[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


               OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF 
              PRISONS AND THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

        SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY

                                 OF THE

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                      WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2020

                               __________

                           Serial No. 116-92

                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
         
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]         


               Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
               
                                __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
44-392                      WASHINGTON : 2021                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------               
               
               
                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                    JERROLD NADLER, New York, Chair
               MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania, Vice-Chair

ZOE LOFGREN, California              DOUG COLLINS, Georgia, Ranking 
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas                Member
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., 
HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,          Wisconsin
    Georgia                          STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida          LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
KAREN BASS, California               JIM JORDAN, Ohio
CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana        KEN BUCK, Colorado
HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York         MARTHA ROBY, Alabama
DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island     MATT GAETZ, Florida
ERIC SWALWELL, California            MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
TED LIEU, California                 ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland               TOM McCLINTOCK, California
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida          GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
J. LUIS CORREA, California           BEN CLINE, Virginia
SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas              KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado                 W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida
LUCY McBATH, Georgia
GREG STANTON, Arizona
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas

        PERRY APELBAUM, Majority Staff Director & Chief of Staff
                 CHRIS HIXON, Minority Staff Director 
                                 
                                 
                                ------                                

        SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY

                     KAREN BASS, California, Chair
                    VAL DEMINGS, Florida, Vice-Chair

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas            JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Ranking Member
LUCY McBATH, Georgia                 F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., 
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida              Wisconsin
CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana           STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
HAKEEM JEFFRIES, New York            LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island     TOM McCLINTOCK, California
TED LIEU, California                 DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
MADELINE DEAN, Pennsylvania          GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida      BEN CLINE, Virginia
STEVEN COHEN, Tennessee              W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida

                   JOE GRAUPENSPERGER, Chief Counsel
                    JASON CERVENAK, Minority Counsel
                           
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                            December 2, 2020

                                                                   Page

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

The Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, 
  Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California..     1
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Ohio.     4

                               WITNESSES

Michael Carvajal, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, United 
  States Department of Justice
  Oral Testimony.................................................     6
  Prepared Statement.............................................     8
The Honorable Donald W. Washington, Director, United States 
  Marshals Service, United States Department of Justice
  Oral Testimony.................................................    13
  Prepared Statement.............................................    14

           STATEMENTS, LETTERS, MATERIALS, ARTICLES SUBMITTED

Letter from Sentencing Project, Research and Advocacy for Reform 
  submitted by the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the 
  Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from 
  the State of California for the record.........................    20
Letter from Shane Fausey, National President, Council of Prison 
  Local 33, submitted the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the 
  Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from 
  the State of California for the record.........................    22
Letter to the Honable William P. Barr, Attorney General submitted 
  by the Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee 
  on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of 
  Ohio for the record............................................    48

                                APPENDIX

Statement from Donte Westmoreland submitted by the Honorable 
  Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and 
  Homeland Security from the State of California for the record..    62
Statement submitted by the Honorable Representative Sheila 
  Jackson Lee, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, 
  and Homeland Security from the State of Texas for the record...    64
Article ``How Biden helped create the student debt problem he now 
  promises to fix,'' The Guardian, submitted by the Honorable 
  Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, 
  and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record.    73
Article ``How Joe Biden helped inflame the student loan crisis: 
  Geoffrey Peterson,'' Ohio Local News, submitted by the 
  Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, 
  Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for 
  the record.....................................................    78
Article ``Joe Biden's Role in Creating the Student Debt Crisis 
  Stretches Back to the 1970s,'' The Intercept, submitted by the 
  Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, 
  Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for 
  the record.....................................................    85
Article ``What is a Women's Issue? Bankruptcy, Commercial Law, 
  and Other Gender-Neutral Topics,'' Harvard Women's Law Journal, 
  Vol. 25, Spring 2002, submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a 
  Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
  Security from the State of Florida for the record..............    87

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

Questions for Director Michael Carvajal from the Honorable Karen 
  Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and 
  Homeland Security from the State of California for the record..   128
Questions for Director Michael Carvajal from the Honorable Val 
  Demings, Vice-Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, 
  and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record.   134
Questions for Donald W. Washington from the Honorable Karen Bass, 
  Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
  Security from the State of California for the record...........   134

 
   OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS AND THE U.S. MARSHALS 
                                SERVICE

                      Wednesday, December 2, 2020

                        House of Representatives

        Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security

                       Committee on the Judiciary

                             Washington, DC

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:12 a.m., in 
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Karen Bass 
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Bass, Jackson Lee, McBath, Deutch, 
Jeffries, Cicilline, Dean, Mucarsel-Powell, Jordan, Chabot, 
Gohmert, Lesko, and Cline.
    Staff Present: Madeline Strasser, Chief Clerk; Joe Graupen-
sperger, Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime; Milagros 
Cisneros, Detailee, Subcommittee on Crime; Veronica Eligan, 
Professional Staff Member, Subcommittee on Crime; Chris Hixon, 
Minority Staff Director; Jason Cervenak, Minority Chief 
Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime; Ken David, Minority Counsel; 
and Kiley Bidelman, Minority Clerk.
    Ms. Bass. Good morning. The Subcommittee on Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security will come to order.
    Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare 
recesses of the Subcommittee at any time.
    I welcome everyone to today's hearing on oversight of the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service.
    Before we begin, I would like to remind Members that we 
have established an email address and distribution list 
dedicated to circulating exhibits, motions, or other written 
materials that Members might want to offer as part of our 
hearing today. If you would like to submit materials, please 
send them to the email address that has been previously 
distributed to your offices, and we will circulate the 
materials to Members and staff as quickly as we can.
    I would ask all Members, both those in person and those 
appearing remotely, to mute your microphones when you are not 
speaking. This will help prevent feedback and other technical 
issues. You may unmute yourself anytime you seek recognition.
    I will now recognize myself for an opening statement.
    We welcome everyone to this morning's hearing, entitled 
``Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. 
Marshals Service.'' Welcome, also, to those who are joining us 
virtually for this extremely important hearing.
    The last time this Subcommittee held a hearing bringing 
together the Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service 
was in the spring of 2017, and, in October of last year, Dr. 
Kathleen Hawk Sawyer discussed the implementation of the FIRST 
STEP Act. This included Antoinette Bacon from the Department of 
Justice regarding the roll-out of the risk and needs assessment 
tool known as PATTERN.
    Today, with the onset of COVID-19, we must address bigger 
challenges. COVID-19 is a worldwide pandemic that is escalating 
in the United States, and of course this includes our prisons 
and jails, which have become hotbeds for the virus. As of this 
past weekend, the BOP reported that over 23,000 prisoners have 
tested positive for the virus. That is out of 125,000 inmates 
in BOP. By our count, at least 161 people have died from COVID 
while in custody.
    Many of these infections and these deaths might have been 
preventable. Early in the pandemic, anticipating the severity 
of what was to come, Chairman Nadler and I wrote several 
letters to the Attorney General and also to you, Director 
Carvajal, asking you to take aggressive measures to protect the 
many thousands of individuals in your custody.
    We knew that men and women in tightly confined spaces were 
uniquely vulnerable to this virus, and we are instituting 
measures for nursing homes across the country. Correctional 
facilities were not properly providing for social distancing--
and how can they?--testing, quarantining, or even providing 
those in custody with masks.
    In late March, Congress passed the CARES Act, giving the 
Attorney General and the BOP expansive authority to decarcerate 
those most vulnerable to COVID-19, but this authority has been 
underutilized.
    The BOP website may very well say that it has placed over 
18,000 people on home confinement during these 9 months of the 
pandemic--we do wonder whether they were tested before they 
were released, however--but how many of those people would have 
been released to home confinement under normal circumstances? 
In other words, were extra people released because of COVID, 
which is what the authority was suggesting. How many people has 
BOP released under the direct authority of the CARES Act is the 
point?
    We have asked these questions, others have asked these 
questions, but we have not been given any satisfactory answers.
    Less than a month after BOP received the authority to 
release individuals to home confinement and the first of our 
letters were sent to you, I visited Terminal Island in San 
Pedro, California. I met with the warden, correction officers, 
and those serving their sentences. I received messages from 
constituents, family Members, advocates, and the prisoners 
themselves that they were all concerned about the risk of 
exposure to COVID-19 in the facility.
    I do want to commend the warden and the staff for their 
openness, but, frankly, I am concerned that they don't have the 
support they need. Now, they didn't raise this concern to me, 
however, but I am raising the concern. My concern is for the 
staff. It was clear that the inmates are tested but the staff, 
who come and go every day, were not tested.
    At other institutions, we have heard stories of prisoners 
alleging that individuals were being grouped together to 
develop herd immunity. Another was concerned that he was being 
bunked with someone who had clear symptoms of COVID-19. Yet 
another was concerned he was not receiving adequate medical 
care. BOP officers themselves did not have access to adequate 
on-site testing. The incarcerated men from this particular 
institute did not have the right PPE and other needed 
resources.
    We continue to hear from our constituents, distraught 
family Members, those on the inside, and their lawyers. They 
tell tales about what is going on, tales of rolling lockdowns, 
of sick calls that get ignored, of prisoners who haven't seen 
or spoken with their loved ones in months. As facility after 
facility experiences outbreaks, it gives further credence to 
their concerns.
    Particularly troubling is a report from the Council on 
Criminal Justice, which found that incarceration facilities 
represented 19 out of the 20 clusters of confirmed cases of 
COVID-19 in the U.S. as of August. The council highlighted that 
this is of particular concern because the U.S., of course, has 
the largest incarcerated population in the world, with 
approximately 2 million people behind bars. More than 1.3 
million individuals are in State or Federal prisons, and the 
remainder are in county jails.
    So, today, people in custody are five times more likely to 
contract COVID-19 than the general population. Even with 
insufficient testing, there are reports that 252,000 people 
have contracted COVID-19 while in Federal, State, and local 
custody. Over 1,400 of them have died.
    You may have heard about the preventable death of Andrea 
Circle Bear. Ms. Circle Bear, a pregnant mother of five, 
contracted COVID while in BOP's care. She gave birth 
unconscious and on a ventilator. Ms. Circle Bear didn't survive 
and never met her child.
    This tragedy occurred in April. Less than 4 months later, 
nearly half of the 1,300 prisoners at the same facility in 
Texas would test positive for COVID-19. This facility would 
become the largest outbreak of COVID-19 in a Federal facility 
in the country.
    Director Carvajal, these prisoners and their families 
rightfully feel abandoned, and they are scared. You are here 
today hopefully to provide us with answers on how you plan to 
address these and many other concerns and also what resources 
you are lacking. What assistance can we provide to you?
    As for the U.S. Marshals Service, Director Washington, we 
continue to hear similar testimonials. The vast majority of the 
individuals under Marshals' care and custody are pretrial 
detainees, who are innocent until proven guilty. I understand 
that you don't have direct control over the facilities with 
which you have contracts, but I would like to understand what 
oversight you are conducting over these facilities and, 
frankly, for many, question whether you should consider 
renewing the contracts, depending on how things are being 
handled.
    We understand from news reports that well over 6,500 
detainees in the U.S. Marshal custody have tested positive for 
the coronavirus and that the latest death toll among Federal 
pretrial detainees is 20. I underscore that we have heard this 
from news reports for a reason, because, unlike the BOP, it is 
our understanding that the Marshals Service does not publicly 
report any of this information.
    When Chairman Nadler and I wrote to you in May, we 
requested that you immediately begin to provide this 
information on the U.S. Marshals' website. We eventually 
received a response in October but with no commitment to report 
that information online. To this day, the information about 
infection rates and deaths in U.S. Marshals' custody is a 
virtual mystery to the public.
    In addition, we have heard multiple reports that, even 
though the official BOP policy was to halt prisoner transfers 
among facilities, the Marshals Service has nevertheless 
continued to transfer prisoners from facility to facility. In a 
nationwide OSHA complaint, the union representing correction 
officers in the Bureau of Prisons has alleged that the U.S. 
Marshals do not properly test prisoners before they transport 
them, spreading the virus from facilities with high rates of 
infection to facilities with no infections.
    Yesterday, I received information from a report produced by 
the BOP. On October 29, BOP reported 1,800 inmates and 888 
staff tested positive for COVID-19. By November 30, there were 
4,000 inmates and 1,400 staff who tested positive. That is a 
162-percent increase in inmates and a 60-percent increase in 
staff in just 30 days. This is a pretty stark increase and 
seems to be correlated to the resumption of transfers and 
social visiting.
    I have spoken with children who were terrified that their 
parent will die of COVID while in custody, husbands and wives 
who were seeking our assistance to gain the release of their 
sick spouses, mothers and fathers who were pleading on behalf 
of their children. As COVID-19 spikes for the general 
population, we know this translates to more cases in 
correctional facilities.
    Today, I am thinking of the death of Andrea Circle Bear and 
that of Marie Neba. Ms. Neba was sick with stage IV cancer and 
pleading to be released at home. Instead, she would die from 
COVID-19 in custody. I really want to understand, especially 
with inmates who are very elderly or have terminal illnesses or 
multiple risk factors, why they can't be released.
    So, it is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member 
of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio.
    Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Dr. Washington and Director Carvajal, welcome, and thank 
you both for your service to our country.
    The Federal Bureau of Prisons is tasked with protecting 
society by confining offenders in the controlled environments 
of prisons and community-based facilities. BOP's duty is not 
merely to provide housing, food, and security for Federal 
inmates but also to help them become eventually law-abiding 
citizens. Every American has an interest in BOP's mission 
because the vast majority of Federal inmates, well above 90 
percent, will someday, in fact, be released.
    BOP's job is not an easy task and has only become more 
complicated due to the COVID-19 virus. In response to COVID-19, 
BOP undertook a number of steps to safeguard the health and 
safety of staff and the public. They prioritized inmates for 
home confinement who did not pose a significant risk to the 
public, restricted the number of visitors, and limited the 
movement of inmates among their detention facilities. These are 
reasonable measures.
    My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to go 
much further. They have tried to use the COVID-19 pandemic as a 
reason to let more criminals back on our streets. They even 
wrote to the Attorney General, Attorney General Barr, urging 
him to, quote, use every tool at his disposal to release as 
many prisoners as possible, regardless of whether they had 
completed their process and what the plan for each inmate to 
actually have reached what the experts would call 
rehabilitation.
    They even passed legislation in the House that would pay 
States to release inmates in State prisons and local jails. 
Think about that. Democrats want to use your tax dollars to 
incentivize States to put more criminals back on the streets.
    The consequence of these actions has deadly real-world 
results, as we have unfortunately seen. A Colorado inmate 
released pursuant to an executive order signed by the Governor 
related to COVID-19 was arrested in a fatal Denver shooting 
less than a month after his release. In Florida, a 26-year-old 
man charged with second-degree murder in connection with a 
fatal shooting in March, he was released from custody by the 
sheriff the previous month to contain the spread of COVID-19. 
Just a few miles from here, in Alexandria, Virginia, a man who 
was in custody for breaking into a woman's apartment and 
attacking her in 2019, due to COVID-19 concerns, this man was 
released by a local judge over the objection of the prosecutors 
in April. Three months later, he shot and killed the very woman 
he attacked the year before.
    In the spite of these and numerous other crimes that have 
been committed by inmates released early, Democrats are calling 
for more inmates to be released, regardless of their crime or 
prison sentence.
    To be clear, Democrats on the Committee want to open the 
jails. Don't forget, they also want to defund the police. They 
want to turn a public health crisis into a public safety 
crisis. These are not responsible policies, and I hope our 
witnesses today will explain why they are not.
    Like the Bureau of Prisons, the United States Marshals 
Service has faced challenges stemming from the COVID-19 
pandemic. As our Nation's oldest Federal law enforcement 
agency, the Marshals Service's duties are vast: Protecting the 
Federal judiciary, apprehending Federal fugitives, managing and 
selling seized criminal assets, housing and transporting 
Federal prisoners, and, of course, operating the Witness 
Security Program.
    This past summer, we saw the husband and son of a Federal 
judge in New Jersey become the victims of murder after they 
were ambushed feet from the front door of their home. I look 
forward to exploring with our witnesses today ways we can help 
to keep our judges safe. As we discuss the BOP and the Marshals 
Service, we cannot forget the men and women around the country 
who put their lives on the line to keep us safe.
    I also want to tell Director Washington and Director 
Carvajal to please pass on our appreciation to your officers 
and employees. They have a tough job. Especially in the recent 
months, with all the violence around the country, they should 
know that they have our support.
    Finally, President Trump has been a leader in criminal 
justice reform through the Second Chance Act and his wise use 
of the Presidential pardon power. President Trump also been a 
champion for law enforcement around the country. This hearing 
would not be complete without discussing and appreciating the 
job the President has done leading in these important areas.
    Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    It is now my pleasure to introduce today's panel.
    Michael Carvajal is Director of the Federal Bureau of 
Prisons. He began his career with the Bureau of Prisons in 1992 
as a correctional officer in Texas. The Attorney General 
appointed him as the Bureau's 11th Director on February 25, 
2020.
    As Director, he oversees the operation of 122 Bureau of 
Prisons facilities, 6 regional officers, 2 staff training 
centers, 12 contract facilities, 22 residential re-entry 
management offices, with oversight and management of 
approximately 37,000 staff and 156,000 prisoners.
    The Honorable Donald Washington was confirmed by the Senate 
and sworn in as the 11th Director of the U.S. Marshals Service 
on March 29, 2019. He directs a force of more than 5,000 
operational and administrative employees spanning 94 districts, 
218 sub-offices, and 4 foreign field offices. He is a graduate 
the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and South Texas College 
of Law in Houston, Texas.
    We welcome our witnesses and thank them for participating 
in today's hearing.
    Please note that your written statement will be entered 
into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, I ask that you 
summarize your testimony in 5 minutes. To help you stay within 
that time, there is a timing light on your table. When the 
light switches from green to yellow, you will have 1 minute to 
conclude your testimony. When the light turns red, it signals 
that your 5 minutes have expired.
    Before proceeding with testimony, I hereby remind each 
witness that all your written and oral statements made to the 
Subcommittee in connection with this hearing are subject to 
penalties of perjury pursuant to 18 U.S.C., which may result in 
the imposition of a fine or imprisonment up to 5 years or both.
    Mr. Carvajal, please begin.

