[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
