00-18602. Paroling, Recommitting, and Supervising Federal Prisoners: Prisoners Serving Sentences Under the District of Columbia Code

AGENCY:

United States Parole Commission, Justice.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Parole Commission is issuing final rules for parole-eligible D.C. Code prisoners and parolees pursuant to the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997. The final rules incorporate the interim rules for D.C. Code prisoners that took effect on August 5, 1998, as well as new provisions pertaining to D.C. Code parolees. This will carry out the transfer to the U.S. Parole Commission of the authority currently exercised by the D.C. Board of Parole over the parole supervision and revocation process, which the Revitalization Act requires to take place by August 5, 2000. These final rules will constitute, in amended and supplemented form, the complete parole regulations of the District of Columbia.

DATES:

These rules are effective August 5, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pamela A. Posch, Office of General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815, telephone [phone], for information concerning these rules. For inquiries about individual cases and all other matters, please contact [phone].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Under section 11231 of the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33, the U.S. Parole Commission assumed the paroling jurisdiction of the D.C. Board of Parole on August 5, 1998. Interim rules, with a request for public comment, were published at 63 FR 39172 (July 21, 1998), and were amended at 63 FR 57060 (October 26, 1998) and 64 FR 5611 (February 4, 1999). They were republished in their entirety at 65 FR 19996 (April 13, 2000) with a continued request for public comment. The Commission has determined that it is now appropriate to publish these rules as final rules.

The Revitalization Act also requires that the remaining powers and duties of the D.C. Board of Parole (concerning the supervision and revocation of parolees) be transferred to the U.S. Parole Commission by August 5, 2000. In anticipation of this transfer of authority, the Commission published proposed rules, at 65 FR 20006 (April 13, 2000) to govern the Commission's exercise of that additional authority. After careful consideration of the public comment received, the Commission has determined that these proposed rules are also ready for publication as final rules effective August 5, 2000.

Accordingly, the Commission is republishing, as a final rule, the complete Subpart C that sets forth the parole release, supervision, and revocation policies and procedures of the U.S. Parole Commission with regard to District of Columbia Code prisoners and parolees. Pursuant to D.C. Code 24-1231(a)(1), these amended and supplemented rules will replace the rules of the D.C. Board of Parole originally published at 28 D.C.M.R. section 100 et. seq., and will constitute the parole regulations of the District of Columbia as described in D.C. Code 24-1231(c).

Summary of the Public Comment

The Commission received public comment on both the interim and proposed rules that were published on April 13, 2000, at a public hearing held by the Commission on June 19, 2000, and through the submission of written statements and letters. The public comment is summarized below, together with the Commission's views on certain of the issues raised.

Law Student Representation

Much of the comment from law professors and law students concerned the proposed rule at § 2.103(e) that only licensed attorneys be permitted to engage in legal advocacy at parole revocation hearings. This comment made a strong case for the Commission permitting representation by law students in a clinical practice program. Such a provision therefore appears in the final rules.

Initial Parole Hearings

Other comment focused on the problem of delays in initial hearings and in processing grants of parole (which have frequently occurred for prisoners housed in District prisons). Complaints were made about delays to obtain more information and about delays in receiving notices of action. Although the Commission was commended for its rule at 28 CFR 2.71 requiring that initial hearings be held 180 days prior to parole eligibility, the point was made that this deadline is not being met in practice. The complaint was also made that Department of Corrections case managers are not always providing parole application forms, and that all eligible prisoners should be placed on the docket for a hearing, whether or not there has been a waiver of parole. (This proposal appears to reflect a high level of distrust of prison staff.) The Commission was advised by the D.C. Public Defender Service to assume “full responsibility” for docketing eligible prisoners wherever confined. However, the USPC staff does not have the ability to monitor the current location and parole eligibility status of all inmates throughout the D.C. system (including contract facilities), and it therefore does not have the ability to organize parole dockets at the D.C. institutions it visits. In all likelihood, most of these problems will be resolved as more and more D.C. inmates are transferred to federal facilities prior to the December 31, 2001, deadline set by the Revitalization Act. However, some delays are made necessary by the need for the Commission to acquire the basic information that is often missing from inmates' files (e.g., presentence reports). Such delays are ordered only where a responsible release decision cannot be made on the basis of the file materials furnished to the Commission by District officials.

Another complaint was that no account is taken by the Commission of the “dead time” caused by a delayed initial parole hearing when a set-off is ordered. The Commission, however, has expressly provided for situations involving a “substantial delay in holding the initial hearing” at § 2.75(b), so that such “dead time” is in fact compensated for by the Commission.

Much comment was made concerning the prohibition on representatives at parole hearings in D.C. institutions, and concern was expressed that this would extend to private prisons. Our experience thus far, however, is that federal contract facilities are following BOP rules in permitting all types of representatives at parole hearings. (In 1998, the Department of Corrections requested the Commission to keep in place the D.C. Board of Parole's prohibition on representatives at parole hearings held in District facilities.) Moreover, if the Public Defender Service has had to acquire additional attorneys just to cover revocation hearings, it is difficult to understand how legal counsel could be provided to prisoners at ordinary parole hearings on anything like a fair basis.

Rehearings

Other complaints concerned cases in which the D.C. Board of Parole had ordered a rehearing with specific program recommendations, and the USPC subsequently denied parole and ordered a further continuance notwithstanding the inmate's program achievements. However, when such cases have arisen, the prisoners involved are typically serious risk cases whose favorable prison records do not justify grants of parole at the set-off date ordered by the Board. Some commenters appear to believe that the D.C. Board of Parole granted parole more frequently than the Commission does, but no evidence of this was adduced.

Telephone Calls and FOIA Requests

One complaint was made that telephone calls to Commission analysts are not being given satisfactory responses, and that Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests are not being answered on time. The volume of public telephone calls received by the Commission (as to both parole-related and non-parole matters) has been extraordinary. The Commission is currently seeking an appropriate solution for this problem. As to the FOIA, there appears to be a misperception that the FOIA can be used as a mechanism to guarantee prehearing disclosure. The Commission's rules provide that the reason a particular prisoner is making a FOIA request does not give that prisoner priority over other FOIA requesters. 28 CFR 2.56(g). FOIA requests will therefore continue to be processed on a “first come first served” basis by the Commission's FOI unit.

Lack of Programs

Several complaints concerned the perceived unfairness of a guideline system that requires program participation, when D.C. inmates frequently do not have programs. However, at least one commenter understood that 28 CFR 2.80(d) already allows for this by permitting points to be deducted in the Commission's discretion even where “* * * prison programs and work assignments are limited or unavailable.” Under this rule, the Commission will deduct a point or points based on any reasonable indicant of the prisoner's cooperativeness and good behavior.

Appeal Rights

Unfairness was alleged in the absence of any right to appeal a parole decision, as appears in the rules for U.S. Code prisoners. It was alleged that the D.C. Board of Parole (at least in practice) permitted appeals. This is a doubtful proposition. The rules of the D.C. Board of Parole make no mention of appeals, and the Board's occasional practice with regard to reopening cases based upon post-decisional complaints can hardly be viewed as an institutionalized appeal system. At any rate, the USPC does not have the staff resources at the present time to process a full caseload of appeals from D.C. Code inmates along the same lines as appeals from federal inmates under 18 U.S.C. 4215. In compensation, the Commission will continue to require a concurrence of at least two Commissioners for all decisions to grant and deny parole. (Appeals in the federal parole system are normally from parole decisions made by a single Commissioner.)

Prehearing Disclosure

Inevitably, comment was directed to the lack of prehearing disclosure at D.C. facilities. However, prehearing disclosure requires the participation of case managers who are fully trained in federal procedures, which the Bureau of Prisons has but the Department of Corrections does not have. Hence, the Commission is not in a position to institute federal prehearing disclosure procedures in District facilities.

Medical and Geriatric Parole

The Commission was commended for its rules on medical and geriatric parole, as well as for its rule on minimum term reduction applications under D.C. Code § 24-201c.

Victim Participation

One complaint was that it is unfair to prisoners to allow the crime victim to appear at the parole hearing and give information, without the prisoner being able to confront the victim. The Public Defender Service also thinks that there is “disparity” in the rights given to victims to appear and oppose parole as compared with the rights given to friends and supporters of the prisoner. One commenter believes that victims should have told everything at the trial (which does not account for convictions resulting from plea bargains), and considers it unfair to let victims say anything at all. Nonetheless, District of Columbia law gives victims the right to participate in parole hearings, and the Commission has an obligation to follow D.C. law in this matter. If anything, the current opportunities for victim participation have redressed a situation in which crime victims were for too long ignored by the criminal justice system.

Five-Year Continuances

The same commenter also decried the possibility of a maximum five-year continuance (reserved for the most serious cases involving guideline departures). However, the D.C. Board of Parole occasionally ordered continuances even longer then five-years. In the Commission's practice, five-year continuances are limited to a small number of prisoners (under five percent) who have committed exceptionally cruel and violent crimes. Most continuances are for 36 months or less.

Alleged Discrimination

Other comments were received concerning the perceived discrimination of the federal system against D.C. inmates in general, with one commenter alleging that it looks like the “truth in sentencing” eighty-five percent rule is already in effect. Another commenter alleged that there is institutionalized discrimination in the federal system against D.C. Code inmates. With a current parole rate of 35 percent at initial hearings (reflecting the percentage of eligible prisoners with low grid point scores), discrimination is clearly not taking place. The Public Defender Service also complains that hearing examiners are required to withhold giving their recommended decisions to D.C. prisoners while giving them to U.S. prisoners. In the light of recent security issues at the Lorton Complex, the Commission has not considered it prudent to require the examiners to announce their decisions in District facilities (which the D.C. Board of Parole did not do).

Warrants

As to warrants, one comment preferred a “probable cause” standard to the “satisfactory evidence” standard that appears in federal law and rules, and called for the adoption of specific criteria to govern the issuance of warrants. However, there is no legal or practical difference between the two standards. The “satisfactory evidence” standard requires that the Commission be presented with evidence (not just an allegation) which, if sustained, would make revocation of parole appropriate.

Moreover, the Commission has never thought it useful to adopt specific criteria for the issuance of warrants. As stated by the Supreme Court in Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972), a warrant may be withheld for a time despite violations, but may be issued when it becomes clear that the parolee “can no longer be counted on to refrain from anti-social behavior.” This is a sufficient standard for the exercise of the Commission's discretion. Objection was also made to the rule permitting execution of a warrant to be voided in favor of local prosecutions. Because that traditional practice often benefits the parolee by allowing him to deal with his criminal case first, the Commission cannot agree with this comment.

The Revocation Process

Finally, with respect to the Commission's revocation hearing procedures, strong opposition was made to the Commission's dual system of local versus institutional revocation hearings. (See 18 U.S.C. 4214.) Although this dual system was recognized as valid for federal parolees, it was perceived as unfair to D.C. Code parolees, who have traditionally had all revocation hearings held locally. In particular, the requirement that the parolee must request (and qualify for) a local revocation hearing was perceived as an unfair presumption against a local revocation hearing. The Public Defender Service also believes that the criteria for receiving a local revocation hearing are “more stringent” for D.C. Parolees. (They are, in fact, exactly the same as for federal parolees.)