                 TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL CARVAJAL

    Mr. Carvajal. Good morning, Chair Bass, Ranking Member 
Jordan, and Members of the subcommittee. It is my privilege to 
speak today on behalf of the Bureau of Prisons' over 37,000 
corrections professionals who work day-in and day-out to 
support our critical law enforcement mission. I am committed to 
ensuring these dedicated men and women are guided by the values 
of respect, integrity, courage, and correctional excellence.
    The Bureau receives a great deal of scrutiny with respect 
to our mission, and much of this is based on misinformation or 
misunderstanding of what we do to keep America safe. I 
appreciate this opportunity to discuss what the Bureau does to 
maintain safety and security while providing inmates the 
programming they need to return to our communities and their 
families.
    I have spent the majority of my professional life in career 
service to this agency. After serving in the United States 
Army, I joined the Bureau as a correctional officer, moving up 
through the ranks as a captain, warden, regional director, 
assistant director, and now director. I care deeply about our 
work and the personal sacrifices that the Bureau's law 
enforcement officers make.
    The Bureau currently confines 154,000 inmates in our 122 
Federal prisons nationwide as well as 11 private prisons and 
nearly 200 community-based facilities. Almost 80 percent of 
those inmates are serving terms for drugs, weapons, or sex 
offenses, with 41 percent of those being medium- and high-
security offenders. The safe management of those offenders is 
challenging, but we continue to maintain low levels of serious 
assaults while ensuring that inmates engage in programs that 
address their re-entry needs.
    The FIRST STEP Act provided further incentives for inmates 
to participate in re-entry opportunities, and we successfully 
met the very aggressive implementation deadlines that it 
included.
    Essentially, the FIRST STEP Act required assessment of 
recidivism risk and programming needs for all inmates in our 
custody. After the Department of Justice developed and released 
their risk assessment tool, we immediately began scoring all 
inmates with the new tool. Effective January 22, all inmates in 
our custody were scored, to include new commitments, who were 
scored within 30 days of their arrival.
    As the COVID-19 pandemic has harshly impacted our country, 
it has also had a tremendous impact on the lives of our staff 
and the inmates. Under normal circumstances, life in prison is 
challenging, and even more so coupled with COVID-19.
    Our pandemic response has often been mischaracterized in 
public forums, which is unfortunate, since we have worked 
closely with the Centers for Disease Control to develop the 
best COVID-19 plan for correctional environments. We have 
welcomed external stakeholders into our facilities for audits 
and reviews as well as conducted unannounced inspections of the 
vast majority of our institutions to ensure COVID-19 procedural 
compliance. These internal reviews are ongoing.
    Early on, we developed quarantine and isolation procedures 
for inmates and mandated social distancing and use of face 
coverings. Our procedures have proven effective, as this is 
evidenced by the steep decline in our inmate hospitalizations, 
inmates on ventilators, and deaths. As test supplies became 
available, we put in place test-in/test-out procedures for 
internal inmate movement to minimize the spread of the virus.
    Since March, we have transferred more than 18,000 inmates 
at risk for COVID-19 to home confinement to help keep them 
safe. Many have asserted that the Bureau is spreading COVID-19 
within our communities. However, contact tracing often revealed 
that the virus entered our prisons from the community.
    Although delayed, our institutions generally mirror the 
community transmission rates. Therefore, it is vital that we 
all work together, the Bureau and the public, to combat this 
threat.
    I am honored to speak on behalf of the Bureau staff 
nationwide who are working the front lines tirelessly to 
mitigate the spread of this virus as well as carrying on our 
very important mission. This is challenging, but it is vital to 
the safety and security of the public, our staff, and the 
inmates entrusted to our care.
    Chair Bass, Ranking Member Jordan, and Members of the 
subcommittee, this concludes my statement.
    [The statement of Mr. Carvajal follows:]

                STATEMENT OF OF MICHAEL CARVAJAL

    Good morning, Chairwoman Bass and Members of the 
Subcommittee. You have asked me to come before you today to 
discuss the Bureau of Prisons' (Bureau's) mission and 
operations. It is a privilege to speak today on behalf of the 
Bureau's over 37,000 staff--corrections professionals who 
support the agency's critical law enforcement mission. I am 
committed to ensuring that Bureau staff are guided by the 
values of respect, integrity, courage, and correctional 
excellence, and that we carry out our mission with the highest 
competencies as we serve our stakeholders: Inmates, the public, 
and not to be forgotten, the crime victims whose voices are 
often unheard.
    I was honored to be selected to lead the Bureau and to work 
alongside the finest corrections professionals in the world. I 
have spent 28 years in the Bureau, starting as a Correctional 
Officer, moving up through the ranks of Correctional Services 
to become a Warden, Regional Director, Assistant Director, and 
now Director. I was appointed to serve as the Bureau's eleventh 
Director on February 25, 2020, approximately four weeks before 
the Bureau's first inmate COVID-19 positive case.
    It is impossible to fully discuss the Bureau's current 
mission and operations without recognizing the impact of the 
COVID-19 pandemic and the diligent work of the Bureau's 
professionals in response. In these past months, I have seen 
the Bureau's professionals work tirelessly and with dedication 
toward their mission to protect the health and safety of 
inmates, fellow staff, and the public. I am keenly aware of the 
personal sacrifices these law enforcement officers make in 
fulfilling our important public safety mission. The great work 
they do every day goes largely unseen by the general public. 
Yet this inherently dangerous work helps keep our communities 
safe.

