Order 12612
This 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, in accordance with Executive
Order 12612, it is determined that this 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, in accordance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this
regulation and by approving it certifies that this regulation 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 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
[[Page 25795]]
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 Sec. 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 foreign-
based companies in domestic and export markets.
Plain Language Instructions
We try to write clearly. If you can suggest how to improve the
clarity of these regulations, call or write Roy Nanovic, Rules Unit,
Office of General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, 320 First St.,
Washington, DC 20534; telephone (202) 514-6655.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 540
Prisoners.
Kathleen Hawk Sawyer,
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), part 540 in subchapter C of 28
CFR, chapter V is amended as set forth below.
SUBCHAPTER C--INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT
PART 540--CONTACT WITH PERSONS IN THE COMMUNITY
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR part 540 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 551, 552a; 18 U.S.C. 1791, 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.
2. In Sec. 540.51, paragraph (b)(3) is amended by revising the
first sentence to read as follows:
Sec. 540.51 Procedures.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) If a background investigation is necessary before approving a
visitor, the inmate shall be held responsible for mailing a release
authorization form to the proposed visitor.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-11980 Filed 5-11-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-P