These comments may also reflect some misunderstanding as to the Commission's ability to ensure that all arrested parolees can be jailed locally while awaiting their revocation hearings. Moreover, a parolee who has been convicted of the charged violations (or who has admitted the charged violations) is in a very different legal position from a parolee who is able to contest the charges against him, and thus has a real need for witnesses, cross-examination, and a hearing held locally. Only in the latter case does Morrissey v. Brewer, supra, require a “local” revocation hearing. For other cases, there is no prejudice in receiving an institutional revocation hearing because the fact that parole was violated is already established by the new conviction or admission.

The Public Defender Service also complained that the Commission's time deadlines are insufficient; preliminary interviews should be held within 5 days of arrest and final revocation hearings 60 days from the interview (as opposed to “promptly” and “60 days from the probable cause determination”). The Commission's time deadlines are, however, the same as in federal law (18 U.S.C. 4214). Nonetheless, this comment had a good point that the proposed rules failed to set a deadline for the Commission's decision following the revocation hearing. That omission has been rectified.

The final revocation hearing rules have also been modified to permit parolees to have voluntary witnesses appear at institutional hearings. The rule, however, makes it clear that such parolees cannot expect the Commission to compel the appearance of desired witnesses if an institutional revocation hearing cannot be held locally. It is our expectation that, for the foreseeable future, both “local revocation hearings” (i.e., fully contested Morrissey type hearings) and “institutional revocation hearings (i.e., where the parolee has admitted or been convicted of the charges) will be held locally in D.C. Department of Corrections facilities. Again, however, the Commission has no control over jail housing policies, and institutional revocation hearings may be held in facilities outside the District of Columbia without violating any fundamental right of the parolee.

Implementation

The regulations set forth below will be made effective as final rules on August 5, 2000, and will apply to all prisoners and parolees (including mandatory releasees) who are serving sentences under the District of Columbia Code for felony crimes committed prior to August 5, 2000. The Commission will continue to evaluate these rules (in particular, the rules establishing procedures for the parole revocation process), and will remain open to any suggestions for improvement from judges, practitioners, other agency personnel, and the public at large.

Good Cause Finding

The Commission is making these final rules effective less than 30 days from the date of this publication for good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). August 5, 2000 is the deadline established by the Revitalization Act for the Commission to assume full responsibility for all D.C. Code felony offenders under parole supervision. On that date, the D.C. Board of Parole will be abolished, so the Commission will have to take immediate responsibility for all pending matters, including parole revocation proceedings and requests from supervision officers for warrants and modifications of the conditions of parole. The Commission was not able to have final rules published earlier than today's date because of the many legal and operational issues that have required resolution during the transition process. Although the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA), which will assume its duties as a new federal agency on August 5, 2000, has joined with the Commission in an intensive planning and training process, the problems presented by the District's current criminal justice system cannot be overstated. Finally, these final rules are published on the assumption that certification pursuant to D.C. Code 24-1232(h) will have occurred prior to August 5, 2000.

Regulatory Assessment Requirements

The U.S. Parole Commission has determined that these final rules do not constitute a significant rule within the meaning of Executive Order 12866. The final rules 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), and are deemed by the Commission to be rules of agency practice that do not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties pursuant to Section 804(3)(C) of the Congressional Review Act.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2

• Administrative practice and procedure
• Prisoners
• Probation and parole

The Final Rules

Accordingly the U.S. Parole Commission is adopting the following amendment 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).

2. Subpart C is revised to read as follows:

Subpart C—District of Columbia Code Prisoners and Parolees

2.70

Authority and functions of the U.S. Parole Commission with respect to District of Columbia Code offenders.

2.71

Application for parole.

2.72

Hearing procedure.

2.73

Parole suitability criteria.

2.74

Decision of the Commission.

2.75

Reconsideration proceedings.

2.76

Reduction in minimum sentence.

2.77

Medical parole.

2.78

Geriatric parole.

2.79

Good time forfeiture.

2.80

Guidelines for D.C. Code offenders.

2.81

Reparole decisions.

2.82

Effective date of parole.

2.83

Release planning.

2.84

Release to other jurisdictions.

2.85

Conditions of release.

2.86

Release on parole; rescission for misconduct.

2.87

Mandatory release.

2.88

Confidentiality of parole records.

2.89

Miscellaneous provisions.

2.90

Prior orders of the Board of Parole.

2.91

Supervision responsibility.

2.92

Jurisdiction of the Commission.

2.93

Travel approval.

2.94

Supervision reports to Commission.

2.95

Release from active supervision.

2.96

Order of release.

2.97

Withdrawal of order of release.

2.98

Summons to appear or warrant for retaking of parolee.

2.99

Execution of warrant and service of summons.

2.100

Warrant placed as detainer and dispositional review.

2.101

Revocation; preliminary interview.

2.102

Place of revocation hearing.

2.103

Revocation hearing procedure.

2.104

Issuance of subpoena for appearance of witnesses or production of documents.

2.105

Revocation decisions.

2.106

Youth Rehabilitation Act.

2.107

Interstate Compact.

Subpart C—District of Columbia Code: Prisoners and Parolees

§ 2.70

Authority and functions of the U.S. Parole Commission with respect to District of Columbia Code offenders.

(a) The U.S. Parole Commission shall exercise authority over District of Columbia Code offenders pursuant to section 11231 of the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33, 111 Stat. 712, and D.C. Code 24-209. The rules in this subpart shall govern the operation of the U.S. Parole Commission with respect to D.C. Code offenders and shall constitute the parole rules of the District of Columbia, as amended and supplemented pursuant to section 11231(a)(1) of the Act.

(b) The Commission shall have sole authority to grant parole, and to establish the conditions of release, for all District of Columbia Code prisoners who are serving sentences for felony offenses, and who are eligible for parole by statute, including offenders who have been returned to prison upon the revocation of parole or mandatory release. (D.C. Code 24-208). The above authority shall include youth offenders who are committed to prison for treatment and rehabilitation based on felony convictions under the D.C. Code. (D.C. Code 24-804(a).)

(c) The Commission shall have authority to recommend to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia a reduction in the minimum sentence of a District of Columbia Code prisoner, if the Commission deems such recommendation to be appropriate. (D.C. Code 24-201(c).)

(d) The Commission shall have authority to grant parole to a prisoner who is found to be geriatric, permanently incapacitated, or terminally ill, notwithstanding the minimum term imposed by the sentencing court. (D.C. Code 24-263 through 267.)

(e) The Commission shall have authority over all District of Columbia Code felony offenders who have been released to parole or mandatory release supervision, including the authority to return such offenders to prison upon an order of revocation. (D.C. Code 24-206.)

§ 2.71

Application for parole.

(a) A prisoner (including a committed youth offender) desiring to apply for parole shall execute an application form as prescribed by the Commission. Such forms shall be available at each institution and shall be provided to a prisoner who is eligible for parole consideration. The Commission may then conduct an initial hearing or grant an effective date of parole on the record. A prisoner who receives an initial hearing need not apply for subsequent hearings.

(b) To the extent practicable, the initial hearing for an eligible adult prisoner who has applied for parole shall be held at least 180 days prior to such prisoner's date of eligibility for parole. The initial hearing for a committed youth offender shall be scheduled during the first 120 days after admission to the institution that is responsible for developing his rehabilitative program.

(c) A prisoner may knowingly and intelligently waive any parole consideration on a form provided for that purpose. A prisoner who declines either to apply for or waive parole consideration shall be deemed to have waived parole consideration.

(d) A prisoner who waives parole consideration may later apply for parole and be heard during the next visit of the Commission to the institution at which the prisoner is confined, provided that the prisoner has applied for parole at least 60 days prior to the first day of the month in which such visit of the Commission occurs. In no event, however, shall such prisoner be heard at an earlier date than that set forth in paragraph (b) of this section.

§ 2.72

Hearing procedure.

(a) Each eligible prisoner for whom an initial hearing has been scheduled shall appear in person before an examiner of the Commission. The examiner shall review with the prisoner the guidelines at § 2.80, and shall discuss with the prisoner such information as the examiner deems relevant, including the prisoner's offense behavior, criminal history, institutional record, health status, release plans, and community support. If the examiner determines that the available file material is not adequate for this purpose the examiner may order the hearing to be postponed to the next docket so that the missing information can be requested.

(b) Parole hearings may be held in District of Columbia facilities (including District of Columbia contract facilities) and federal facilities (including federal contract facilities).

(c) A prisoner appearing for a parole hearing in a federal facility (including federal contract facilities) may have a representative pursuant to § 2.13(b). A prisoner appearing for a parole hearing in any other facility shall not be accompanied by counsel or any other person (except a staff member of the facility), except in such facilities as the Commission may designate as suitable for the appearance of representatives.

(d) Prehearing disclosure of file material pursuant to § 2.55 will be available to prisoners and their representatives only in the case of prisoners confined in federal facilities (including federal contract facilities).

(e) A victim of a crime, or a representative of the immediate family of a victim if the victim has died, shall have the right:

(1) To be present at the parole hearings of each offender who committed the crime, and

(2) To testify and/or offer a written or recorded statement as to whether or not parole should be granted, including information and reasons in support of such statement. A written statement may be submitted at the hearing or provided separately. The prisoner may be excluded from the hearing room during the appearance of a victim or representative who gives testimony. In lieu of appearing at a parole hearing, a victim or representative may request permission to appear before an examiner (or other staff member), who shall record and summarize the victim's or representative's testimony. Whenever new and significant information is provided under this rule, the hearing examiner will summarize the information at the parole hearing and will give the prisoner an opportunity to respond. Such summary shall be consistent with a reasonable request for confidentiality by the victim or representative.

(f) Attorneys, family members, relatives, friends of the prisoner, or other interested persons desiring to submit information pertinent to any prisoner, may do so at any time, but such information must be received by the Commission at least 30 days prior to a scheduled hearing in order to be considered at that hearing. Such persons may also request permission to appear at the offices of the Commission to speak to a Commission staff member, provided such request is received at least 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing. The purpose of this office visit will be to supplement the Commission's record with pertinent factual information concerning the prisoner, which shall be placed in the record for consideration at the hearing. An office visit at a time other than set forth in this paragraph may be authorized only if the Commission finds good cause based upon a written request setting forth the nature of the information to be discussed. See § 2.22.

(g) A full and complete recording of every parole hearing shall be retained by the Commission. Upon a request pursuant to § 2.56, the Commission shall make available to any eligible prisoner such record as the Commission has retained of the hearing.

(h) Because parole decisions must be reached through a record-based hearing and voting process, no contacts shall be permitted between any person attempting to influence the Commission's decision-making process, and the examiners and Commissioners of the Commission, except as expressly provided in this subpart.

§ 2.73

Parole suitability criteria.

(a) In accordance with D.C. Code 24-204(a), the Commission shall be authorized to release a prisoner on parole in its discretion after the prisoner has served the minimum term of the sentence imposed, if the following criteria are met:

(1) The prisoner has substantially observed the rules of the institution;

(2) There is a reasonable probability that the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating the law; and

(3) In the opinion of the Commission, the prisoner's release is not incompatible with the welfare of society.

(b) It is the policy of the Commission with respect to District of Columbia Code offenders that the minimum term imposed by the sentencing court presumptively satisfies the need for punishment for the crime of which the prisoner has been convicted, and that the responsibility of the Commission is to account for the degree and the seriousness of the risk that the release of the prisoner would entail. This responsibility is carried out by reference to the Salient Factor Score and the Point Assignment Table at § 2.80. However, there may be exceptional cases in which the gravity of the offense is sufficient to warrant an upward departure from § 2.80 and denial of parole.

§ 2.74

Decision of the Commission.