      Our Mission--A History of Public Safety and Re-entry

    The Bureau confines over 154,000 inmates in 122 federal 
prisons, 11 private prisons, and nearly 200 community-based 
facilities nationwide. Incarceration is a valuable crime-
reduction strategy and an important law enforcement tool that 
holds individuals responsible for their actions and deters 
others from committing similar crimes. But equally important, 
it provides a means for individuals to address their 
criminogenic risks (such as gang involvement and substance 
use). As the Subcommittee recognizes, it is imperative that we 
effectively reintegrate individuals back into the community 
following release from prison to reduce the likelihood of 
future criminal behavior and associated victimization. To that 
end, the mission of the Bureau is to confine offenders in 
prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, 
cost- efficient, and secure, and to assist inmates in becoming 
productive, law-abiding citizens when they return to our 
communities.
    The Bureau has had great success with respect to both parts 
of our mission: We have low rates of inmate on staff and inmate 
on inmate assaults, disturbances, and escapes, and our 
recidivism rate is lower than that found in most studies of 
State prisons using comparable definitions and 
methodologies.\1\ These results are a testament to the hard 
work of our dedicated professional staff who support public 
safety and promote re-entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ An estimated 68% of prisoners released from 30 State prisons 
were arrested within 3 years. Source: BJS, Office of Justice Programs 
``2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9-Year Follow-up Period (2005-
2014)'' May 2019. The BOP's 2018 Second Chance Act study (of inmates 
released FY 2011-13) shows that approximately 45% were re-arrested or 
had their supervision revoked over a three-year period; see also U.S. 
Sentencing Commission, Recidivism Among Federal Offenders: A 
Comprehensive Overview, 16 (Mar. 2016), https://www.ussc.gov/sites/
default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2016/
recidivism_overview.pdf (finding that 33.7% of federal offenders 
recidivated within three years of release (Table 2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Our Population

    During the first five decades of the Bureau's existence, 
the number and type of inmates we housed remained fairly 
stable. Beginning in the 1980s, however, federal law 
enforcement efforts and legislative changes led to a 
significant increase in the federal prison population; the 
Bureau's inmate population doubled in the 1980s and doubled 
again in the 1990s. Between 1980 and 2013, the population grew 
by approximately 800%, topping out at nearly 220,000. This 
increase was a significant challenge, and our staff responded 
accordingly and continued to serve the public by maintaining 
safety, security, and providing re-entry programming to our 
inmates.
    Over the past few years, the inmate population has 
decreased significantly, such that today our crowding and 
staffing levels are more manageable. Particularly in the wake 
of COVID-19, this recent decrease has given us important 
latitude to respond to the pandemic.

            Our Programs--Re-entry Begins on Day One

    Re-entry programing is a critical component of public 
safety; individuals are much less likely to return to a life of 
crime and victimization if they leave prison with an education, 
job training, treatment for mental illness and/or substance use 
when needed, and a general understanding of what it means to be 
a productive, law-abiding citizen. Inmates also need an 
opportunity to develop employable skills. It is imperative we 
work in conjunction with our criminal justice partners and 
community stakeholders to do everything possible to ensure the 
nearly 44,000 inmates who are released back into our 
communities each year do not reoffend.
    Inmate programs in federal prisons include work, 
occupational and vocational training, education (including 
literacy), substance abuse disorder treatment, psychological 
services and counseling, observance of faith and religion, and 
other programs that impart essential life skills. These 
programs are a critical part of the Bureau's mission to keep 
our communities safe by improving an inmate's mental health 
and/or providing employable skills and addressing critical 
criminogenic needs. The Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP), 
vocational and occupational training, education, and Federal 
Prison Industries (FPI) have been shown to reduce recidivism. 
In previous research studies, RDAP participants were 16 percent 
less likely to recidivate and 15 percent less likely to have a 
relapse in their substance use disorder within three years 
after release. Inmates who participate in vocational or 
occupational training were 33 percent less likely to 
recidivate, and inmates who participate in education programs 
were 16 percent less likely to recidivate

        Our Goal--Effective Transition to the Community

    The Bureau relies on Residential Re-entry Centers (RRCs; 
also known as halfway houses), and home confinement to assist 
inmates reintegrate into their communities prior to completing 
their prison terms. Typically, approximately 75% of inmates 
annually transfer to an RRC or home confinement prior to their 
release. RRCs provide inmates with a structured, supervised 
environment, and assistance in finding employment and housing; 
completing necessary programming (e.g., community-based 
treatment services); participating in counseling; and 
strengthening ties to family and friends.

                       COVID-19 Pandemic

    The COVID-19 pandemic that is impacting our entire country, 
and indeed the world, has had a significant impact on our 
operations. The Bureau's response to and management of COVID 
has received a great deal of Congressional, media, and 
stakeholder interest and scrutiny. I appreciate the opportunity 
to discuss in person all that the Bureau has done, and 
continues to do, to reduce risks and mitigate the impacts of 
the pandemic, and to keep our staff, inmates, and communities 
safe.
    The Bureau has a sound pandemic plan in place and a well-
established history of managing and responding to various types 
of communicable disease outbreaks. We used this pandemic plan 
as a springboard for our COVID response planning beginning in 
January, when our medical leadership began consulting with 
relevant experts, including the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC), the U.S. Public Health Service, the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM), and the Office of the Vice 
President. We leveraged and implemented guidance from these 
experts and used it to develop protocols for screening inmates 
and staff with potential COVID exposure risk factors. We have 
continued this strong collaboration throughout the pandemic and 
have invited the CDC and public health officials into our 
facilities to evaluate our work. They have praised our planning 
and implementation in the wake of a vexing virus. To be 
transparent about our plans, operations, and statistics, the 
Bureau has published one of the most detailed and thorough 
COVID pandemic resource areas in the Federal Government on our 
public website at www.bop.gov/coronavirus. As a further 
commitment to transparency, the Bureau updates the statistics 
on this site daily.

                     Institution Operations

    On March 13, 2020, in response to an increasing number of 
people with COVID-19 positive infections in various 
communities, the Bureau implemented a decisive and 
comprehensive action plan to protect the health of the inmates 
in our custody, the staff, and the public, to the greatest 
extent possible, consistent with sound medical and corrections 
principles. This plan included significantly limiting movement 
in and out of our federal prisons. Almost all internal inmate--
or Bureau-controlled--movement was suspended. There was some 
very limited inmate movement that was required, including 
movements for forensic studies, writs, Interstate Agreements on 
Detainers, necessary medical and mental health treatment, and 
transfer to RRCs or home confinement. Some new admissions to 
the Bureau from the United States Marshals Service (USMS) 
continued, as legally required. While we received criticism for 
that limited but continued movement, it is critical to note 
that the criminal justice system has not stopped processing 
criminal cases during the pandemic. Individuals in the 
community continue to commit crimes, arrests continue to be 
made, federal courts continue to adjudicate and sentence 
offenders, and thus detainees and sentenced inmates continue to 
enter our system. We are obligated to take these individuals 
from the courts and cannot control who the courts place into 
our system. Working closely with the Department of Justice 
(Department) and the USMS, we attempted to slow the entrance of 
some of these new admissions until additional testing 
capability was acquired.
    With the March 13, 2020 guidance, we implemented social 
distancing procedures, to the greatest extent appropriate 
within the prison environment. As is widely noted, prisons are 
not designed for social distancing. Nonetheless, we modified 
our operations to the extent we could minimize co-mingling and 
group gatherings. We suspended social visiting, tours, and the 
admission of volunteers to decrease the flow of individuals 
from the community into the prison, particularly at the height 
of the pandemic. Understanding the importance of visitation to 
the inmate population, we significantly increased telephone 
minutes for the inmates from 300 to 500 minutes on March 13, 
2020, and later, on April 8, 2020, in accordance with the CARES 
Act, we made telephone calls free for the inmate population. We 
also made video-visiting, also available at our female 
facilities, free of charge. The impact of this program has been 
great--telephone minutes use increased by nearly 50% the next 
day. This program is expected to continue over the course of 
the Presidentially-declared emergency.
    On March 26, 2020, over eight months ago and early in the 
pandemic, we implemented enhanced daily monitoring, to include 
the cessation of movement for any inmate who screened positive 
for COVID-19, and established quarantine and medical isolation 
procedures for inmates. On March 31, 2020, enhanced modified 
operations were introduced to further limit movement within the 
institution such as eating meals in their rooms or cells, or in 
small groups within housing units, and limiting programmatic 
offerings to individualized or small group activities.
    Despite movement limitations, all critical services have 
continued, and Chaplains and Psychologists visit inmates in 
their housing areas when inmates cannot leave that space. In 
early April, to maintain the safety of inmates leaving our 
facilities and the public, we instituted requirements for all 
inmates releasing from the Bureau or transferring to a 
Residential Re-entry Center (RRC) or Home Confinement to be 
placed on 14-day quarantine prior to their anticipated release 
or transfer.
    The Bureau recognized early on that COVID testing for the 
inmate population was critical, but as was the case for the 
country as a whole, testing supplies were initially very 
limited. Working closely with the Department, the Bureau was 
able to obtain testing resources for all our prisons and 
established a national contract with outside laboratories for 
COVID testing. With that availability, we have instituted a 
test-in/test-out and 14-day quarantine protocol for any 
necessary inmate movement.
    Further, regardless of our diligent COVID-19 planning and 
protocol, emergencies have and will continue to arise that 
require us to adapt changes to our procedures. For example, in 
the midst of the diligent work Bureau staff were undertaking 
nationwide to counter the pandemic, on April 13, 2020, Federal 
Correctional Institution (FCI) Estill, South Carolina, was 
struck by a tornado causing extensive damage to both the 
medium- and minimum-security institutions. Over the ensuing 
four days, we were able to move 842 inmates safely and 
securely, relocating them to a prison in Pennsylvania that had 
available capacity. Subsequently, three facilities sustained 
significant damage from Hurricane Laura. The Bureau has plans 
in place to deal with situations such as these, and despite the 
complexities that the COVID-19 pandemic adds to the 
implementation of those plans, these experiences reflect just 
how well-trained and prepared our staff and leadership are to 
handle whatever the next challenge may be.

                        Home Confinement

    As the pandemic grew more widespread, the Bureau began 
aggressively screening the inmate population for inmates who 
were appropriate for transfer to an RRC or Home Confinement for 
service of the remainder of their sentences. Additionally, the 
Bureau authorized the use of inmate furloughs to move qualified 
offenders out of the facilities, to reduce populations, and to 
increase ability for inmates to socially distance.
    On March 26, 2020 and April 3, 2020, Attorney General Barr 
issued memoranda to the Bureau directing us to maximize the use 
of Home Confinement for vulnerable inmates, particularly at 
institutions that were markedly affected by COVID-19. The CARES 
Act, signed into law on March 27, 2020, further expanded our 
ability to place inmates on Home Confinement by lifting the 
statutory limitations contained in title 18 USC 3624(c)(2) 
during the course of the pandemic. I am pleased to report that 
since March 26, 2020, BOP has transferred 18,112 inmates to 
Home Confinement, and there are an additional 175 who are 
scheduled to transfer to Home Confinement in the coming weeks. 
These assessments remain ongoing and will continue for the 
duration of the pandemic.
    It should go without saying that, while we are always 
dedicated to the protection of our inmates' health and safety, 
public safety must also be considered when evaluating community 
placements, and, as the Attorney General's guidance emphasized, 
it is not appropriate for inmates who present a risk to the 
public, because of their criminal acts or other factors, to be 
transferred to home confinement. Nor can we transfer inmates, 
who do not have safe housing for themselves or housing with 
appropriate safeguards, to home confinement. As home 
confinement is still, after all, a form of incarceration for 
persons convicted of crimes who are still serving a federal 
sentence, these public safety factors must be considered, and 
these decisions are made using sound correctional judgement and 
our many years of experience overseeing such transfers.

                         First Step Act

    Despite the challenges COVID brings, the Bureau continues 
to provide robust and effective programming, and it is 
diligently implementing the First Step Act (FSA).

           Assessment of Inmates' Risk to Recidivate

    As of January 15, 2020, which is the FSA statutory 
deadline, all sentenced inmates had received individual risk 
scores and identified need areas. Also in January, the approved 
catalog of more than 70 Evidence-based Recidivism Reducing 
Programs (EBRR) and Productive Activities (PA) was published on 
our public website. These EBRRs and PAs are recommended to 
inmates, to address their specific needs. When an inmate 
successfully completes a recommended program in an identified 
need area, he or she may be able to earn FSA time credit or 
other incentives.

                        FSA Programming

    The Bureau has a variety of programs, the most robust of 
which are Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) interventions for 
mental health and substance use disorders, anger management, 
and criminal thinking elimination. Literacy and occupational 
training programs are also widely available, and re-entry-
focused programs, such as parenting, are offered at all sites. 
Because the agency has such a large menu of programs covering 
all need areas, the Bureau has put forth considerable effort to 
ensure adequate capacity in our existing programs and has been 
able to give access to more inmates by hiring staff into the 
positions authorized by Congress under FSA. We have also worked 
toward program fidelity, standardizing service delivery so that 
every program comports with the evidence that supports its use. 
We identified gaps in services for women and were able to 
enhance our offerings. We also recently contracted for women's 
college programming. Although we have many strong programs, 
external vendors or program developers may submit established 
programs for initial review by an independent research 
organization engaged by the Bureau; this review analyzes and 
determines if the program satisfies the requirements of the 
FSA, and that determination is later reviewed by the Bureau. We 
also develop programs internally. As one of the largest 
employers of doctoral level psychologists--as well as an 
employer of chaplains, teachers, and medical professionals--the 
agency is well- suited to identify gaps in programming and 
create services grounded in evidence that fit federal 
population parameters.

              Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT)

    The Bureau's MAT program was established in 2018 and 
expanded as a result of the FSA. By May 2019, the Bureau was 
screening all inmates nearing transfer to community placement 
for MAT, in an effort to treat addiction and reduce the risk of 
overdose deaths among releasing offenders. Treatment options 
for newly-committed inmates, who entered Bureau custody with 
existing MAT treatment plans, were expanded to include all 
three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medications 
for MAT, using a combination of community providers and 
appropriately trained Bureau providers. The Substance Abuse and 
Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), within the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), provides the 
regulation and oversight of substance use disorder treatment. 
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and SAMHSA work 
together to provide the licensing and accreditation of Opioid 
Treatment Programs. The Bureau currently has one opioid 
treatment program at MCC New York and is working with the DEA 
and SAMSHA to stand up three more at Federal Medical Center 
(FMC) Butner, North Carolina; FMC Springfield, Illinois; and 
FMC Carswell, Texas. These will enable the Bureau to 
internalize even more MAT services and expand our ability to 
treat all inmates in our custody who demonstrate a clinical 
need for MAT. The Bureau continues to work towards establishing 
an internal infrastructure for all MAT-related services and 
medications, with primary focus on consulting with external 
subject matter experts, training staff in all divisions, 
implementing clinical guidance for treatment standardization, 
and monitoring/tracking/reporting MAT utilization.

                FSA Second Chance Act Provisions

    The FSA also contains enhancements to the Second Chance 
Reauthorization Act of 2018, which, among other changes, 
reauthorized and modified a pilot program that allows the 
Bureau to place certain elderly and terminally ill inmates on 
home confinement, to serve the remainder of their sentences. 
The program was fully implemented in April 2019. To-date, 
approximately 534 inmates have been placed into home 
confinement pursuant to this five-year pilot program.

                FSA Criminal Justice Provisions

    The FSA includes a series of other criminal justice-related 
provisions. These provisions include a statutory prohibition on 
the use of restraints on pregnant inmates; a change to the way 
good conduct time credit is calculated (directing that inmates 
earn 54 days of good time credit for each year of imposed 
sentence, rather than for each year of time served); a 
requirement for the Bureau to provide a way for employees to 
safely store firearms on Bureau grounds; a requirement for the 
Bureau to try to place inmates within 500 driving miles of 
their primary residences; a prohibition against the use of 
solitary confinement for juvenile delinquents in federal 
custody; and an expanded requirement that the Bureau aid 
inmates with obtaining identification before they are released. 
In each of these areas, the Bureau either was already in 
compliance with the mandate when the FSA was enacted or has 
since updated its policy or procedures to come into compliance 
with the new provisions.

                           Conclusion

    I am honored to speak on behalf of the Bureau, its staff in 
our 122 institutions, and our administrative offices 
nationwide. Our mission is extremely challenging, but critical 
to the safety and security of the public, our staff, and the 
inmates we house. I thank the staff who, like first responders 
everywhere, are working long hours to prevent or mitigate the 
spread of COVID-19 in our facilities. The Bureau can be proud 
of this hard work, but we understand there is still more to do.
    Chairwoman Bass and Members of the Subcommittee, this 
concludes my formal statement.

    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Mr. Washington?

        TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DONALD W. WASHINGTON

    Mr. Washington. Good morning, Chair Bass, Ranking Member 
Jordan, distinguished Members of the committee. Thank you for 
the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the 
United States Marshals Service.
    As my statement for the record reflects, the Marshals 
Service has an array of critical law enforcement missions, all 
of which we have continued to accomplish despite the challenges 
presented this year.
    My complete statement is available to you all, so I just 
want to briefly highlight two current areas of operation that 
reflect our diversity and importance as a law enforcement 
entity.
    First, not many people realize that, in addition to our 
core missions of apprehending fugitives, transporting, and 
housing prisoners, protecting the judicial process, and running 
the Federal Witness Security program, we are also responsible 
for the Strategic National Stockpile security operations 
program.
    Enhanced after 9/11, the national stockpile fills an 
important need to have pharmaceuticals and other medical 
materials available for quick dissemination to the American 
people in times of national need, such as a manmade or natural 
disaster or a pandemic. The Marshals provide a variety of 
security controls for the stockpile, including storage and 
transportation of medical materials.
    I am very pleased to report that our deputies are already 
working hand-in-hand with Operation Warp Speed to provide 
security for COVID-19 vaccines from the facilities where they 
are manufactured to distribution sites. We have teams of highly 
trained Marshals Service deputies who are executing this 
mission, and this demonstrates yet another way this agency 
provides for the safety and security of our Nation's citizens.
    The second area I want to highlight relates to critically 
missing children. While we are recognized as the preeminent 
agency for locating and apprehending fugitives, we have found 
an equally important application for our people-finding skills.
    In 2015, Members of this Subcommittee gave the Marshals 
Service an added statutory authority as part of the Justice for 
Victims of Trafficking Act. This authority enhanced our ability 
to use our resources to assist Federal, State, and local law 
enforcement entities with the recovery of missing, endangered, 
and abducted children.
    Previously, we could only help find critically missing 
children when there was a connection to a fugitive or a sex 
offender investigation. Under this new authority, we 
established a Missing Child Unit in 2016, and, ever since, we 
have been partnering with our Federal, State, and local 
authorities to recover missing children, many of whom are older 
runaways who are at a very high risk of child sex trafficking, 
child exploitation, sexual abuse, and physical abuse.
    Since August alone, this agency's Missing Child Unit has 
conducted six operations in districts around the country aimed 
at locating and recovering local missing children. The results 
speak for themselves. In these 6 operations, we recovered or 
located 181 children, 22 of which were known victims of sex 
trafficking.
    Now, beneath those numbers are real people. A few weeks 
ago, the foster parents of a child we recovered in New Orleans 
sent me this email. It reads: ``Dear Director Washington, thank 
you for saving our foster son. When 13-year-old Malik was 
abducted in New Orleans in mid-October, we were put in touch 
with your Missing Children Unit team here. Their coordinated 
efforts, calm energy, vigilant search tactics, and quick 
communication provided both relief and results. They stayed in 
touch with us at every turn, giving us hope when we had little. 
We cannot thank you enough for the great work your team down 
here does. If we can impress upon you anything, it is that this 
program should continue to be funded and provided resources. 
Without these efforts, we fear where our son may be today. 
Thank you again for the commitment you have instilled in your 
NOLA team. We are forever grateful. Best, Chelsea and Eric 
Nelson.''
    Committee Members, these two mission areas I have 
highlighted demonstrates this agency's diverse missions and 
commitment to public safety. I thank you for the opportunity to 
be here today, and I look forward to answering your questions 
or any questions that you might have.
    Thank you.
    [The statement of Mr. Washington follows:]

          STATEMENT OF HONORABLE DONALD W. WASHINGTON

    Good morning Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Sensenbrenner, 
and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. I am 
honored to appear before you today to discuss the missions of 
the United States Marshals Service (USMS).
    I would like to start by thanking you for your strong 
support of the USMS and providing us the resources that allow 
us to reduce violent crime and protect, defend, and enforce the 
American justice system.

                            Overview

    In 2019, the USMS celebrated its 230th anniversary. For 
over two centuries, the USMS has held a unique role in the 
American judicial system. Since 1789, when George Washington 
appointed the first 13 Marshals, we serve as the enforcement 
arm of the federal courts and are involved in virtually every 
federal law enforcement initiative. From the Nation's 
inception, through our 19th century westward expansion, our 
role in the iconic 20th century civil rights struggles, and 
into the present, USMS has proudly contributed to the Rule of 
law.
    Even for an organization as storied as ours, 2020 has been 
a year with unique challenges. Like every American institution, 
the USMS has adjusted to the realities imposed by the COVID-19 
pandemic and accompanying economic disruption, while still 
conducting our critical law enforcement missions. As a federal 
law enforcement organization, we have a keen interest in the 
policing issues raised by the death of George Floyd and other 
highly publicized cases this summer. The USMS has been affected 
by the violent unrest in some American cities that put the 
federal judiciary directly at risk. Finally, on July 19, a 
deranged gunman attacked the family of federal judge Esther 
Salas at her home, killing her 20-year-old son and severely 
injuring her husband. This tragic incident brings to the 
forefront our sacred duty to protect the federal judiciary from 
threats to the Rule of law and raises important issues about 
the availability of technology that criminals and disturbed 
individuals use to target protected individuals like judges.
    Despite these challenges, the USMS continues to accomplish 
our varied and critical missions. I am proud of the way our 
workforce of approximately 5,500 Marshals, Deputy Marshals, and 
administrative employees has risen to meet this year's 
adversity. Courthouse operations have been reconfigured because 
of COVID-19, often under short deadlines.
    Enforcement operations are precisely focused on arresting 
the most violent criminals who need to be off the streets in 
order to make our communities safer, pandemic or not. We have 
reconfigured our prisoner operations to ensure the safety of 
the prisoners, our staff, and the court family. Deputies have 
been shifted from one part of the country to another to help 
defend federal property. Many of our employees are teleworking 
from home, juggling work, family, and their own concerns about 
safety. Others are out on the streets of our nation, risking 
themselves and their health in order to find and apprehend 
violent fugitives, wherever they may be. I am incredibly proud 
of our workforce and hope you are as well.
    A recent example of our dedication is Operation Not 
Forgotten, where our Missing Child Unit worked with numerous 
other agencies to locate 26 missing and endangered children in 
Georgia and arrested nine criminals in the process. Using our 
renowned skills to locate wanted fugitives, we used relatively 
new authorities granted to us by Congress in 2015 to find these 
children, who were considered to be some of the most at-risk 
and challenging recovery cases in the area, based on 
indications of high-risk factors such as victimization of child 
sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual abuse, physical 
abuse, and medical or mental health conditions. One child was 
recovered in the company of a convicted child molester, who was 
promptly arrested and is now incarcerated.
    Without the continued support of this committee, successes 
like these would not be possible. As the Director of the USMS, 
my priorities are to ensure the safety of USMS employees and 
protectees; reduce violent crime; and increase the professional 
development of our workforce.
    The Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 President's budget request 
supports a robust addition to our workforce, specifically 363 
positions, including 280 deputies, which are all carefully 
justified. The number one concern I hear from deputies, from 
the judiciary, and from the various Marshals and leaders who 
report to me is that we do not have enough people to execute 
the missions that we have been assigned. With your support, 
funding of these positions will improve the USMS's capabilities 
to meet our mission responsibilities in the years to come. I 
appreciate the chance to speak with you today about the many 
missions of the USMS, which include protecting the federal 
judiciary, apprehending fugitives, housing and transporting 
federal prisoners, managing and selling seized assets acquired 
by criminals through illegal activities, operating the Witness 
Security Program, and ensuring that convicted sex offenders are 
complying with their obligations. Many of our missions are 
accomplished working side by side with other federal, state, 
and local law enforcement agencies, a force multiplier that we 
believe is a hallmark of effective federal law enforcement.