(a) Following each initial or subsequent hearing, the Commission shall render a decision granting or denying parole, and shall provide the prisoner with a notice of action that includes an explanation of the reasons for the decision. The decision shall ordinarily be issued within 21 days of the hearing, excluding weekends and holidays.

(b) Whenever a decision is rendered within the applicable guideline established in this subpart, it will be deemed a sufficient explanation of the Commission's decision for the notice of action to set forth how the guideline was calculated. If the decision is a departure from the guidelines, the notice of action shall include the reasons for such departure.

(c) Relevant issues of fact shall be resolved by the Commission in accordance with § 2.19(c). All final parole decisions (granting, denying, or revoking parole) shall be based on the concurrence of two Commissioner votes, except that three Commissioner votes shall be required if the decision differs from the decision recommended by the examiner panel by more than six months. A final decision releasing a parolee from active supervision shall also be based on the concurrence of two Commissioner votes. All other decisions may be based on a single Commissioner vote, except as expressly provided in these rules.

§ 2.75

Reconsideration proceedings.

(a) If the Commission denies parole, it shall establish an appropriate reconsideration date in accordance with the provisions of § 2.80. The prisoner shall be given a rehearing during the month specified by the Commission, or on the docket of hearings immediately preceding that month if no docket of hearings is scheduled for the month specified. If the prisoner's mandatory release date will occur before the reconsideration date deemed appropriate by the Commission pursuant to § 2.80, the Commission may order that the prisoner be released by the expiration of his sentence less good time (“continue to expiration”).

(b) The first reconsideration date shall be calculated from the prisoner's eligibility date, except that in the case of a youth offender or any prisoner who has waived the initial hearing, the first reconsideration date shall be calculated from the date the initial hearing is held. In all cases, any subsequent reconsideration date shall be calculated from the date of the last hearing. In the case of a waiver or substantial delay in holding the initial hearing, the Commission may conduct a combined initial hearing and such rehearings nunc pro tunc as would otherwise have been held during the delay.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, the Commission shall not set a reconsideration date in excess of five years from the date of the prisoner's last hearing, nor shall the Commission continue a prisoner to the expiration of his or her sentence if more than five years remains from the date of the last hearing until the prisoner's scheduled mandatory release. The scheduling of a reconsideration date does not imply that parole will be granted at such hearing.

(d) Prior to the parole reconsideration date, the Commission shall review the prisoner's record, including an institutional progress report which shall be submitted 60 days prior to the hearing. Based on its review of the record, the Commission may grant an effective date of parole without conducting the scheduled in-person hearing.

(e) Notwithstanding a previously established reconsideration date, the Commission may also reopen any case for a special reconsideration hearing, as provided in § 2.28, upon the receipt of new and significant information concerning the prisoner.

§ 2.76

Reduction in minimum sentence.

(a) A prisoner who has served three or more years of the minimum term of his or her sentence may request the Commission to file an application with the sentencing court for a reduction in the minimum term pursuant to D.C. Code 24-201c. The prisoner's request to the Commission shall be in writing and shall state the reasons that the prisoner believes such request should be granted. The Commission shall require the submission of a special progress report before approving such a request.

(b) Approval of a prisoner's request under this section shall require the concurrence of a majority of the Commissioners holding office.

(c) Pursuant to D.C. Code 24-201c, the Commission may file an application to the sentencing court for a reduction of a prisoner's minimum term if the Commission finds that:

(1) The prisoner has completed three years of the minimum term imposed by the court;

(2) The prisoner has shown, by report of the responsible prison authorities, an outstanding response to the rehabilitative program(s) of the institution;

(3) The prisoner has fully observed the rules of each institution in which the prisoner has been confined;

(4) The prisoner appears to be an acceptable risk for parole based on both the prisoner's pre- and post-incarceration record; and

(5) Service of the minimum term imposed by the court does not appear necessary to achieve appropriate punishment and deterrence.

(d) If the Commission approves a prisoner's request under this section, an application for a reduction in the prisoner's minimum term shall be forwarded to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for filing with the sentencing court. If the U.S. Attorney objects to the Commission's recommendation, the U.S. Attorney shall provide the government's objections in writing for consideration by the Commission. If, after consideration of the material submitted, the Commission declines to reconsider its previous decision, the U.S. Attorney shall file the application with the sentencing court.

(e) If a prisoner's request under this section is denied by the Commission, there shall be a waiting period of two years before the Commission will again consider the prisoner's request, absent exceptional circumstances.

§ 2.77

Medical parole.

(a) Upon receipt of a report from the institution in which the prisoner is confined that the prisoner is terminally ill, or is permanently and irreversibly incapacitated by a physical or medical condition that is not terminal, the Commission shall determine whether or not to release the prisoner on medical parole. Release on medical parole may be ordered by the Commission at any time, whether or not the prisoner has completed his or her minimum sentence. Consideration for medical parole shall be in addition to any other parole for which a prisoner may be eligible.

(b) A prisoner may be granted a medical parole on the basis of terminal illness if:

(1) The institution's medical staff has provided the Commission with a reasonable medical judgment that the prisoner is within six months of death due to an incurable illness or disease; and

(2) The Commission finds that:

(i) The prisoner will not be a danger to himself or others; and

(ii) Release on parole will not be incompatible with the welfare of society.

(c) A prisoner may be granted a medical parole on the basis of permanent and irreversible incapacitation only if the Commission finds that:

(1) The prisoner will not be a danger to himself or others because his condition renders him incapable of continued criminal activity; and

(2) Release on parole will not be incompatible with the welfare of society.

(d) The seriousness of the prisoner's crime shall be considered in determining whether or not a medical parole should be granted prior to completion of the prisoner's minimum sentence.

(e) A prisoner, or the prisoner's representative, may apply for a medical parole by submitting an application to the institution case management staff, who shall forward the application, accompanied by a medical report and any recommendations, within 15 days. The Commission shall render a decision within 15 days of receiving the application and report.

(f) A prisoner, the prisoner's representative, or the institution may request the Commission to reconsider its decision on the basis of changed circumstances.

(g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section :

(1) A prisoner who has been convicted of first degree murder or who has been sentenced for a crime committed while armed under D.C. Code 22-2903, 22-3202, or 22-3204(b), shall not be eligible for medical parole (D.C. Code 24-267); and

(2) A prisoner shall not be eligible for medical parole on the basis of a physical or medical condition that existed at the time the prisoner was sentenced (D.C. Code 24-262).

§ 2.78

Geriatric parole.

(a) Upon receipt of a report from the institution in which the prisoner is confined that a prisoner who is at least 65 years of age has a chronic infirmity, illness, or disease related to aging, the Commission shall determine whether or not to release the prisoner on geriatric parole. Release on geriatric parole may be ordered by the Commission at any time, whether or not the prisoner has completed his or her minimum sentence. Consideration for geriatric parole shall be in addition to any other parole for which a prisoner may be eligible.

(b) A prisoner may be granted a geriatric parole if the Commission finds that:

(1) There is a low risk that the prisoner will commit new crimes; and

(2) The prisoner's release would not be incompatible with the welfare of society.

(c) The seriousness of the prisoner's crime, and the age at which it was committed, shall be considered in determining whether or not a geriatric parole should be granted prior to completion of the prisoner's minimum sentence.

(d) A prisoner, or a prisoner's representative, may apply for a geriatric parole by submitting an application to the institution case management staff, who shall forward the application, accompanied by a medical report and any recommendations, within 30 days. The Commission shall render a decision within 30 days of receiving the application and report.

(e) In determining whether or not to grant a geriatric parole, the Commission shall consider the following factors (D.C. Code 24-265(c)(1)-(7)):

(1) Age of the prisoner;

(2) Severity of illness, disease, or infirmities;

(3) Comprehensive health evaluation;

(4) Institutional behavior;

(5) Level of risk for violence;

(6) Criminal history; and

(7) Alternatives to maintaining geriatric long-term prisoners in traditional prison settings.

(f) A prisoner, the prisoner's representative, or the institution, may request the Commission to reconsider its decision on the basis of changed circumstances.

(g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section:

(1) A prisoner who has been convicted of first degree murder or who has been sentenced for a crime committed while armed under D.C. Code 22-2903, 22-3202, or 22-3204(b), shall not be eligible for geriatric parole (D.C. Code 24-267); and (2) A prisoner shall not be eligible for geriatric parole on the basis of a physical or medical condition that existed at the time the prisoner was sentenced (D.C. Code 24-262).

§ 2.79

Good time forfeiture.

Although a forfeiture of good time will not bar a prisoner from receiving a parole hearing, D.C. Code 24-204 permits the Commission to parole only those prisoners who have substantially observed the rules of the institution. Consequently, the Commission will consider a grant of parole for a prisoner with forfeited good time only after a thorough review of the circumstances underlying the disciplinary infraction(s). The Commission must be satisfied that the prisoner has served a period of imprisonment sufficient to outweigh the seriousness of the prisoner's misconduct.

§ 2.80

Guidelines for D.C. Code offenders.

(a) Introduction. In determining whether an eligible prisoner should be paroled, the Commission shall apply the guidelines set forth in this section. The guidelines assign numerical values to the pre- and post-incarceration factors described in the Point Assignment Table set forth in paragraph (f) of this section. Decisions outside the guidelines may be made, where warranted, pursuant to paragraph (m) of this section.

(b) Salient factor score and criminal record. The prisoner's Salient Factor Score shall be determined by reference to the Salient Factor Scoring Manual in § 2.20. The Salient Factor Score is used to assist the Commission in assessing the probability that an offender will live and remain at liberty without violating the law. The prisoner's record of criminal conduct (including the nature and circumstances of the current offense) shall be used to assist the Commission in determining the probable seriousness of the recidivism that is predicted by the Salient Factor Score.

(c) Disciplinary infractions. The Commission shall assess whether the prisoner has been found guilty of committing disciplinary infractions while under confinement for the current offense. The Commission shall refer to the offense classification tables of the D.C. Department of Corrections or the Bureau of Prisons, as applicable, in determining whether the prisoner's disciplinary record should be counted on the point score. A single Class I or Code 100 offense, or two or more Class II or Code 200 offenses, shall be counted as negative institutional behavior at an initial hearing or any rehearing. A persistent record of lesser offenses may also be counted as negative institutional behavior at an initial hearing or a rehearing. At initial hearings, an infraction free period of at least three years preceding the date of the hearing may be considered by the Commission as sufficient to exclude from consideration a previous record of Class I (or Code 100) or Class II (or Code 200) offenses, provided that such offenses would result in not more than one point added to the prisoner's score.

(d) Program achievement. The Commission shall assess whether the prisoner has demonstrated ordinary or superior achievement in the area of prison programs, industries, or work assignments while under confinement for the current offense. Where prison programs and work assignments are limited or unavailable, the Commission may exercise discretion based on the prisoner's record of behavior. Points may be deducted for program achievement regardless of whether points have been added for negative institutional behavior during the same period.

(e) Implementation. These guidelines shall be applied to all prisoners who are given initial parole hearings on or after August 5, 1998. For prisoners whose initial hearings were held prior to August 5, 1998, the Commission shall render its decisions by reference to the guidelines applied by the D.C. Board of Parole. However, when a decision outside such guidelines has been made by the Board, or is ordered by the Commission, the Commission may determine the appropriateness and extent of the departure by comparison with the guidelines in this section. The Commission may also correct any error in the calculation of the D.C. Board's guidelines.