                            COVID-19

    From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the USMS has 
taken proactive measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 
amongst prisoners in its custody and began monitoring its 
detention population for COVID-19, formulating COVID-19 related 
guidance, and providing COVID-19 related resources addressing 
the USMS's prisoner detention mission.
    The USMS does not own or operate any detention facilities. 
While some USMS detainees are housed in Bureau of Prisons (BOP) 
and private detention facilities, the majority of those in USMS 
custody are housed in facilities operated by State or local 
government facilities where we have an established 
intergovernmental agreement to house federal prisoners. All 
decisions concerning infectious disease treatment, including 
decisions to isolate and quarantine prisoners, are made by 
medical and correctional staff working at each facility. 
Nevertheless, we have worked from the beginning of the pandemic 
to minimize the risk of COVID-19 to prisoners and staff, and 
have adjusted our processes from the beginning of the pandemic 
to account for our growing understanding of the disease and its 
transmission. For example, we have authorized COVID-19 testing 
at any facility where the USMS houses prisoners; and we are now 
testing many prisoners who are leaving our custody before they 
move to the BOP to serve their sentences. We also have widely 
distributed personal protective equipment (PPE) to our 
operational workforce who are arresting and interacting with 
prisoners, and we also provide PPE to prisoners in our custody 
upon their arrest.
    The USMS currently houses prisoners in nearly 800 
facilities located throughout the country, which reflects our 
legal requirements to house prisoners in proximity to their 
legal proceedings. Depending upon the needs of each judicial 
district, we might use some facilities to house just a few 
prisoners while others routinely house more than 1,000. In more 
than two-thirds of the facilities with USMS prisoners, we house 
fewer than 50 prisoners, representing a fraction of their total 
population.

                       Judicial Security

    Protecting federal judicial officials, which include 
judges, attorneys, and jurors, is a primary mission for USMS. 
Each year, Deputy U.S. Marshals investigate thousands of 
communications that are vetted into hundreds of significant 
threats against judges, prosecutors, and other Members of the 
court family. Our investigations have been complicated by the 
exponential growth of social media communications in recent 
years, and we see an increasing need to monitor public social 
media so that we have a better chance of detecting disturbed 
people who may be contemplating crimes against protected 
officials. Senior inspectors and deputies, as well as contract 
court security officers, provide security and screen visitors 
at more than 700 judicial facilities across the country. 
Because of COVID-19, we have instituted safety precautions in 
courthouses across the nation, including masking requirements, 
use of video conferencing for some judicial appearances, and 
increased screenings and protections for in-person prisoner 
appearances. In addition to providing security to judicial 
proceedings, Deputy
    U.S. Marshals also provide protective security details for 
certain governmental officials when required. The USMS also 
oversees the security aspect of courthouse construction 
projects, from design to completion. These protective measures, 
although not always visible to the general public, are critical 
to ensuring the security and stability of our federal judicial 
system.

                      Fugitive Operations

    The USMS is the Federal Government's primary agency for 
fugitive investigations and apprehensions. Deputy U.S. Marshals 
arrest or clear more than 30,000 federal fugitives each year, 
and Marshals-led fugitive task forces, made up of federal, 
state, and local law enforcement partner agencies, arrest or 
clear more than 70,000 State and local fugitives every year. 
Many of these fugitives are the ``worst of the worst'': Violent 
repeat offenders whose capture immediately makes local 
communities safer. The USMS leads 56 district fugitive task 
forces and operates eight regional fugitive task forces 
dedicated to locating and arresting wanted felons. We are the 
primary agency tasked with arresting foreign criminal fugitives 
believed to be hiding in the U.S., as well as working with law 
enforcement partners and governments worldwide to track, 
arrest, and extradite fugitives hiding in foreign countries. 
This year we began piloting the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems 
(UAS) in some of our fugitive apprehension operations, marking 
a carefully implemented, years-long development effort 
consistent with DOJ policy. We are excited about the ability of 
UAS to provide cost effective overwatch capabilities to our 
fugitive task forces that reduce risks to law enforcement 
personnel.
    The USMS is the lead federal law enforcement agency 
responsible for investigating sex offender registration 
violations. Following passage of the Adam Walsh Act in 2006, 
the Marshals Service has partnered with law enforcement 
personnel from thousands of State and local agencies to 
coordinate and conduct sex offender compliance/enforcement 
operations throughout the country. In FY 2020, USMS conducted 
2,759 non-compliant sex offender investigations and assisted 
with 52,738 compliance checks of known registered sex 
offenders.

                      Prisoner Operations

    The USMS is responsible for the custody of more than 
200,000 federal detainees each year, beginning at the time of 
arrest by a federal agency (or remand by a judge) until 
acquittal, commitment to a designated Federal BOP institution, 
or otherwise ordered release from our custody. The USMS ensures 
the safe, secure, and humane care of prisoners in its custody. 
We currently provide housing, medical care, and transportation 
for an average daily population of about 63,000 federal 
prisoners located throughout the United States and its 
territories and escort prisoners to and from their court 
appearances. Our prisoner operations have been significantly 
affected by the sudden COVID-19 pandemic this year. Many court 
appearances have been substantially curtailed in certain parts 
of the country, depending on the severity of the disease 
outbreak there. The USMS does not own or operate detention 
facilities but partners with State and local governments to 
house approximately 70 percent of our prisoners. Additionally, 
the agency houses approximately 16 percent of its prisoner 
population in private detention facilities under direct 
contract and approximately 14 percent in Federal BOP 
facilities. In regular times, the detention of federal 
prisoners presents diverse and complex challenges, including: 
(1) Locating detention space near federal courthouses; (2) 
coordinating with federal, state, and local authorities 
regarding the execution of writs, court orders, and the 
transfer of prisoners; (3) separating multiple co-defendant 
prisoners from each other to ensure their safety and security 
and the effective operation of the judicial system; and (4) 
managing prisoners with contagious diseases and chronic 
illnesses. These factors have all been complicated by the 
COVID-19 pandemic. Jails and detention facilities are a 
particularly challenging environment for communicable diseases 
like COVID-19, and we have been taking appropriate and prudent 
measures to protect prisoners, staff, and the community while 
executing the lawful orders set by the federal judiciary. USMS 
is actively mitigating the COVID-19 threat for all new 
detainees. After arrest, all new intakes are screened for 
COVID-19 symptoms at the sally port prior to entering the 
courthouse facility. Prisoners are also screened when leaving 
the facility. Screening includes verbal COVID-19 screening 
questions, as well as temperature checks. Detainees are given 
facemasks upon arrest and must wear masks within the courthouse 
and during transportation. Inmate restraints are cleaned 
between uses. We are following guidance from the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on handling prisoners; 
this guidance has changed several times since the outbreak, and 
we will continue to evolve our prisoner operations as CDC 
guidance changes. We also have surveyed the approximately 800 
State and local facilities actively housing USMS prisoners to 
determine if they are following CDC guidelines for managing 
COVID-19 in correctional and detention facilities. We observed 
that the vast majority are following most of CDC's guidelines.

                    Prisoner Transportation

    The USMS Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System 
(JPATS) transports prisoners between judicial districts and 
correctional institutions in the U.S., including Puerto Rico 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands. During normal times, JPATS handles 
more than 1,000 movements per business day on average, or about 
a quarter million movements a year. Since the arrival of COVID-
19, prisoner movements have been sharply reduced as a safety 
measure.
    Between March 2020 and July 2020, there has been a 70 
percent decrease in JPATS movements when compared to the same 
timeframe last year. JPATS uses all CDC recommended protocols 
including full personal protective equipment (PPE) for crews 
and face coverings for prisoners. JPATS has also implemented 
increased equipment and aircraft cleaning as well as crew/
prisoner social distancing on flights.

                        Asset Forfeiture

    The Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program is a key 
component of the Federal Government's law enforcement efforts 
to combat major criminal activity by disrupting and dismantling 
illegal enterprises, depriving criminals of the proceeds of 
illegal activity, deterring crime, and restoring property to 
victims. The USMS plays a critical role in identifying and 
evaluating assets that represent the proceeds of crime as well 
as efficiently managing and selling assets seized and forfeited 
by DOJ. Proceeds generated from asset sales are used to operate 
the program, compensate victims, and support various law 
enforcement and community initiatives. We manage a wide array 
of assets, including real estate, commercial businesses, cash, 
financial instruments, vehicles, jewelry, art, antiques, 
collectibles, vessels, and aircraft.

                        Witness Security

    The USMS operates the federal Witness Security Program 
(WITSEC), which is sometimes referred to colloquially as the 
``Witness Protection Program.'' WITSEC provides for the 
security, safety, and health of government witnesses and their 
authorized family Members, whose lives are in danger as a 
result of their cooperation with the U.S. government. The
    program has successfully protected an estimated 19,000 
participants--including innocent victim-witnesses and 
cooperating defendants and their dependent family Members--from 
intimidation and retribution since it began in 1971. No 
participant following program guidelines has ever been harmed 
while under the active protection of the USMS. The program is a 
vital and effective tool in the U.S. government's battles 
against organized crime, drug trafficking, terrorism, and other 
major criminal enterprises. WITSEC personnel are the leading 
authorities and foremost experts on witness security matters, 
providing guidance and training to many government officials 
throughout the world.

                      Tactical Operations

    The USMS performs tactical operations for sensitive 
missions involving homeland security, national emergencies, and 
domestic crises. The Special Operations Group (SOG) is a 
rapidly-deployable, highly-trained force of tactically-trained 
deputies whose Members are deployed in high-risk and sensitive 
law-enforcement situations, national emergencies, civil 
disorders, and natural disasters. SOG is comprised of 80-100 
volunteer Deputy U.S. Marshals who complete rigorous training 
in specialties such as high-risk entry, explosive breaching, 
weapons employment, rural operations, evasive driving, less-
than-lethal weapons, waterborne operations, and tactical 
medical support. SOG deploys specialized people and equipment 
in support of domestic operations such as 15 Most Wanted 
investigations, fugitive task force support, and high-threat 
judicial proceedings such as terrorist and drug kingpin trials.

                         Officer Safety

    The USMS's fugitive apprehension mission is among the most 
dangerous in federal law enforcement, and officer safety is our 
top priority. Born of hard lessons learned, we developed 
Officer Safety Training that includes a 40-hour High Risk 
Fugitive Apprehension Course, which focuses on the real dangers 
of the fugitive mission. This course focuses on topics 
including: Deputy Trauma Medicine, Use of Force, Building 
Entries, Firearms Training, Vehicle Stops, and Leadership. We 
also ensure that all personnel receive officer safety training 
on a continuous basis, including a program to ensure every 
district has a highly trained Tactical Training Officer able to 
provide officer safety training on a continuous basis. Finally, 
we developed a program in recent years for the cyclical 
replacement of body armor, which ensures that all body armor is 
replaced on a 5 year cycle to take advantage of advances in 
protective technologies.

                           Conclusion

    Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Sensenbrenner, and Members 
of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of the 
United States Marshals Service, thank you for your ongoing 
support of the Agency's programs. I am committed to ensuring 
that we are efficient stewards of the resources you have 
entrusted to us. I look forward to working with you to ensure 
we meet our obligations to the Department of Justice, the 
federal judiciary, and the American people.

    Ms. Bass. Again, let me thank both witnesses for being here 
today and for your service.
    I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter two 
documents into the record, one from The Sentencing Project and 
the other one from the American Federation of Government 
Employees.
    [The information follows:]   

                       KAREN BASS FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    We will now proceed under the 5-minute Rule with questions, 
and I will begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
    The Justice Department's inspector general has reported 
that the Federal Correctional Complex in Oakdale, Louisiana, 
failed to isolate or quarantine prisoners who were exposed or 
who tested positive to COVID-19.
    The report found that some inmates who had tested positive 
were left in their housing units for up to 6 days without being 
isolated. In the BOP's COVID-19 Pandemic Response Plan, the BOP 
requires that a person who tests positive for COVID-19 be 
immediately placed under medical isolation.
    So, I would like to ask Mr. Carvajal, what is your response 
to this? Why are COVID-positive prisoners not immediately 
isolated from the general population in all Federal facilities?
    Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Chair Bass.
    They are. We do have procedures. They are good procedures 
when they are followed.
    In a nutshell, we had some leadership issues there. We sent 
an outside team in. Attorney General Barr actually sent a 
couple of his staff over. We sent a review team. Our regional 
director had some concerns about the procedures not being 
enforced or followed.
    In essence, without getting into details, I removed the 
leadership. The warden was removed from his position.
    Ms. Bass. Okay. Good. I appreciate that.
    So, in your facilities, are inmates and staff provided with 
masks, gloves, and the ability to practice good hygiene?
    Mr. Carvajal. Chair Bass, that is absolutely correct; they 
are.
    We do have the same challenge that everyone else, I 
believe, in the country, in the world does, is that people have 
a personal accountability here also. We must enforce the rules, 
but people have to make a conscious effort to follow the rules 
and procedures.
    They are in place for a reason, and we have been in 
lockstep with CDC guidance from day one. It is well-published. 
There are links. I have done informational messages. We have 
COVID review compliance teams, unannounced. Prior to me being 
the Director, an announced visit in a Federal correctional 
institution was unheard of. We have reviewed almost 100 percent 
of our facilities. That doesn't include outside stakeholders 
coming in.
    So, it is a matter of enforcement, and it is a matter of 
people following the rules, both inmates and staff.
    Ms. Bass. Okay.
    I want to ask you about staff being provided access to 
testing. I mentioned my visit to Terminal Island, and I did 
appreciate they were very open. They did not raise the issue, 
but I am.
    So, it made no sense at all to me--it was wonderful that 
the inmates were tested and tested regularly. The inmates are 
there. The staff come and go every day and the staff had no 
access to testing.
    So, has this been remedied in not just that facility but 
throughout?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, it has, Chair Bass.
    I do recall your visit over there. I don't remember the 
particular date or the time. I will tell you that, early on, as 
with the rest of the world and the country, testing resources 
were unavailable.
    Ms. Bass. Right.
    Mr. Carvajal. They were hard to get--
    [Audio interruption.]
    Ms. Bass. --is not picking up your voice. There you go.
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, ma'am. It was on.
    Ms. Bass. Great.
    Mr. Carvajal. Okay. Testing resources, as they have become 
available, we have gained access to them. If I remember 
correctly, in California, we partnered with the local community 
public health care, we partnered with other entities. The union 
has helped us at times gain resources. Bow I am happy to say 
that we have a contract, a high-volume testing contract.
    I would also like to mention, Chair Bass, that we can offer 
the testing, and in many places, we have offered availability 
to 100-percent testing, people don't want to take it. We can't 
make them--
    Ms. Bass. ``People'' meaning who?
    Mr. Carvajal. ``People'' as in staff. It is voluntary.
    Ms. Bass. They don't want to take it?
    Mr. Carvajal. It is voluntary. I will give you an example. 
At Forrest City, we--
    Ms. Bass. Actually, I am going to run out of time, so thank 
you.
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, ma'am.
    Let me ask Mr. Washington: We have heard accounts of people 
in Marshals' custody being moved across State and county lines 
and placed into local jails with no information on their 
transfer paperwork about whether they have been tested for 
COVID or not.
    Could you respond to that?
    Mr. Washington. Yeah, Chair Bass, I have not heard that 
particular complaint. I can say that the good men and women of 
the United States Marshals Service are very interested in 
making sure that our inmates are healthy and safe and that--
    Ms. Bass. Are they tested before they are transferred, and 
are the people, the staff?
    Mr. Washington. Yes. We are testing in--for example, all 
our inmates that go off to the BOP facilities are being tested, 
or at least a large portion of them are. We have authorized 
funding for all State institutions in which our prisoners are 
housed.
    Ms. Bass. Are you aware of the breakouts that have taken 
place from prisoners being transferred? Now, I don't know, 
maybe you have rectified it, but--
    Mr. Washington. Yes, ma'am. I have, of course, seen the 
media reports and things of that sort. We also know when there 
is an issue inside of a particular--
    Ms. Bass. Are the media reports accurate?
    Mr. Washington. Generally, so-so.
    Ms. Bass. Okay.
    Thank you. My time has expired.
    Representative Chabot?
    Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding 
this hearing today.
    I want to thank Director Washington and Director Carvajal 
for appearing this morning. Thank you both for your service to 
our country and to your respective agencies.
    This year has been particularly difficult for everyone, 
everywhere, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We have all 
had to stay home, socially distance, and otherwise--
    Ms. Bass. Oh. Steve, your mike.
    Mr. Chabot. Sorry. Otherwise follow CDC guidelines to help 
reduce the spread of this deadly virus.
    Similarly, you have had three challenges. You are tasked to 
protect both your staff and the spreading populations that you 
serve and make sure that they don't contract, both your 
employees as well as the inmates, this deadly virus.
    Now, in the Ranking Member's opening statement, Mr. Jordan 
mentioned that Democratic leadership in this Committee sent a 
letter to the Attorney General, Mr. Barr--I am sure that you 
were aware of this--urging you to use every tool at your 
disposal to release as many prisoners as possible. Now, that 
would be completely irresponsible, as I think most people would 
agree, and would put the public directly at risk.
    Now, Director, how do you take into consideration the 
seriousness of the inmate's crime, for example, and the risk of 
recidivism before sending someone into home confinement, for 
example? What do you look at when you are making those types of 
determinations?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, there are several criteria. The 
ones in particular that would refer to what you are talking 
about, the seriousness of crime, is there are four criteria 
that were listed that we follow that we don't deviate from: The 
primary offense cannot be a violence, a sex offense, terrorism, 
or they can't have a detainer.
    There are numerous other criteria--I can certainly list 
them if you would like--that are somewhat discretionary. We 
absolutely take into consideration public safety. In fact, the 
Attorney General's guidance to me in two separate memoranda 
stated that, to maximize the use of this authority but that we 
absolutely have a responsibility not to release and overburden 
the community.
    So, we take into consideration public health and public 
safety. I assure you that anyone that is eligible under that 
criteria have been reviewed and, if appropriate, transferred to 
community custody, just as we were directed.
    Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
    What tools does the Bureau use to monitor inmates after 
they are released into home confinement?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, under normal circumstances, I 
think everyone needs to understand that home confinement, in 
and of itself, is a transitional program. It is set up for 
inmates at the end of their sentence, 6 months, or 10 percent 
of their sentence, to transition into the community.
    The CARES Act has us looking at inmates who otherwise may 
not even meet that criteria. So, you are talking about long-
term placement in the community. We didn't have the resources; 
we expanded it. Ninty-four percent of the inmates on home 
confinement are monitored through contracts. Everybody needs to 
understand that those contract staff that monitor these 
inmates, they use GPS, electronic monitoring, things like that. 
These are not law enforcement personnel.
    We don't have the staff to monitor them. We contract out. 
Ninty-four percent of them are monitored by contract staff. We 
do contracts, but they are not law enforcement. They simply 
keep track of and check on these people. The other 6 percent 
are monitored by the United States Probation Office and the 
Federal Location Monitoring.
    Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
    Finally, I have about a minute left, so let me touch on 
something else.
    I have been a longtime supporter and advocate for prison 
industries. When we have these folks confined for a period of 
time, the vast majority of them are going to get out at some 
point. We would prefer the lowest recidivism as possible. We 
don't want them to go out and commit more crimes. We know many 
will, unfortunately, but those that have been involved in 
getting a skill or something they can put to work in the 
private sector at some point probably have a better chance of 
not going out and committing more crime.
    So how has COVID and the restrictions impacted the prison 
industries program?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, it absolutely has impacted 
prison industries.
    We know that 24 percent less likely to recidivate if they 
worked in prison industries, 14 percent more likely to have a 
job when they get out if they worked in Federal prison 
industries. It is actually our number-one evidence-based 
recidivism-reducing program.
    It has been impacted, like all other organizations. We are 
down about 2,000 workers. We generally employ about 10,000 
inmates in Federal prison industries. There is always a waiting 
list. We are done to about 8,000.
    UNICOR was projected to have $27 million earnings last 
year, because our factories were doing well under the FIRST 
STEP Act. We closed the year with a $3 million deficit. So, we 
have to get that back on track so that we continue to give 
people the opportunity to get those jobs out there.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you very much.
    Representative Jackson Lee?
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you for yielding. Good morning. 
Thank you to the Director for your service to the country, and 
to the head of the U.S. Marshals as well.
    My time is very short. I will try to shorten my questions.
    I will go directly to you, U.S. Marshals. The chairwoman 
asked a question that I would like to follow up, and that is 
that those that you are able to secure--and let me also 
acknowledge your work with finding children and congratulate 
your men and women in that service--come from many different 
facilities. There has never been a question of--or a source of 
information about the COVID-19 protocols or the status of these 
individuals coming from facilities that do not follow the 
Bureau of Prisons protocol in testing.
    Do you have the data of all the people you have in custody 
and whether or not they have been tested whether or not their 
facilities are following COVID-19 facility protocols, and also 
whether or not you have had any to die from COVID-19 in your 
custody?
    If you could just quickly answer those questions, I need to 
move to the Director, please.
    Mr. Washington. Thank you, Congresswoman Jackson Lee.
    Yes, we have some data. The difficulty we have, of course, 
is that we have some 800 facilities, because, as Chair Bass 
indicated, of the 2 million prisoners in the United States, we 
have 63,000 spread out over 800 facilities. So, it has been 
somewhat of a difficult exercise to make sure that we have 
consistent, accurate data. The data that we have been able to 
accumulate is not uniformly reported, and it is not reported at 
the same time.
    We do have some data, in terms of the numbers that have 
tested positive and deaths and those that are on ventilators 
and in hospitals and things of that sort.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. So, let me make this request. I think it 
has been made by Members of Congress before, House and Senate. 
My official request is that you find the capacity for 
collecting that data and submitting it to this committee, 
particularly--as much as you can garner--particularly those 
hospitalized and any that have died.
    Whatever authority you have to the facilities--because we 
pay those facilities--to send notice to them that you want them 
to provide testing protocols or others, to those that you 
have--that are under your Federal custody, meaning that you are 
getting from them. I would like to hopefully have you look into 
that, please, Mr. Washington, and see how much data you can 
provide us with.
    Mr. Washington. I will look into it, Representative.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Those individuals may go back into 
society--family Members, et cetera. That is what we are trying 
to stop, is that extensive community spread.
    Thank you very much for your service.
    Mr. Washington. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me ask--Director, thank you again. As 
you well know, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on October 27 regarding 
the handling of COVID-19 at the Federal facility at Butner, 
North Carolina. The complaint alleges that BOP has not 
reconfigured housing units to allow for social distancing.
    During a hearing, Director, in the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, you committed to new efforts by the Bureau to create 
alternate living. Let me ask you, what progress you have made 
in dealing with social distancing? Let me also ask you, whether 
or not you have continued the waiver of the copayment for 
incarcerated persons that makes it very difficult for them?
    Then my other question is to raise the question of why we 
are allowing the mindset for individuals who are on the front 
lines to deny or reject testing. That means--I know there are 
unions inside. I want to respect--and I am not sure whether 
they are representing individuals. I would like to question 
them. I am a strong supporter of their work ethic. I don't 
think you can come here and say to us that they don't want to 
get tested. I am going to be asking people to get vaccinated, 
and I know that is going to be a challenge. They don't want to 
get tested?
    I think you need to come up with--I would like to hear your 
response of how you can more effectively deal with making sure 
that all your staff are effectively tested, which I think is 
extremely important. If you would share, in the short amount of 
time, your best answers.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    Yes, we are still waiving the copay for COVID-related 
illness.
    We have expanded the use--because our population is lower, 