(f) Point Assignment Table. Add the applicable points from Categories I-III to determine the base point score. Then add or subtract the points from Categories IV and V to determine the total point score.

Point Assignment Table

	Salient factor score
Category I: Risk of Recidivism
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
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, conspiracy to murder, solicitation to murder, or any willful violence in which the victim survived despite death having been the most probable result at the time the offense was committed	+2
C. Current offense involved high level violence (other than the behaviors described above)	+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)

(g) Definitions and instructions for application of point assignment table.

(1) Salient factor score means the salient factor score set forth at § 2.20.

(2) High level violence in Category III means any of the following offenses

(i) Murder;

(ii) Voluntary manslaughter;

(iii) Arson of a building in which a person other than the offender was present or likely to be present at the time of the offense;

(iv) Forcible rape or forcible sodomy (first degree sexual abuse);

(v) Kidnapping, hostage taking, or any armed abduction of a victim during a carjacking or other offense;

(vi) Burglary of a residence while armed with any weapon if a victim was in the residence during the offense;

(vii) Obstruction of justice through violence or threats of violence;

(viii) Any offense involving sexual abuse of a person less than sixteen years of age;

(ix) Mayhem, malicious disfigurement, or any offense defined as other violence in paragraph (g)(4) of this section that results in serious bodily injury as defined in paragraph (g)(3) of this section;

(x) Any offense defined as other violence in paragraph (g)(4) of this section which the offender intentionally discharged a firearm;

(3) Serious bodily injury means bodily injury that involves a substantial risk of death, unconsciousness, extreme physical pain, protracted and obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty.

(4) Other violence means any of the following felony offenses that does not qualify as high level violence—

(i) Robbery;

(ii) Residential burglary;

(iii) Felony assault;

(iv) Felony offenses involving a threat, or risk, of bodily harm;

(v) Felony offenses involving sexual abuse or sexual contact;

(vi) Involuntary manslaughter (excluding negligent homicide).

(5) Attempts, conspiracies, and solicitations shall be scored by reference to the substantive offense that was the object of the attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation; except that Category IIIA shall apply only if death actually resulted.

(6) Current offense means any criminal behavior that is either:

(i) Reflected in the offense of conviction, or

(ii) Is not reflected in the offense of conviction but is found by the Commission to be related to the offense of conviction (i.e., part of the same course of conduct as the offense of conviction). In probation violation cases, the current offense includes both the original offense and the violation offense, except that the original offense shall be scored as a prior conviction (with a prior commitment) rather than as part of the current offense, if the prisoner served more than six months in prison for the original offense before his probation commenced.

(7) Category IIE applies whenever a firearm is possessed by the offender during, or is used by the offender to commit, any offense that is not scored under Category II(A-D). Category IIE also applies when the current offense is felony unlawful possession of a firearm and there is no other current offense. Possession for purposes of Category IIE includes constructive possession.

(8) Category IIIA applies if the death of a victim is:

(i) Caused by the offender, or

(ii) Caused by an accomplice and the killing was planned or approved by the offender in furtherance of a joint criminal venture.

(9) In some cases, negative institutional behavior that involves violence will result in a higher score if scored as an additional current offense under Categories II and/or III, than if scored under Category IVA. In such cases, the prisoner's point score is recalculated to reflect the conduct as an additional current offense under Categories II and/or III, rather than as a disciplinary infraction under Category IVA. For example, the attempted murder of another inmate will result in a higher score when treated as an additional current offense under Categories II and III, if the offense of conviction was scored under Category IIC only as violence in current offense. If negative institutional behavior is treated as an additional current offense, points may nonetheless be assessed under Category IVA or B for other disciplinary infractions.

(10) Superior Program Achievement means program achievement that is beyond the level that the prisoner might ordinarily be expected to accomplish.

(h) Guidelines for Decisions at Initial Hearing—Adult Offenders. In considering whether to parole an adult offender at an initial hearing, the Commission shall determine the offender's total point score and then consult the following guidelines for the appropriate action:

Total Points Guideline Recommendation

(1) IF POINTS =0: Parole at initial hearing with low level of supervision indicated.

(2) IF POINTS =1: Parole at initial hearing with high level of supervision indicated.

(3) IF POINTS =2: Parole at initial hearing with highest level of supervision indicated.

(4) IF POINTS =3+: Deny parole at initial hearing and schedule rehearing in accordance with § 2.75(c) and the time ranges set forth in paragraph (j) of this section.

(i) Guidelines for Decisions at Initial Hearing—Youth Offenders. In considering whether to parole a youth offender at an initial hearing, the Commission shall determine the youth offender's total point score and then consult the following guidelines for the appropriate action:

Total points	Guideline recommendation
(1) If Points=0	Parole at initial hearing with low level of supervision indicated.
(2) If Points=1	Parole at initial hearing with high level of supervision indicated.
(3) If Points=2	Parole at initial hearing with highest level of supervision indicated.
(4) If Points=3+	Deny parole at initial hearing and schedule rehearing in accordance with § 2.75(c) and the time ranges set forth in paragraph (j) of this section.

(i) Guidelines for Decisions at Initial Hearing—Youth Offenders. In considering whether to parole a youth offender at an intial hearing, the Commission shall determine the youth offender's total point score and then consult the following guidelines for the approprate action.

Total points	Guideline recommendation
(1) If Points=0	Parole at initial hearing with conditions established to address treatment needs.
(2) If Points=1+	Deny parole at initial hearing and schedule a rehearing based on estimated time to achieve program objectives or by reference to the time ranges in paragraph (j) of this section, whichever is less.

(j) Guidelines for Time to Rehearing—Adult Offenders. (1) If parole is denied or rescinded, the time to the subsequent hearing for an adult offender shall be determined by the following guidelines:

Base point score (categories I through III)	Months to rehearing
0-4	12-18
5	18-24
6	18-24
7	18-24
8	18-24
9	22-28
10	26-32

(2) The time to a rehearing shall be determined by the prisoner's base point score, and not by the total point score at the current hearing, which indicates only whether parole should be granted or denied.

Exception: In the case of institutional misconduct deemed insufficiently serious to warrant the addition of one or more points for negative institutional behavior, the Commission may nonetheless deny or rescind parole and render a decision based on the guideline ranges at § 2.36.

(3) At any initial hearing or rehearing, if the prisoner's total point score is 4 or less, the Commission may order both a rehearing date and a presumptive parole date that is not more than 9 months from the rehearing date. Such presumptive date may be converted to a parole effective date following the rehearing, or the case may be reopened based on new favorable information and a parole effective date granted on the record.

(k) Guidelines for Decisions at Subsequent Hearing—Adult Offenders. In determining whether to parole an adult offender at a rehearing or rescission hearing, the Commission shall take the total point score from the initial hearing or last rehearing, as the case may be, and adjust that score according to the institutional record of the candidate since the last hearing. The following guidelines are applicable:

Total points	Guideline recommendation
If Points = 0-3	Parole with highest level of supervision indicated.
If Points = 4+	Deny parole at rehearing and schedule a further rehearing in accordance with § 2.75(c) and the time ranges set forth in paragraph (j) of this section.

(l) Guidelines for Decisions at Subsequent Hearing—Youth Offenders. (1) In determining whether to parole a youth offender appearing at a rehearing or rescission hearing, the Commission shall take the total point score from the initial hearing or last rehearing, as the case may be, and adjust that score according to the institutional record of the candidate since the last hearing. The following guidelines are applicable:

Total points	Guideline recommendation
If Points = 0-3	Parole with highest level of supervision indicated.
If Points = 4+	Deny parole and schedule a rehearing based on estimated time to achieve program objectives or by reference to the time ranges in paragraph (j) of this section, whichever is less.

(2) Prison officials may in any case recommend an earlier rehearing date than ordered by the Commission if the Commission's program objectives have been met.

(m) Decisions Outside the Guidelines—All Offenders. (1) The Commission may, in unusual circumstances, waive the Salient Factor Score and the pre- and post-incarceration factors set forth in this section to grant or deny parole to a prisoner notwithstanding the guidelines, or to schedule a reconsideration hearing at a time different from that indicated in paragraph (j) of this section. Unusual circumstances are case-specific factors that are not fully taken into account in the guidelines, and that are relevant to the grant or denial of parole. In such cases, the Commission shall specify in the notice of action the specific factors that it relied on in departing from the applicable guideline or guideline range.

(2) If the prisoner is deemed to be a poorer or more serious risk than the guidelines indicate, the Commission shall determine what Base Point Score would more appropriately fit the prisoner's case, and shall render its initial and rehearing decisions as if the prisoner had that higher Base Point Score. If possible, the factors justifying such a departure shall be fully accounted for in the initial continuance, so that the guidelines can be followed at subsequent hearings. In some cases, however, an extreme level of risk presented by the prisoner may make it inappropriate for the Commission to contemplate a parole at any hearing without a significant change in the prisoner's circumstances.

(3) Factors that may warrant a decision above the guidelines include, but are not limited to, the following:

(i) Poorer Parole Risk Than Indicated By Salient Factor Score. The offender is a poorer parole risk than indicated by the salient factor score because of—

(A) Unusually persistent failure under supervision (pretrial release, probation, or parole);

(B) Unusually persistent history of criminally related substance (drug or alcohol) abuse and resistance to treatment efforts; or

(C) Unusually extensive prior record (sufficient to make the offender a poorer risk than the “poor” prognosis category).

(ii) More Serious Parole Risk. The offender is a more serious parole risk than indicated by the total point score because of—

(A) Prior record of violence more extensive or serious than that taken into account in the guidelines;

(B) Current offense demonstrates extraordinary criminal sophistication, criminal professionalism in the employment of violence or threats of violence, or leadership role in instigating others to commit a serious offense;

(C) Unusual cruelty to the victim (beyond that accounted for by scoring the offense as high level violence), or predation upon extremely vulnerable victim;

(D) Unusual propensity to inflict unprovoked and potentially homicidal violence, as demonstrated by the circumstances of the current offense; or

(E) Additional serious offense(s) committed after (or while on bond or fugitive status from) current offense that show unusual capacity for sustained, repeated violent criminal activity.

(4) Factors that may warrant a decision below the guidelines include, but are not limited to, the following:

(i) Better Parole Risk Than Indicated by Salient Factor Score. The offender is a better parole risk than indicated by the salient factor score because of (applicable only to offenders who are not already in the very good risk category)—

(A) A prior criminal record resulting exclusively from minor offenses;

(B) A substantial crime-free period in the community for which credit is not already given on the Salient Factor Score;

(C) A change in the availability of community resources leading to a better parole prognosis;

(ii) Other Factors:

(A) Unusually lengthy period of incarceration on the minimum sentence (in relation to the seriousness of the offense and prior record) that warrants an initial parole determination as if the offender were being considered at a rehearing;

(B) Substantial period in custody on other sentence(s) sufficient to warrant a finding in paragraph (m)(4) of this section; or

(C) Clearly exceptional program achievement.

§ 2.81

Reparole decisions.

(a) If the prisoner is not serving a new, parolable D.C. Code sentence, the Commission's decision to grant or deny reparole on the parole violation term shall be made by reference to the reparole guidelines at § 2.21. The Commission shall establish a presumptive or effective release date pursuant to § 2.12(b), and conduct interim hearings pursuant to § 2.14.

(b) If the prisoner is eligible for parole on a new D.C. Code felony sentence that has been aggregated with the prisoner's parole violation term, the Commission shall make a decision to grant or deny parole on the basis of the aggregate sentence, and in accordance with the guidelines at § 2.80.