two things we have done in those areas that were challenging: 
The prisons aren't made for social distancing, as you are well 
aware. They are completely the opposite, so we did have 
challenges. With the reduction in our population, we have been 
able to spread people out. We actually put target population 
levels on our most vulnerable facilities so they are at about 
50-percent capacity.
    We also used some of the COVID funding to purchase tents 
and things of that nature. We have temporary housing--we 
borrowed tents from the military at one point until we were 
able to get some--to distance people out and provide 
alternative living areas. We have made use of every available 
space we can to convert for housing so that we can get that in 
place. Again, prisons aren't necessarily built for that.
    The last portion of your question, about staff testing, I 
can't mandate somebody to take a test, Congresswoman. If I 
could, I would be doing it already.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, my time is up, but let me indicate 
that your individuals who are on the front line, maybe we need 
to help you with that. I understand civil liberties, civil 
rights, the Constitution. You are talking about individuals 
coming in contact with incarcerated persons, who can't walk 
away, can't get out. That means they are endangering 
themselves, their families at home.
    Can you just answer the question of the numbers of your men 
and women who may have lost their life to COVID-19? Do you have 
a number on that?
    Mr. Carvajal. When you say my men and women, are you 
referring to inmates or staff?
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Staff.
    Mr. Carvajal. One-hundred-and-forty-five inmates and three 
staff--two staff that were confirmed, one that was listed 
posthumously as being COVID-positive but the cause of death was 
not listed as that.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
    I yield back. Thank you.
    Ms. Bass. Representative Gohmert?
    Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Chair.
    Thank you both, to our witnesses, for being here.
    Mr. Carvajal, I know this is a difficult time, but I am--
back when I was a judge and when I was paying attention to 
felony facilities, Federal and State, we had a problem called 
AIDS. I am glad to see the majority's interest now. I was 
shocked how little regard people had in Congress with regard to 
AIDS spreading through Federal prisons. So, it looks like there 
is more of an appropriate interest now, even though that was 
much more of a deadly disease.
    Do you have any idea what the percentage, the mortality 
rate, is of those who are positive with COVID-19 within the 
prison system?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, that is somewhat of a difficult 
question to ask, because we have so many moving pieces, 
releases, and everything. Even my medical experts are 
challenged with that.
    Here is what I will tell you. The way we look at this is 
that we have a lot of positive cases, as does everyone. The 
majority of those cases early on were asymptomatic. That is why 
the testing is so important and the mass testing, is we have 
been able to identify presymptomatic or asymptomatic cases and 
use that to help us mitigate the spread of this virus.
    So, we have been able to flatten that curve, as everyone 
likes to say. Although our deaths were a higher rate early on, 
we haven't had as many on ventilators, which is a key. It 
averages about six to eight here lately, even with the last 
spike. More importantly, at one point, we had over 145, 150 
inmates in a hospital at one time. That stays at about 18 to 
20, depending on these spikes.
    Less people are dying now from this disease. Even though 
our numbers show high positive rates, at least 50 percent, at 
this point right now, are asymptomatic, and they aren't 
actively sick. I know they are sick with the virus. That is why 
we want to isolate them and quarantine them. We are able to do 
that better with testing.
    Mr. Gohmert. I would encourage your physicians, when you 
talk about people being put on ventilators--Dr. Bartlett from 
Midland has done some great research in the use of steroid 
nebulizers to protect the alveoli from becoming mush. Because 
once that happens, even when you put them on ventilators, it 
doesn't seem to be helpful.
    Do you know approximately what percentage of the prison 
population are in the United States illegally?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, off my head, I remember the 
number is about 15 percent non-U.S. citizens. I don't know the 
exact number that were illegal entry, but I do know that we 
have approximately 15 percent non-U.S. citizens.
    Mr. Gohmert. Wasn't it higher than that at one time?
    Mr. Carvajal. I believe so, Congressman.
    Mr. Gohmert. I understood that that percentage have been 
reduced because of the COVID crackdown on the border. Have you 
seen that yourself?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't want to misspeak. I 
would have to ask somebody for that data. I don't have--
    Mr. Gohmert. Would you mind getting that and--
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, I will.
    Mr. Gohmert. Thank you.
    Now, from my experience during the days as a judge, it 
seemed that 70-plus percent of those incarcerated had either an 
alcohol or drug problem, alcoholics, or drug addicts. Do you 
have any idea what percentage you are looking at in our Federal 
prison system?
    Mr. Carvajal. Again, Congressman, I don't know the exact 
percentages. I will tell you that we do have lots of 
programming tailored towards alcohol and drug problems and 
offenses, treatment programs. A lot of our programs are geared 
towards that. I don't know the exact percentage.
    Mr. Gohmert. Have those programs been impacted by COVID, 
their ability to have the regular meetings?
    Mr. Carvajal. Absolutely. We have been impacted by COVID 
just like everyone else.
    We did--early on, obviously, we suspended programming at 
some point. We have since resumed. We are probably at--it 
varies, depending on the infection at the facility, but I would 
like to say we are at 50, 60, 70 percent programming back to 
normal. We have found creative ways, just as the school systems 
have, to resume programming.
    Mr. Gohmert. All right.
    We have military inmates confined in Federal facilities 
using a program called Federal Transfer. Has that been impacted 
by COVID?
    Ms. Bass. A quick answer because you are out of time.
    Mr. Gohmert. Yeah.
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't know particularly about 
the military, again, our entire system has been impacted.
    Mr. Gohmert. All right.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Bass. Representative McBath?
    Mrs. McBath. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you gentlemen for shedding some light on these very 
important issues this morning.
    As we continue to grapple with COVID-19, case after case 
has shown us just how difficult it is to contain this virus. 
Everyone must do their part to protect one another. We have 
seen that a single unsafe environment or event has ripple 
effects through our communities. Employers especially have a 
responsibility to be provide safety measures for their workers, 
because if they don't, lives are definitely on the line.
    No one knows this more than the family of Robin Grubbs. 
Robin was an Army veteran and a caseworker at a BOP facility in 
Atlanta. I represent Georgia. In March, she was promoted to a 
new role, where she would be helping those who had completed 
their sentences to return to their families and to their 
communities, and she would be helping them get a brand-new 
start.
    Despite her promotion, Robin never got to start her new job 
or move to a new office in another building. Instead, she was 
kept for an additional month in her old role, in her old 
office, located in an area that BOP started using to house 
those who were infected or exposed to COVID-19.
    According to coworkers, Robin tried to buy her own masks 
while she still waited for her office move and for BOP to 
provide her sufficient PPE. Robin's parents knew that she was 
at risk. They themselves had recently dropped off a care 
package with cough suppressants, medicine, and hand sanitizer 
to her.
    Sadly, Robin was found dead in her home. She posthumously 
tested positive for COVID-19, and her father says that he was 
told the toxicology report did not reveal any alternative 
causes of her death other than COVID-19.
    According to a news report in April, and I quote, a BOP 
spokesperson said that her official cause of death has not yet 
been determined, as her autopsy is not yet complete, end quote. 
Since then, according to later reporting, a spokesperson for 
the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said an autopsy was not 
performed on Robin because she tested positive for COVID-19, 
which was listed as the probable cause of death.
    As of today, BOP does not list any COVID-19 staff deaths at 
the facility where Robin worked. In short, BOP has not 
acknowledged that Robin Grubbs likely died of COVID-19.
    Director Carvajal, does BOP disagree with the determination 
that COVID-19 was Robin's possible cause of death? If so, what 
evidence does it rely on to make that decision?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, what happened to Robin Grubbs, 
as with anyone who dies, for that matter, is sad.
    I don't know that we have ever disagreed with anything. I 
don't know where you are getting your information. I am not a 
medical expert, nor do I write the autopsy reports, and we are 
simply saying what we are given. That last piece of information 
you said, from the Georgia bureau, I don't have that 
information. We have never disputed or debated; we just simply 
call it like we see it.
    The paperwork we were given did not determine a cause of 
death. We are not disputing it. I would not do that. Robin 
Grubbs was one of our staff.
    Mrs. McBath. Okay. Well, thank for that answer. Also, too, 
the Bureau of Prisons' website--we have just had a chance to 
look at--doesn't actually show her death. It shows the death of 
two staff Members.
    So, are you planning on updating the website to identify 
the fact that Robin did actually die and so there was a 
prison--there was an inmate death?
    Mr. Carvajal. You are correct, Congresswoman; our website 
lists two. Again, I don't know all the specifics or the 
legalities or whatever region that is, but I will tell you that 
no one in the Bureau of Prisons is disputing whatever the 
doctor says that that young lady passed away from.
    Our website--we get criticized regardless of if we put it 
out there. I will have you know that staff criticized us for 
acknowledging her death at all early on. We were actually 
scrutinized because we wanted to tell people about this. There 
has been nobody trying to hide anything here.
    Regardless of what we put on that website; somebody is not 
going to like the information. We are not disputing--it is a 
sad situation, and it bothers me that I am even talking about 
this. Robin Grubbs was one of my staff.
    Mrs. McBath. Sir, thank you so much.
    So, despite what anyone thinks, would you be willing to 
update the website to make sure that you are identifying that 
an inmate actually died within the care of the Bureau of 
Prisons?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, again, I will speak to 
whatever reason that that website is not updated. I follow the 
advice of people. There are reasons we do that. I will get back 
with you, I assure you, and I will address that issue of our 
staff member passing away.
    Mrs. McBath. Okay. Thank you very much, and I appreciate 
any updates that you can provide the Committee going forward.
    I would like to give the balance of my time to Chair Bass.
    Ms. Bass. I think you are out of time.
    Let me say quickly that no one on either side of the aisle 
is calling for the indiscriminate release of prisoners. Who we 
are concerned about are prisoners that might be medically 
compromised, including prisoners with terminal illnesses--why 
would they be confined now? Prisoners who are elderly; 
illnesses that put them at risk for COVID, respiratory or heart 
conditions; and people who are in pretrial detention who are 
not a risk to the public safety.
    The other issue is that the majority of the inmates come 
from communities that are already disproportionately impacted. 
So, we want to make sure that they are tested and medically 
cleared before they are released. This protects the inmates, 
the prison staff, and the general public.
    Representative Cline?
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank our witnesses for being here today.
    This has certainly been a challenging year for our Nation, 
and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been felt by 
every American and institution. Much like everything else in 
today's world, our criminal justice system has had to adapt to 
ensure justice is served no matter the circumstances we are 
facing.
    As Members of this committee, we must continue to seek 
improvements to our justice system and guarantee that victims 
of crime and their families are never robbed of justice. At the 
same time, we must ensure that there is fairness and 
transparency throughout our criminal justice system.
    I have appreciated hearing from our witnesses today and 
getting their insight on how the pandemic has affected their 
agencies and what must be done to ensure that our justice 
system continues to operate safely and in the best interest of 
the American public.
    Director Washington, I want to first commend the U.S. 
Marshals Service for their tremendous work in rescuing 33 
children during an operation last month in Virginia that 
included parts of my district. Protecting our Nation's children 
from predators has been a top priority for me.
    Can you expand on your earlier remarks about how the 
pandemic has impacted Marshals' work in pursuing predators and 
rescuing children who are being exploited and trafficked?
    Mr. Washington. Yes. Thank you for that question, 
Congressman Cline.
    First, let me thank you for House Resolution 5706 and the 
Danger Pay for U.S. Marshals Act. That is very meaningful for 
my agency. It is something that we need.
    The pandemic has taken its toll all over the country, as 
you well know. Inside of our agency, we have had to adjust, 
like anyone else has done. In terms of the number of fugitives, 
as an example, in any given year, the United States Marshals 
Service will arrest 100,000 of the Nation's worst criminals in 
any given year. That number is going to be about 80,000 this 
year, as an example.
    So, we will see the impact in terms of workload and things 
of that sort, but it has also impacted just the way we look and 
feel about each other. For example, we took note, of course, as 
everyone in the country did, of the death of George Floyd and 
what happened there. We have had the opportunity to have 
discussions about racial inequality and use of force and things 
of that sort. That is the good side of it.
    On the other side of it, workload has been tremendously 
impacted. Although we have people who are at home, we have 
deputies that must go to court every day, and that has caused a 
tremendous strain on those deputies and their families.
    In terms of courts, you know, we continue to ensure that 
the Rule of law functions as it should in this country. I will 
be honest with you; we need staff. I think you probably have 
heard that before. We have asked for 280 additional deputy 
United States marshal positions in the fiscal year 2021 budget. 
That is not something that we take lightly, when we make those 
kinds of requests.
    It is vital for us to do whatever we can to increase those 
kinds of resources so we can get back to do even more fugitive 
operations and even more child rescues.
    Mr. Cline. Let me follow up on that. Regarding recruiting, 
the U.S. Marshals carry out operations not only here in the 
U.S. but overseas in dangerous locations. However, unlike your 
DOJ counterparts at the FBI and DEA, the U.S. Marshals Service 