(c) If the prisoner is eligible for parole on a new D.C. Code felony sentence but the prisoner's parole violation term has not commenced (i.e., the warrant has not been executed), the Commission shall make a single parole/reparole decision by applying the guidelines at § 2.80. The Commission shall establish an appropriate date for the execution of the outstanding warrant in order for the guidelines at § 2.80 to be satisfied. In cases where the execution of the warrant will not result in the aggregation of the new sentence and the parole violation term, the Commission shall make parole and reparole decisions that are consistent with the guidelines at § 2.80.

(d) All reparole hearings shall be conducted according to the procedures set forth in § 2.72, and may be combined with the holding of a revocation hearing if the prisoner's parole has not previously been revoked.

§ 2.82

Effective date of parole.

(a) A parole release date may be granted up to nine months from the date of the hearing in order to permit the prisoner's placement in a halfway house or to allow for release planning. Otherwise, a grant of parole shall ordinarily be effective not more than six months from the date of the hearing.

(b) Except in the case of a medical or geriatric parole, a parole that is granted prior to the completion of the prisoner's minimum term shall not become effective until the prisoner becomes eligible for release on parole.

§ 2.83

Release planning.

(a) All grants of parole shall be conditioned on the development of a suitable release plan and the approval of that plan by the Commission. A parole certificate shall not be issued until a release plan has been approved by the Commission. In the case of mandatory release, the Commission shall review each prisoner's release plan to determine whether the imposition of any special conditions should be ordered to promote the prisoner's rehabilitation and protect the public safety.

(b) If a parole date has been granted, but the prisoner has not submitted a proposed release plan, the appropriate correctional or supervision staff shall assist the prisoner in formulating a release plan for investigation.

(c) After investigation by a Supervision Officer, the proposed release plan shall be submitted to the Commission 30 days prior to the prisoner's parole or mandatory release date.

(d) A Commissioner may retard a parole date for purposes of release planning for up to 120 days without a hearing. If efforts to formulate an acceptable release plan prove futile by the expiration of such period, or if the Offender Supervision staff reports that there are insufficient resources to provide effective supervision for the individual in question, the Commission shall be promptly notified in a detailed report. If the Commission does not order the prisoner to be paroled, the Commission shall suspend the grant of parole and conduct a reconsideration hearing on the next available docket. Following such reconsideration hearing, the Commission may deny parole if it finds that the release of the prisoner without a suitable plan would fail to meet the criteria set forth in § 2.73. However, if the prisoner subsequently presents an acceptable release plan, the Commission may reopen the case and issue a new grant of parole.

(e) The following shall be considered in the formulation of a suitable release plan:

(1) Evidence that the parolee will have an acceptable residence;

(2) Evidence that the parolee will be legitimately employed as soon as released; provided, that in special circumstances, the requirement for immediate employment upon release may be waived by the Commission;

(3) Evidence that the necessary aftercare will be available for parolees who are ill, or who have any other demonstrable problems for which special care is necessary, such as hospital facilities or other domiciliary care; and

(4) Evidence of availability of, and acceptance in, a community program in those cases where parole has been granted conditioned upon acceptance or participation in a specific community program.

§ 2.84

Release to other jurisdictions.

The Commission, in its discretion, may parole any prisoner to live and remain in a jurisdiction other than the District of Columbia.

§ 2.85

Conditions of release.

(a) The following conditions are attached to every grant of parole and are deemed necessary to provide adequate supervision and to protect the public welfare. They are printed on the certificate issued to each parolee and mandatory releasee:

(1) The parolee shall go directly to the district named in the certificate (unless released to the custody of other authorities). Within three days after his release, he shall report to the Supervision Officer whose name appears on the certificate. If in any emergency the parolee is unable to get in touch with his supervision office, he shall communicate with the U.S. Parole Commission, Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815-7286.

(2) If the parolee is released to the custody of other authorities, and after release from the physical custody of such authorities, he is unable to report to the Supervision Officer to whom he is assigned within three days, he shall report instead to the nearest U.S. Probation Officer.

(3) The parolee shall not leave the limits fixed by his certificate of parole without written permission from his Supervision Officer.

(4) The parolee shall notify his Supervision Officer within two days of any change in his place of residence.

(5) The parolee shall make a complete and truthful written report (on a form provided for that purpose) to his Supervision Officer between the first and third day of each month. He shall also report to his Supervision Officer at other times as the officer directs, providing complete and truthful information.

(6) The parolee shall not violate any law, nor shall he associate with persons engaged in criminal activity. The parolee shall report within two days to his Supervision Officer (or supervision office) if he is arrested or questioned by a law-enforcement officer.

(7) The parolee shall not enter into any agreement to act as an informer or special agent for any law-enforcement agency without authorization from the Commission.

(8) The parolee shall work regularly unless excused by his Supervision Officer, and support his legal dependents, if any, to the best of his ability. He shall report within two days to his Supervision Officer any changes in employment or employment status.

(9) The parolee shall not drink alcoholic beverages to excess. He shall not purchase, possess, use, or administer controlled substances (marijuana or narcotic or other habit-forming drugs) unless prescribed or advised for the parolee by a physician. The parolee shall not frequent places where such drugs are illegally sold, dispensed, used, or given away.

(10) The parolee shall not associate with persons who have a criminal record without the permission of his Supervision Officer.

(11) The parole shall not possess a firearm or other dangerous weapon.

(12) The parolee shall permit visits by his Supervision Officer to his residence and to his place of business or occupation. He shall permit confiscation by his Supervision Officer of any materials which the officer believes may constitute contraband in the parolee's possession and which he observes in plain view in the parolee's residence, place of business or occupation, vehicle(s), or on his person. The Commission may also, when a reasonable basis for so doing is presented, modify the conditions of parole to require the parolee to permit the Supervision Officer to conduct searches and seizures of concealed contraband on the parolee's person, and in any building, vehicle, or other area under the parolee's control, at such times as the officer shall decide.

(13) The parolee shall make a diligent effort to satisfy any fine, restitution order, court costs or assessment, and/or court ordered child support or alimony payment that has been, or may be, imposed, and shall provide such financial information as may be requested by his Supervision Officer that is relevant to the payment of the obligation. If unable to pay the obligation in one sum, the parolee shall cooperate with his Supervision Officer in establishing an installment payment schedule.

(14) The parolee shall submit to a drug test whenever ordered by his Supervision Officer.

(15) If released to the District of Columbia, the parolee shall submit to the sanctions imposed by his Supervision Officer (within the limits established by the approved Schedule of Accountability Through Graduated Sanctions), if the Supervision Officer finds that the parolee has tested positive for illegal drugs or that he has committed any non-criminal violation of the conditions of his parole. Graduated sanctions may include community service, curfew with electronic monitoring, and/or a period of time in a community treatment center. The parolee's failure to cooperate with a graduated sanction imposed by his Supervision Officer will subject the parolee to the issuance of a summons or warrant by the Commission, and a revocation hearing at which the parolee will be afforded the opportunity to contest the violation charge(s) upon which the sanction was based. If the Commission finds that the parolee has violated parole as alleged, the parolee will also be found to have violated this condition. In addition, the Commission may override the imposition of a graduated sanction at any time and issue a warrant or summons if it finds that the parolee is a risk to the public safety or that he is not complying with this condition in good faith.

(b) The Commission or a member thereof may at any time modify or add to the conditions of release. The parolee shall receive notice of the proposed modification and unless waived shall have ten days following receipt of such notice to express his views thereon. Following such ten day period, the Commission shall have 21 days, exclusive of holidays, to order such modification of or addition to the conditions of release. The ten-day notice requirement shall not apply to a modification of the conditions of parole in the following circumstances:

(1) Following a revocation hearing;

(2) Upon a finding that immediate modification of the conditions of parole is required to prevent harm to the parolee or to the public; or

(3) In response to a request by the parolee for a modification of the conditions of parole.

(c) The Commission may, as a condition of parole, require a parolee to reside in a community corrections center, or participate in the program of a residential treatment center, or both, for all or part of the period of parole.

(d) The Commission may require that a parolee remain at his place of residence during nonworking hours and, if the Commission so directs, to have compliance with this condition monitored by telephone or electronic signaling devices. A condition under this paragraph may be imposed only as an alternative to incarceration.

(e) A prisoner who, having been granted a parole date, subsequently refuses to sign the parole certificate, or any other consent form necessary to fulfill the conditions of parole, shall be deemed to have withdrawn the application for parole as of the date of his refusal to sign. To be considered for parole again, the prisoner must reapply for parole.

(f) With respect to prisoners who are required to be released to supervision through good time reductions (mandatory release), the conditions of parole set forth in this rule, and any other special conditions ordered by the Commission, shall be in full force and effect upon the established release date regardless of any refusal by the prisoner to sign his certificate.

(g) Any parolee who absconds from supervision has effectively prevented his sentence from expiring. Therefore, the parolee remains bound by the conditions of his release and violations committed at any time prior to execution of a warrant issued by the Commission, whether before or after the original expiration date, may be charged as a basis for revocation. In such a case, the warrant may be supplemented at any time.

(h) The Commission may require a parolee, when there is evidence of prior or current alcohol dependence or abuse, to participate in an alcohol aftercare treatment program. In such a case, the Commission will require that the parolee abstain from the use of alcohol and/or all other intoxicants during and after the course of treatment.

(i) The Commission may require a parolee, where there is evidence of prior or current drug dependence or abuse, to participate in a drug treatment program, which shall include at least two periodic tests to determine whether parolee has reverted to the use of drugs (including alcohol). In such a case, the Commission will require that the parolee abstain from the use of alcohol and/or all other intoxicants during and after the course of treatment. In the event such condition is imposed prior to an eligible prisoner's release from prison, any grant of parole or reparole shall be contingent upon the prisoner passing all pre-release drug tests administered by prison officials.

(j) Parolees are expected by the Commission to understand the conditions of parole according to their plain meaning, and to seek the guidance of their Supervision Officers before engaging in any conduct that may constitute a violation thereof. Supervision Officers may issue instructions to parolees to refrain from particular conduct that would violate parole, or to take specific steps to avoid or correct a violation of parole, as well as such other directives as may be authorized by the conditions imposed by the Commission.

§ 2.86

Release on parole; rescission for misconduct.

(a) When a parole effective date has been set, actual release on parole on that date shall be conditioned upon the individual maintaining a good conduct record in the institution or prerelease program to which the prisoner has been assigned.

(b) The Commission may reconsider any grant of parole prior to the prisoner's actual release on parole, and may advance or retard a parole effective date or rescind a parole date previously granted based upon the receipt of any new and significant information concerning the prisoner, including disciplinary infractions. The Commission may retard a parole date for disciplinary infractions (e.g., to permit the use of graduated sanctions) for up to 120 days without a hearing, in addition to any retardation ordered under 2.83(d). If a parole effective date is rescinded for disciplinary infractions, an appropriate sanction shall be determined either by adding the appropriate points for negative institutional behavior to the prisoner's total point score, or by reference to § 2.36 if the misconduct is not sufficiently serious to warrant a continuance under § 2.80(j). A total point score of 0-2 shall be adjusted to a total point score of 3 prior to adding points for negative institutional behavior pursuant to the Point Assignment Table at § 2.80(f).

(c) After a prisoner has been granted a parole effective date, the institution shall notify the Commission of any serious disciplinary infractions committed by the prisoner prior to the date of actual release. In such case, the prisoner shall not be released until the institution has been advised that no change has been made in the Commission's order granting parole.

(d) A grant of parole becomes operative upon the authorized delivery of a certificate of parole to the prisoner, and the signing of that certificate by the prisoner, who thereafter becomes a parolee.

§ 2.87

Mandatory release.

(a) When a prisoner has been denied parole at the initial hearing and all subsequent considerations, or parole consideration is expressly precluded by statute, the prisoner shall be released at the expiration of his or her imposed sentence less the time deducted for any good time allowances provided by statute.

(b) Any prisoner having served his or her term or terms less deduction for good time shall, upon release, be deemed to be released on parole until the expiration of the maximum term or terms for which he or she was sentenced, except that if the offense of conviction was committed before April 11, 1987, such expiration date shall be less one hundred eighty (180) days. Every provision of these rules relating to an individual on parole shall be deemed to include individuals on mandatory release.

§ 2.88

Confidentiality of parole records.

(a) Consistent with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552(b)), the contents of parole records shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed outside the Commission except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.

(b) Information that is subject to release to the general public without the consent of the prisoner shall be limited to the information specified in § 2.37.

(c) Information other than as described in § 2.37 may be disclosed without the consent of the prisoner only pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552(b)) and § 2.56.

§ 2.89

Miscellaneous provisions.

Except to the extent otherwise provided by law, the following sections in Subpart A of this part are also applicable to District of Columbia Code offenders:

2.5 (Sentence aggregation)

2.7 (Committed fines and restitution orders)

2.8 (Mental competency procedures)

2.10 (Date service of sentence commences)

2.16 (Parole of prisoner in State, local, or territorial institution)

2.19 (Information considered)

2.23 (Delegation to hearing examiners)

2.30 (False information or new criminal conduct; Discovery after release)

2.32 (Parole to local or immigration detainers)

2.56 (Disclosure of Parole Commission file)

2.62 (Rewarding assistance in the prosecution of other offenders: criteria and guidelines)

2.65 (Paroling policy for prisoners serving aggregated U.S. and D.C. Code sentences)

§ 2.90

Prior orders of the Board of Parole.

Any order entered by the Board of Parole of the District of Columbia shall be accorded the status of an order of the Parole Commission unless duly reconsidered and changed by the Commission at a regularly scheduled hearing. It shall not constitute grounds for reopening a case that the prisoner is subject to an order of the Board of Parole that fails to conform to a provision of this part.

§ 2.91

Supervision responsibility.

(a) Pursuant to D.C. Code 24-1233(c) and 4203(b)(4), the District of Columbia Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) shall provide supervision, through qualified Supervision Officers, for all D.C. Code parolees and mandatory releasees under the jurisdiction of the Commission who are released to the District of Columbia. Individuals under the jurisdiction of the Commission who are released to districts outside the D.C. metropolitan area, or who are serving mixed U.S. and D.C. Code sentences, shall be supervised by a U.S. Probation Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3655.

(b) A parolee or mandatory releasee may be transferred to a new district of supervision with the permission of the supervision offices of both the transferring and receiving district, provided such transfer is not contrary to instructions from the Commission.

§ 2.92

Jurisdiction of the Commission.

(a) Pursuant to D.C. Code 24-431(a), the jurisdiction of the Commission over a parolee shall expire on the date of expiration of the maximum term or terms for which he was sentenced, subject to the provisions of this subpart relating to warrant issuance, time in absconder status, and the forfeiture of credit for time on parole in the case of revocation.

(b) The parole of any parolee shall run concurrently with the period of parole, probation, or supervised release under any other Federal, State, or local sentence.

(c) Upon the expiration of the parolee's maximum term as specified in the release certificate, the parolee's Supervision Officer shall issue a certificate of discharge to such parolee and to such other agencies as may be appropriate.

(d) A termination of parole pursuant to an order of revocation shall not affect the Commission's jurisdiction to grant and enforce any further periods of parole, up to the expiration of the offender's maximum term.

§ 2.93

Travel approval.

(a) A parolee's Supervision Officer may approve travel outside the district of supervision without approval of the Commission in the following situations:

(1) Vacation trips not to exceed thirty days.

(2) Trips, not to exceed thirty days, to investigate reasonably certain employment possibilities.

(3) Recurring travel across a district boundary, not to exceed fifty miles outside the district, for purpose of employment, shopping, or recreation.

(b) Specific advance approval by the Commission is required for all foreign travel, employment requiring recurring travel more than fifty miles outside the district, and vacation travel outside the district of supervision exceeding thirty days. A request for such permission shall be in writing and must demonstrate a substantial need for such travel.

(c) A special condition imposed by the Commission prohibiting certain travel shall apply instead of any general rules relating to travel as set forth in paragraph (a) of this section.

(d) The district of supervision for a parolee under the supervision of the D.C. Community Supervision Office of CSOSA shall be the District of Columbia, except that for the purpose of travel permission under this section the district of supervision will include the D.C. metropolitan area as defined in the certificate of parole.

§ 2.94

Supervision reports to Commission.

An initial supervision report to confirm the satisfactory initial progress of the parolee shall be submitted to the Commission 90 days after the parolee's release from prison, by the officer responsible for the parolee's supervision. A regular supervision report shall be submitted to the Commission by the officer responsible for the supervision of the parolee after the completion of 12 months of continuous community supervision and annually thereafter. The Supervision Officer shall submit such additional reports and information concerning both the parolee, and the enforcement of the conditions of the parolee's supervision, as the Commission may direct. All reports shall be submitted according to the format established by the Commission.

§ 2.95

Release from active supervision.

(a) The Commission, in its discretion, may release a parolee or mandatory releasee from further supervision prior to the expiration of the maximum term or terms for which he or she was sentenced.

(b) Two years after release on supervision, and at least annually thereafter, the Commission shall review the status of each parolee to determine the need for continued supervision. In calculating such two-year period there shall not be included any period of release on parole prior to the most recent release, nor any period served in confinement on any other sentence. A review shall also be conducted whenever release from supervision is specially recommended by the parolee's Supervision Officer.

(c) In determining whether to grant release from supervision, the Commission shall apply the following guidelines, provided that case-specific factors do not indicate a need for continued supervision:

(1) For a parolee originally classified in the very good risk category and whose current offense did not involve violence, release from supervision may be ordered after two continuous years of incident-free parole in the community;

(2) For a parolee originally classified in the very good risk category and whose current offense involved violence other than high level violence, release from supervision may be ordered after three continuous years of incident-free parole in the community;

(3) For a parolee originally classified in the very good risk category and whose current offense involved high level violence (without death of victim resulting), release from supervision may be ordered after four continuous years of incident-free parole in the community;

(4) For a parolee originally classified in other than the very good risk category, whose current offense did not involve violence, and whose prior record includes not more than one episode of felony violence, release from supervision may be ordered after three continuous years of incident-free parole in the community;

(5) For a parolee originally classified in other than the very good risk category, and whose current offense involved violence other than high level violence, or whose prior record includes two or more episodes of felony violence, release from supervision may be ordered after four continuous years of incident-free parole in the community;

(6) For a parolee who was originally classified in other than the very good risk category and whose current offense involved high level violence (without death of victim resulting), release from supervision may be ordered after five continuous years of incident-free parole in the community;

(7) For any parolee whose current offense involved high level violence with death of victim resulting, release from supervision may be ordered only upon a case-specific finding that, by reason of age, infirmity, or other compelling factors, the parolee is unlikely to be a threat to the public safety.

(d) Decisions to release from supervision prior to completion of the periods specified in this section may be made where it appears that the parolee is a better risk than indicated by the salient factor score (if originally classified in other than the very good risk category), or a less serious risk than indicated by a violent current offense or prior record (if any). However, release from supervision prior to the completion of two years of incident-free supervision will not be granted in any case unless case-specific factors clearly indicate that continued supervision would be counterproductive to the parolee's rehabilitation.

(e) Except as provided in § 2.99(c), cases with pending criminal charge(s) shall not be released from supervision until the disposition of such charge(s) is known. The term “incident-free” parole shall include both any reported violations, and any arrest or law enforcement investigation that raises a reasonable doubt as to whether the parolee has been able to refrain from law violations while on parole.

§ 2.96

Order of release.

(a) When the Commission approves a recommendation for release from active supervision, a written order of release from supervision shall be issued and a copy thereof shall be delivered to the releasee.

(b) Each order of release shall state that the conditions of the releasee's parole are waived, except that it shall remain a condition that the releasee shall not violate any law or engage in any conduct that might bring discredit to the parole system, under penalty of possible withdrawal of the order of release or revocation of parole.

(c) An order of release from supervision shall not release the parolee from the custody of the Attorney General or from the jurisdiction of the Commission before the expiration of the term or terms being served.

§ 2.97

Withdrawal of order of release.

If, after an order of release from supervision has been issued by the Commission, and prior to the expiration date of the sentence(s) being served, the parolee commits any new criminal offense or engages in any conduct that might bring discredit to the parole system, the Commission may, in its discretion, do any of the following:

(a) Issue a summons or warrant to commence the revocation process;

(b) Withdraw the order of release from supervision and return the parolee to active supervision; or

(c) Impose any special conditions to the order of release from supervision.

§ 2.98

Summons to appear or warrant for retaking of parolee.

(a) If a parolee is alleged to have violated the conditions of his release, and satisfactory evidence thereof is presented, the Commission or a member thereof may:

(1) Issue a summons requiring the offender to appear for a preliminary interview or local revocation hearing; or

(2) Issue a warrant for the apprehension and return of the offender to custody.

(b) A summons or warrant under paragraph (a)(1) of this section may be issued or withdrawn only by the Commission, or a member thereof.

(c) Any summons or warrant under this section shall be issued as soon as practicable after the alleged violation is reported to the Commission, except when delay is deemed necessary. Issuance of a summons or warrant may be withheld until the frequency or seriousness of the violations, in the opinion of the Commission, requires such issuance. In the case of any parolee who is charged with a criminal offense and who is awaiting disposition of such charge, issuance of a summons or warrant may be:

(1) Temporarily withheld;

(2) Issued by the Commission and held in abeyance;

(3) Issued by the Commission and a detainer lodged with the custodial authority; or

(4) Issued for the retaking of the parolee.

(d) A summons or warrant may be issued only within the prisoner's maximum term or terms, except that in the case of a prisoner who has been mandatorily released from a sentence imposed for an offense committed before April 11, 1987, such summons or warrant may be issued only within the maximum term or terms less one hundred eighty days. A summons or warrant shall be considered issued when signed and either:

(1) Placed in the mail; or

(2) Sent by electronic transmission to the appropriate law enforcement authority.

(e) The issuance of a warrant under this section operates to bar the expiration of the parolee's sentence. Such warrant maintains the Commission's jurisdiction to retake the parolee either before or after the normal expiration date of the sentence and to reach a final decision as to the revocation of parole and the forfeiture of time pursuant to D.C. Code 24-206(a).

(f) A summons or warrant issued pursuant to this section shall be accompanied by a warrant application stating the charges against the parolee, the applicable procedural rights under the Commission's regulations, and the possible actions which may be taken by the Commission. A summons shall specify the time and place the parolee shall appear. Failure to appear in response to a summons shall be grounds for issuance of a warrant.

(g) Every warrant issued by the Board of Parole of the District of Columbia prior to August 5, 2000, shall be deemed to be a valid warrant of the U.S. Parole Commission unless withdrawn by the Commission. Such warrant shall be executed as provided in § 2.99, and every offender retaken upon such warrant shall be treated for all purposes as if retaken upon a warrant issued by the Commission.

§ 2.99

Execution of warrant and service of summons.

(a) Any officer of any Federal or District of Columbia correctional institution, any Federal Officer authorized to serve criminal process, or any officer or designated civilian employee of the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, to whom a warrant is delivered, shall execute such warrant by taking the parolee and returning him to the custody of the Attorney General.

(b) Upon the arrest of the parolee, the officer executing the warrant shall deliver to him a copy of the warrant application stating the charges against the parolee, the applicable procedural rights under the Commission's regulations, and the possible actions which may be taken by the Commission.

(c) If execution of the warrant is delayed pending disposition of local charges, for further investigation, or for some other purpose, the parolee is to be continued under supervision by the Supervision Officer until the normal expiration of the sentence, or until the warrant is executed, whichever first occurs. Monthly supervision reports are to be submitted, and the parolee must continue to abide by all the conditions of release.

(d) If any other warrant for the arrest of the parolee has been executed or is outstanding at the time the Commission's warrant is executed, the arresting officer may, within 72 hours of executing the Commission's warrant, release the parolee to such other warrant and lodge the Commission's warrant as a detainer, voiding the execution thereof, if such action is consistent with the instructions of the Commission. In other cases, a parolee may be released from an executed warrant whenever the Commission finds such action necessary to serve the ends of justice.

(e) A summons to appear at a preliminary interview or revocation hearing shall be served upon the parolee in person by delivering to the parolee a copy of the summons and the application therefor. Service shall be made by any Federal or District of Columbia officer authorized to serve criminal process and certification of such service shall be returned to the Commission.

(f) Official notification of the issuance of a Commission warrant shall authorize any law enforcement officer within the United States to hold the parolee in custody until the warrant can be executed in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.

§ 2.100

Warrant placed as detainer and dispositional review.

(a) When a parolee is in the custody of other law enforcement authorities, or is serving a new sentence of imprisonment imposed for a crime committed while on parole or for a violation of some other form of community supervision, a parole violation warrant may be lodged against him as a detainer.

(b) If the parolee is serving a new sentence of imprisonment, and is eligible and has applied for parole under the Commission's jurisdiction, a dispositional revocation hearing shall be scheduled simultaneously with the initial hearing on the new sentence. In such cases, the warrant shall not be executed except upon final order of the Commission following such hearing, as provided in § 2.81(c). In any other cases, the detainer shall be reviewed on the record pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.

(c) If the parolee is serving a new sentence of imprisonment that does not include eligibility for parole under the Commission's jurisdiction, the Commission shall review the detainer upon the request of the parolee. Following such review, the Commission may:

(1) Withdraw the detainer and order reinstatement of the parolee to supervision upon release from custody, or close the case if the expiration date has passed.

(2) Order a dispositional revocation hearing to be conducted by a hearing examiner or an official designated by the Commission at the institution in which the parolee is confined. In such case, the warrant shall not be executed except upon final order of the Commission following such hearing.

(3) Let the detainer stand until the new sentence is completed. Following the release of the parolee, and the execution of the Commission's warrant, an institutional revocation hearing shall be conducted after the parolee is returned to federal custody.

(d) Dispositional revocation hearings pursuant to this section shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions at § 2.103 governing institutional revocation hearings, except that a hearing conducted at a state or local facility may be conducted by a hearing examiner, hearing examiner panel, or other official designated by the Commission. Following a revocation hearing conducted pursuant to this section, the Commission may take any action specified in § 2.105.

(1) The date the violation term commences is the date the Commission's warrant is executed. It shall be the policy of the Commission that the parolee's violation term (i.e., the unexpired term that remained to be served at the time the parolee was last released on parole) shall start to run only upon his release from the confinement portion of the sentence for the new offense, or the date of reparole granted pursuant to this subpart, whichever comes first.

(2) A parole violator whose parole is revoked shall be given credit for all time in confinement resulting from any new offense or violation that is considered by the Commission as a basis for revocation, but solely for the limited purpose of satisfying the time ranges in the reparole guidelines at § 2.81. The computation of the prisoner's sentence, and forfeiture of time on parole pursuant to D.C. Code 24-206(a), is not affected by such guideline credit.

§ 2.101

Revocation; Preliminary interview.

(a) Interviewing officer. A parolee who is retaken on a warrant issued by the Commission shall promptly be offered a preliminary interview by a Supervision Officer (or other official designated by the Commission). The purpose of the preliminary interview is to enable the Commission to determine if there is probable cause to believe that the parolee has violated his parole as charged, and if so, whether a local or institutional revocation hearing should be conducted. Any Supervision Officer or U.S. Probation Officer in the district where the prisoner is confined may conduct the preliminary interview, provided he or she is not the officer who recommended that the warrant be issued.

(b) Notice and opportunity to postpone interview. At the beginning of the preliminary interview, the interviewing officer shall ascertain that the warrant application has been given to the parolee as required by § 2.99(b). The interviewing officer shall advise the parolee that he may have the preliminary interview postponed in order to obtain an attorney (and/or witnesses and evidence on his behalf), and that he may apply for counsel to be assigned by the D.C. Public Defender Service or otherwise obtained. In addition, the parolee may request the Commission to obtain the presence of adverse witnesses (i.e., persons who have given information upon which revocation may be based). Such adverse witnesses may be requested to attend the postponed preliminary interview if the parolee meets the requirements at § 2.102(a) for a local revocation hearing. The parolee shall be given advance notice of the time and place of a postponed preliminary interview.

(c) Review of the charges. At the preliminary interview, the interviewing officer shall review the violation charges with the parolee and shall apprise the parolee of the evidence that has been presented to the Commission. The interviewing officer shall ascertain whether the parolee admits or denies each charge listed on the warrant application, as well as the parolee's explanation of the facts giving rise to each charge. The officer shall also receive the statements of any witnesses and documentary evidence on behalf of the parolee. At a postponed preliminary interview, the hearing officer shall also permit the cross-examination of any adverse witnesses in attendance. However, in such cases, the Commission will ordinarily have ordered a combined preliminary interview and local revocation hearing as provided in paragraph (f) of this section.

(d) Probable cause determination. At the conclusion of the preliminary interview, the interviewing officer shall inform the parolee of his recommended decision as to whether there is probable cause to believe that the parolee has violated the conditions of release, and shall submit to the Commission a digest of the interview together with a recommended decision.

(1) If the interviewing officer's recommended decision is that there is no probable cause to believe that the parolee has violated the conditions of release, a Commissioner shall review such recommended decision and notify the parolee of his final decision concerning probable cause as expeditiously as possible. A decision to release the parolee shall be implemented without delay.

(2) If the interviewing officer's recommended decision is that there is probable cause to believe that the parolee has violated a condition (or conditions) of his release, the Commissioner shall notify the parolee of the final decision concerning probable cause within 21 days of the date of the preliminary interview.

(3) Release notwithstanding probable cause. If the Commission finds probable cause to believe that the parolee has violated the conditions of his release, reinstatement to supervision or release pending further proceedings may be ordered in the Commission's discretion if it determines that:

(i) Continuation of revocation proceedings is not warranted despite the violations found; or

(ii) Incarceration pending further revocation proceedings is not warranted by the alleged frequency or seriousness of such violation or violations, and the parolee is neither likely to fail to appear for further proceedings, nor constitutes a danger to himself or others.

(e) Conviction as probable cause. Conviction of any Federal, District of Columbia, State, or local crime committed subsequent to release by a parolee shall constitute probable cause for the purposes of this section, and no preliminary interview shall be conducted unless ordered by a Commissioner to consider additional violation charges (including, but not limited to, unadjudicated criminal offenses) that may be determinative of the Commission's decision regarding revocation and/or reparole.

(f) Local revocation hearing. A postponed preliminary interview may be conducted as a local revocation hearing by an examiner or other officer designated by a Commissioner provided that the parolee has been advised that the postponed preliminary interview will constitute his final revocation hearing. It shall be the Commission's policy to conduct a combined preliminary interview and local revocation hearing whenever adverse witnesses are required to appear and give testimony with respect to contested charges.

(g) Late received charges. If the Commission is notified of an additional charge after probable cause has been found to proceed with a revocation hearing, the Commission may:

(1) Remand the case for a supplemental preliminary interview if the new charge may be contested by the parolee and possibly result in the appearance of witness(es) at the revocation hearing;

(2) Notify the prisoner that the additional charge will be considered at the revocation hearing without conducting a supplemental interview; or

(3) Determine that the new charge shall not be considered at the revocation hearing.

§ 2.102

Place of revocation hearing.

(a) If the parolee requests a local revocation hearing, he shall be given a revocation hearing reasonably near the place of the alleged violation(s) or arrest, with the opportunity to contest the charges against him, if the following conditions are met:

(1) The parolee has not been convicted of a crime committed while under supervision; and

(2) The parolee denies all charges against him.

(b) The parolee shall also be given a local revocation hearing if he admits (or has been convicted of) one or more charged violations, but denies at least one unadjudicated charge that may be determinative of the Commission's decision regarding revocation and/or reparole, and requests the presence of one or more adverse witnesses regarding that contested charge. If the appearance of such witness at the hearing is precluded by the Commission for good cause, a local revocation hearing shall not be ordered.

(c) If there are two or more contested charges, a local revocation hearing may be conducted near the place of the violation chiefly relied upon by the Commission as a basis for the issuance of the warrant or summons.

(d) A parolee who voluntarily waives his right to a local revocation hearing, or who admits one or more charged violations without contesting any unadjudicated charge that may be determinative of the Commission's decision regarding revocation and/or reparole, or who is retaken following release from a sentence of imprisonment for a new crime, shall be given an institutional revocation hearing upon his return or recommitment to an institution. An institutional revocation hearing may also be conducted in the District of Columbia jail or prison facility in which the parolee is being held. (However, a Commissioner may, on his own motion, designate any such case for a local revocation hearing instead.) The difference in procedures between a “local revocation hearing” and an “institutional revocation hearing” is set forth in § 2.103.

(e) A parolee retaken on a warrant issued by the Commission shall be retained in custody until final action relative to revocation of his parole, unless otherwise ordered by the Commission under § 2.101(e)(3). A parolee who has been given a revocation hearing pursuant to the issuance of a summons shall remain on supervision pending the decision of the Commission, unless the Commission has provided otherwise.

(f) A local revocation hearing shall be scheduled to be held within sixty days of the probable cause determination. Institutional revocation hearings shall be scheduled to be held within ninety days of the date of the execution of the violator warrant upon which the parolee was retaken. However, if a parolee requests and receives any postponement, or consents to a postponement, or by his actions otherwise precludes the prompt conduct of such proceedings, the above-stated time limits may be extended. A local revocation hearing may be conducted by an examiner, hearing examiner panel, or other official designated by the Commission.

§ 2.103

Revocation hearing procedure.

(a) The purpose of the revocation hearing shall be to determine whether the parolee has violated the conditions of his release and, if so, whether his parole or mandatory release should be revoked or reinstated.

(b) At a local revocation hearing, the alleged violator may present voluntary witnesses and documentary evidence in his behalf. The alleged violator may also seek the compulsory attendance of any adverse witnesses for cross-examination, and any relevant favorable witnesses who have not volunteered to attend. At an institutional revocation hearing, the alleged violator may present voluntary witnesses and documentary evidence in his behalf, but may not request the Commission to secure the attendance of any adverse or favorable witness. At any hearing, the presiding hearing officer or examiner may limit or exclude any irrelevant or repetitious statement or documentary evidence, and may prohibit the parolee from contesting matters already adjudicated against him in other forums.

(c) At a local revocation hearing, the Commission shall, on the request of the alleged violator, require the attendance of any adverse witnesses who have given statements upon which revocation may be based. The adverse witnesses who are present shall be made available for questioning and cross-examination in the presence of the alleged violator. The Commission may also require the attendance of adverse witnesses on its own motion, and may excuse any requested adverse witness from appearing at the hearing (or from appearing in the presence of the alleged violator) if it finds good cause for so doing. A finding of good cause for the non-appearance of a requested adverse witness may be based, for example, on a significant possibility of harm to the witness, the witness not being reasonably available, and/or the availability of documentary evidence that is an adequate substitute for live testimony.

(d) All evidence upon which the finding of violation may be based shall be disclosed to the alleged violator at or before the revocation hearing. The hearing officer or examiner panel may disclose documentary evidence by permitting the alleged violator to examine the document during the hearing, or where appropriate, by reading or summarizing the document in the presence of the alleged violator.

(e) An alleged violator may be represented by an attorney at either a local or an institutional revocation hearing. In lieu of an attorney, an alleged violator may be represented at any revocation hearing by a person of his choice. However, the role of such non-attorney representative shall be limited to offering a statement on the alleged violator's behalf. Only licensed attorneys shall be permitted to question witnesses, make objections, and otherwise provide legal representation for parolees, except in the case of law students appearing before the Commission as part of a court-approved clinical practice program, with the consent of the alleged violator, and under the personal direction of a lawyer or law professor who is physically present at the hearing.

§ 2.104

Issuance of subpoena for appearance of witnesses or production of documents.

(a)(1) If any adverse witness (i.e., a person who has given information upon which revocation may be based) refuses, upon request by the Commission, to appear at a preliminary interview or local revocation hearing, a Commissioner may issue a subpoena for the appearance of such witness. Such subpoena may also be issued at the discretion of a Commissioner in the event such adverse witness is judged unlikely to appear as requested.

(2) In addition, a Commissioner may, upon a showing by the parolee that a witness whose testimony is necessary to the proper disposition of his case will not appear voluntarily at a local revocation hearing or provide an adequate written statement of his testimony, issue a subpoena for the appearance of such witness at the revocation hearing.

(3) Such subpoenas may also be issued at the discretion of a Commissioner if deemed necessary for the orderly processing of the case.

(b) A subpoena issued pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section may require the production of documents as well as, or in lieu of, a personal appearance. The subpoena shall specify the time and the place at which the person named therein is commanded to appear, and shall specify any documents required to be produced.

(c) A subpoena may be served by any Federal or District of Columbia officer authorized to serve criminal process. The subpoena may be served at any place within the judicial district in which the place specified in the subpoena is located, or any place where the witness may be found. Service of a subpoena upon a person named therein shall be made by delivering a copy thereof to such a person.

(d) If a person refuses to obey such subpoena, the Commission may petition a court of the United States for the judicial district on which the parole proceeding is being conducted, or in which such person may be found, to require such person to appear, testify, or produce evidence. If the court issues an order requiring such person to appear before the Commission, failure to obey such an order is punishable as contempt. 18 U.S.C. 4214 (1976).

§ 2.105

Revocation decisions.

(a) Whenever a parolee is summoned or retaken by the Commission, and the Commission finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the parolee has violated one or more conditions of parole, the Commission may take any of the following actions:

(1) Restore the parolee to supervision, including where appropriate:

(i) Reprimand the parolee;

(ii) Modify the parolee's conditions of release; or

(iii) Refer the parolee to a residential community treatment center for all or part of the remainder of his original sentence; or

(2) Revoke parole.

(b) If parole is revoked pursuant to this section, the Commission shall also determine whether immediate reparole is warranted or whether parole should be terminated pursuant to D.C. Code 24-206(a). Termination of parole shall return the parolee to prison. If the parolee is returned to prison, the Commission shall also determine a presumptive release date pursuant to § 2.81.

(c) Decisions under this section shall be made upon the concurrence of two Commissioner votes, except that a decision to override an examiner panel recommendation shall require the concurrence of three Commissioner votes. The Commission's decision shall ordinarily be issued within 21 days of the hearing, excluding weekends and holidays.

(d) Pursuant to D.C. Code 24-206(a), a parolee whose parole is revoked by the Commission shall receive no credit toward his sentence for time spent on parole, including any time the parolee may have spent in confinement on other sentences (or in a halfway house as a condition of parole) prior to the execution of the Commission's warrant.

(e) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, prisoners committed under the Federal Youth Corrections Act shall not be subject to forfeiture of time on parole, but shall serve uninterrupted sentences from the date of conviction except as provided in § 2.10(b) and (c). This exception from D.C. Code 24-206(a) does not apply to prisoners serving sentences under the D.C. Youth Rehabilitation Act, to which D.C. Code 24-206(a) is fully applicable.

(f) In determining whether to revoke parole for non-compliance with a condition requiring payment of a fine, restitution, court costs or assessment, and/or court ordered child support or alimony payment, the Commission shall consider the parolee's employment status, earning ability, financial resources, and any other special circumstances that may have a bearing on the matter. Revocation shall not be ordered unless the parolee is found to be deliberately evading or refusing compliance.

§ 2.106

Youth Rehabilitation Act.

(a) Regulations governing YRA offenders and D.C. Code FYCA offenders. The provisions of this section shall apply to offenders sentenced pursuant to the Youth Rehabilitation Act of 1985 (D.C. Code 24-801 et seq.) (YRA), and to D.C. Code offenders sentenced under the former Federal Youth Corrections Act (former 18 U.S.C. 5005 et seq.) (FYCA).

(b) Application of this subpart to YRA offenders. All provisions of this subpart that apply to adult offenders also apply to YRA offenders unless a specific exception is made for YRA (or youth) offenders. The specific exceptions for YRA offenders, apart from this section, are found in § 2.71(b) (timing of initial parole hearings), § 2.75(b) (timing of reconsideration hearings), § 2.80(i) (guidelines for decisions at initial hearings), and § 2.80(l) (guidelines for decisions at subsequent hearings).

(c) No further benefit finding. If there is a finding that a YRA offender will derive no further benefit from treatment, such prisoner shall be considered for parole, and for any other action, exclusively under the provisions of this subpart that are applicable to adult offenders. Such a finding may be made pursuant to D.C. Code 24-805 by the Department of Corrections or by the Bureau of Prisons, and shall be promptly forwarded to the Commission. However, if the finding is appealed to the sentencing judge, the prisoner will continue to be treated under the provisions pertaining to YRA offenders until the judge makes a final decision denying the appeal.

(d) Program plans. At a YRA prisoner's initial parole hearing, a program plan for the prisoner's treatment shall be submitted by institutional staff and reviewed by the hearing examiner. Any proposed modifications to the plan shall be discussed at the hearing, although further relevant information may be presented and considered after the hearing. The plan shall adequately account for the risk implications of the prisoner's current offense and criminal history and shall address the prisoner's need for rehabilitational training. The program plan shall also include an estimated date of completion. The criteria at § 2.64(d) for successful response to treatment programs shall be considered by the Commission in determining whether the proposed program plan would effectively reduce the risk to the public welfare.

(e) Parole violators. A YRA parolee who has had his parole revoked shall be scheduled for a rehearing within six months of the revocation hearing to review the new program plan prepared by institutional staff, unless a parole effective date is granted after the revocation hearing. Such program plan shall reflect a thorough reassessment of the prisoner's rehabilitational needs in light of the prisoner's failure on parole. Decisions on reparole shall be made using the guidelines at § 2.80. If a YRA parolee is sentenced to a new prison term of one year or more for a crime committed while on parole, the case shall be referred to correctional authorities for consideration of a “no further benefit” finding.

(f) Unconditional Discharge From Supervision. (1) A YRA parolee may be unconditionally discharged from supervision after service of one year on parole supervision if the Commission finds that supervision is no longer needed to protect the public safety. A review of the parolee's file shall be conducted after the conclusion of each year of supervision upon receipt of an annual progress report, and upon receipt of a final report to be submitted by the supervision officer six months prior to the sentence expiration date.

(2) In making a decision concerning unconditional discharge, the Commission shall consider the facts and circumstances of each case, focusing on the risk the parolee poses to the public and the benefit he may obtain from further supervision. The decision shall be made after an analysis of case-specific factors, including, but not limited to, the parolee's prior criminal history, the offense behavior that led to his conviction, record of drug or alcohol dependence, employment history, stability of residence and family relationships, and the number and nature of any incidents while under supervision (including new arrests, alleged parole violations, and criminal investigations).

(3) An order of unconditional discharge from supervision terminates the YRA offender's sentence. Whenever a YRA offender is unconditionally discharged from supervision, the Commission shall issue a certificate setting aside the offender's conviction. If the YRA offender is not unconditionally discharged from supervision prior to the expiration of his sentence, a certificate setting aside the conviction may be issued nunc pro tunc if the Commission finds that the failure to issue the decision on time was due to administrative delay or error, or that the Supervision Officer failed to present the Commission with a progress report before the end of the supervision term, and the offender's own actions did not contribute to the absence of the final report. However, the offender must have deserved to be unconditionally discharged from supervision before the end of his supervision term for a nunc pro tunc certificate to issue.

§ 2.107

Interstate Compact.

(a) Pursuant to D.C. Code 24-1233(b)(2)(G), the Director of the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA), or his designee, shall be the Compact Administrator with regard to the following individuals on parole supervision pursuant to the Interstate Parole and Probation Compact authorized by D.C. Code 24-251:

(1) All D.C. Code parolees who are under the supervision of agencies in jurisdictions outside the District of Columbia; and

(2) All parolees from other jurisdictions who are under the supervision of CSOSA within the District of Columbia.

(b) Transfers of supervision pursuant to the Interstate Compact, where appropriate, may be arranged by the Compact Administrator, or his designee, and carried out with the approval of the Parole Commission. A D.C. Code parolee who is under the Parole Commission's jurisdiction will ordinarily be released or transferred to the supervision of a U.S. Probation Office outside the District of Columbia.

(c) Upon receipt of a report that a D.C. Code parolee, who is under supervision pursuant to the Interstate Compact in a jurisdiction outside the District of Columbia, has violated his or her parole, the Commission may issue a warrant pursuant to the procedures of § 2.98. The warrant may be executed as provided as in § 2.99. A parolee who is arrested on such a warrant shall be considered to be a prisoner in federal custody, and may be returned to the District of Columbia or designated to a facility of the Bureau of Prisons at the request of the Commission.

(d) If a parolee from another jurisdiction, who is under the supervision of CSOSA pursuant to the Interstate Compact, is alleged to have violated his or her parole, the Compact Administrator or his designee may issue a temporary warrant to secure the arrest of the parolee pending issuance of a warrant by the original paroling agency. If so requested, the Commission will conduct a courtesy revocation hearing on behalf of the original paroling agency whenever a revocation hearing within the District of Columbia is required.

(e) The term “D.C. Code parolee” shall include any felony offender who is serving a period of parole or mandatory release supervision pursuant to a sentence of imprisonment imposed under the District of Columbia Code.

Dated: July 18, 2000.

Michael J. Gaines,

Chairman, Parole Commission.