is not eligible for danger pay, as you mentioned. This is a 
serious problem, and I appreciate your recognition of the 
legislation that has been introduced on a bipartisan basis by 
Members of this committee.
    Can you talk about the impact on recruitment? If these men 
and women are serving overseas in dangerous conditions, putting 
themselves in harm's way, shouldn't they also be able to 
receive danger pay? How does that lack of danger pay impact 
your ability to recruit the best and brightest?
    Mr. Washington. Yes. The pandemic has shone a light on that 
issue. Let me back up just a little bit.
    So, as you indicated, the FBI and the DEA have those 
authorities to pay danger pay to their agents. We do not to our 
deputy U.S. marshals, who do exceedingly, extraordinarily 
dangerous work--in countries like Mexico, where we are going 
after a drug trafficker and trying to bring them back to the 
United States, where we are actually working with authorities 
inside the country at levels that I don't think the other 
agencies do. In fact, we have relationships in those countries 
that give us a little bit of a leg up.
    We have not only agents, but deputy U.S. marshals and their 
families as well. So, this year, as an example, we had to, of 
course, remove people from those four foreign field offices 
because of the pandemic, and then we had to send them back. So, 
we are sending them back into harm's way. They can look across 
the table in Mexico City, as an example, and sit there next to 
a DEA agent or an FBI agent and recognize that, even though 
they may be the same grade level, they are not getting the same 
kind of compensation for work that is equally as dangerous, if 
not more dangerous, than what those other agents are doing.
    So, it is just something that we need to kind of level out 
and make sure that our officers are fairly treated.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you.
    Ms. Bass. Representative Deutch?
    Mr. Deutch. Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
    Director Carvajal, Director Washington, thank you for your 
service to our country.
    Prisoners confined in BOP facilities have two options to 
seek additional protection from the pandemic. We have talked 
about this; we have talked about seeking a remainder of their 
sentence in home confinement or compassionate release.
    Home confinement is a determination made solely by the BOP. 
Director Carvajal, you have talked about the consideration of 
public safety, something that all of us acknowledge needs to be 
the primary driver here. Then we get to the criteria that are 
used to determine whether a person is eligible to serve their 
remainder in their home confinement.
    The question I have for you, just for some context: On May 
13, the former chair of President Trump's campaign, Paul 
Manafort, was transferred to home confinement due to COVID-19 
fears. He had served far less than half of his 7-year sentence. 
On May 20, President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, 
qualified for home confinement. He was released from BOP 
custody.
    Both Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen were released due to 
concerns of the pandemic in prisons. These are valid concerns. 
Since May of this year, only about 1.8 percent of prisoners in 
the BOP have been moved to complete their sentence in home 
confinement. Most have been denied a transfer.
    So, my question, Director Carvajal, for you is: How many 
prisoners have been approved by the Bureau of Prisons for 
transfer to home confinement? Do you have that number?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I believe, if I am understanding 
your question correctly, it is 18,000--over 18,000 that we have 
placed in home confinement since the passage of the CARES Act.
    Mr. Deutch. How did--if you know, how did Paul Manafort and 
Michael Cohen qualify to be transferred to home confinement? Do 
you know the analysis that was used in those cases?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, what I can tell you is, anyone 
that has been placed on home confinement, regardless of who 
they are, have met the criteria outlined by the CARES Act and, 
specifically, the criteria written by the Attorney General. He 
issued two separate memorandums to me with guidance on there.
    I don't personally review these. There is a reason I don't 
get involved. They are done at the local level. When there is 
anything discretionary to be reviewed outside of the criteria, 
it rises to a Committee at the headquarters level that is 
higher-level subject-matter experts. Everything is either--they 
either meet the criteria or they don't.
    There is some discretion on some of that criteria--
    Mr. Deutch. Well, let me just follow up for a second. I 
appreciate that. I am not sure that I understand what the 
higher-level analysis or the expertise is required, but let me 
just talk about two other cases, not Paul Manafort or Michael 
Cohen.
    In a letter requesting compassionate release from Marie 
Neba, who was confined at the Federal Medical Center Carswell, 
there was a description to the judge that she had not received 
medication for treating her breast cancer since March 5 of this 
year. She described how the lockdown at the facility due to the 
COVID-19 pandemic had caused medical care at the facility to 
deteriorate. Her condition worsened. She was concerned about 
the spread of COVID-19. She was not released and ultimately 
passed away from COVID.
    In a letter requesting compassionate release, W. Young 
Bird, who was confined at the Medical Center for Federal 
Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, described to the judge how 
there were 30 cases of COVID in 3 different facilities. The 
facility was on lockdown, and Mr. Young Bird was housed in a 
24-hour medical care unit. Actively sought help from the warden 
and the judge to protect himself from the spreading virus. 
Ultimately, in that case, unfortunately, he passed as well.
    Do you know, Director Carvajal, how many prisoners over the 
age of 65 and medically vulnerable have been transferred to 
home confinement? Is that all the 18,000 that you referenced?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't have those exact 
numbers. I will have to follow up with you.
    I will tell you, there is a difference between the 
compassionate release process--you are talking about releasing 
someone, essentially undoing, or reducing a sentence imposed by 
a criminal court.
    Mr. Deutch. No, I understand.
    Mr. Carvajal. The home confinement process is different.
    Mr. Deutch. Director Carvajal, I understand. I do 
understand the difference well. What I don't understand is the 
seeming disparity in treatment that permitted two individuals 
who may have had underlying conditions but were released to 
home confinement with two individuals who clearly had 
underlying challenges and wound up dying of COVID-19.
    A Federal judge ordered the Bureau of Prisons to review 
medically vulnerable prisoners at Elkton in Ohio, asked for a 
list of prisoners age 65 and those who were medically 
vulnerable, and the Bureau responded to a judge that there were 
837, but only 5 would be transferred to home confinement.
    All I ask, Director Carvajal, is that we go back and 
analyze fully the steps that we can take to provide the same 
protections for these inmates, who are not violent, as the 
protections that were provided to these two individuals who 
happened, coincidentally, to have close relationships with the 
President of the United States.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Representative Lesko?
    Mrs. Lesko. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    First of all, I want to say thank you to both of you for 
your service to our country, and also to your employees. They 
have a difficult job, very dangerous job. I appreciate them, 
and I believe the majority of Americans appreciate their hard 
work.
    I am going to read a letter dated March 30, 2020, and it 
was a letter from Chairman Nadler and Chair Bass to Attorney 
General Barr. It is on page 4, and I am going to go into page 
5. It reads, ``Your memorandum,'' meaning Attorney General 
Barr's memorandum, ``specifies that priority should be given to 
inmates in low- and minimum-security facilities and that 
serious offenses should weigh more heavily against 
consideration for home detention.''
    I think that is reasonable.
    ``These limitations unfortunately beg the question of what 
you do with individuals who are at high risk for contracting 
COVID-19 who are not in low- or minimum-security facilities, 
who have been convicted of serious offenses, or have high 
PATTERN risk scores. We urge you to consider that even 
individuals in these categories should be assessed for release 
because they may be elderly or particularly vulnerable.
    ``Pregnant prisoners in all circumstances should be 
released to home confinement forthwith.
    ``We further urge you to assess the risk of contracting 
COVID-19 of every individual in BOP custody regardless of the 
type of institution in which they are housed, the seriousness 
of their offense, or the potential recidivism risk they may 
present.''
    Well, I think that we can take reasonable measures, 
commonsense measures of people that are low risk to the 
society. I am concerned, I have to say, Madam Chairman and 
others, I am very concerned if we are just encouraging the 
prisons to release even people convicted of serious offenses.
    Let me tell you why. This isn't a person that was in 
Federal prison, but this is an example. This was a rape--this 
man was indicted in rape of a woman last year and was released 
in April because of the coronavirus and is accused of then 
fatally shooting his accuser.
    I mean, this is the picture of the man.
    You know, to me, of course we must take reasonable measures 
to protect not only the inmates but, of course, your employees. 
I certainly do not think that the majority of Americans, 
including myself, whether they are Republican, independent, or 
Democrats, want dangerous criminals released into our 
communities.
    So, I just want to tell you that. Also, with the 1 minute 
and 47 seconds left, do either one of you have anything that 
you would like to add that you haven't had the opportunity to 
talk about?
    Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    I just want to say that anyone that was eligible under the 
criteria we were issued at the direction of the CARES Act, that 
met that criteria and was safe, met public safety factors, has 
been released from our custody. We take this very seriously. We 
want to keep people safe regardless.
    Most people that aren't released, it is because they have 
committed a crime of violence or a sex offense or they have a 
detainer or an Act of terrorism.
    I think that it goes back to what you were saying that we 
have a responsibility. A court processed them; a judge found 
them to come to our custody. We take seriously who we are going 
to release back.
    Again, I would like to remind everyone that we are 
transferring people to home confinement. They are still in the 
custody of the Bureau of Prisons. Compassionate release is an 
actual reduction in sentence or release of that sentence that 
was imposed by a court.
    Thank you.
    Mrs. Lesko. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Bass. Representative Jeffries?
    Mrs. Lesko. Unless the Marshals had something to say?
    Ms. Bass. Oh. Well, we are done. You are out of time.
    Mrs. Lesko. Okay. I thank you.
    Mr. Jeffries. Thank you, Madam Chair, for yielding and for 
your tremendous leadership in convening this hearing.
    I thank our two witnesses for their service to the country.
    Director Carvajal, COVID-19 is a serious disease; is that 
correct?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, Congressman, it is.
    Mr. Jeffries. A potentially fatal disease in some 
instances. Is that right?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Jeffries. I think there are about 24,000 individuals in 
BOP custody who have tested positive for the virus. Is that 
right?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Jeffries. Approximately 145 Federal inmates have died 
as a result of COVID-19. Is that true?
    Mr. Carvajal. That is correct.
    Mr. Jeffries. Those individuals who died were in the Bureau 
of Prisons' custody. Is that right?
    Mr. Carvajal. The 145? Correct.
    Mr. Jeffries. At a hearing before the Senate in June, you 
stated that, quote, ``prisons, by design, are not made for 
social distancing. They are, on the opposite, made to contain 
people in one area.'' Is that correct, in terms of that being 
your testimony?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir, it is.
    Mr. Jeffries. I think you reiterated earlier today that 
prisons are not built for social distancing. Is that true?
    Mr. Carvajal. That is correct.
    Mr. Jeffries. The public health experts have indicated that 
social distancing is an important tool to be used in combating 
this serious and deadly COVID-19 virus. Is that right?
    Mr. Carvajal. That is correct.
    Mr. Jeffries. So, I think, given the circumstances that the 
inmates and employees of the Bureau of Prisons find themselves 
in, as you have testified, it seems like the presumption at the 
Bureau of Prisons should be to utilize the tools available to 
it to allow inmates relief from this potentially deadly virus. 
Is that fair to say?
    Mr. Carvajal. It is, Congressman, and that is what we are 
doing.
    Mr. Jeffries. So, part of my concern is that the tools that 
have been made available to you include both the emergency 
provisions and powers provided under the CARES Act as well as 
the compassionate release provision that was a part of the 
FIRST STEP Act. Is that right?
    Mr. Carvajal. Correct.
    Mr. Jeffries. In terms of the compassionate release 
provision, I guess during the COVID-19 pandemic the Federal 
courts have granted nearly 2,000 motions for compassionate 
release. Is that true?
    Mr. Carvajal. That sounds about right.
    Mr. Jeffries. Now, the Bureau of Prisons can also initiate 
a motion for compassionate release. Is that correct?
    Mr. Carvajal. Correct.
    Mr. Jeffries. Part of my concern is that, I guess during 
the first 3 months of the pandemic, the Bureau of Prisons 
approved approximately 0.1 percent of compassionate release 
requests. Is that right?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir. Again, I don't know the exact 
numbers, but it was a low number.
    Mr. Jeffries. In other words, 10,929 requests out of 10,940 
requests were rejected. Does that sound right?
    Mr. Carvajal. Again, Congressman, I don't have the exact 
numbers.
    Mr. Jeffries. So, you just testified earlier that we should 
utilize the tools available to us, that have been made 
available to you on a bipartisan basis in both the CARES Act 
and the FIRST STEP Act, to alleviate the pain, suffering, and 
death connected to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the numbers don't 
suggest that you are actually doing that.
    Can you explain why there has been such low utilization as 
it relates to compassionate release?
    Mr. Carvajal. Yes, I can, Congressman.
    First, as I stated earlier, you are talking about reducing 
a sentence or reversing a sentence imposed by a judge in a 
court. That is not a process that should be rushed. We take 
into consideration public safety. We review everyone for home 
confinement because it is a quicker process to get them out.
    An inmate has the right and the ability to go straight to 
the courts. I also want to remind everyone that the Bureau of 
Prisons doesn't make the final determination of whether or not 
someone is approved for compassionate release. All we are doing 
is simply recommending to the judge. So, there is a 30-day 
window, and then the inmate can go directly to a court. That is 
why the courts have released more.
    It is a lengthy process. There is a lot of vetting and 
verifying to go into that. So, it is a very thorough process.
    Mr. Jeffries. Thank you for that.
    I think the issue is that you have had at least two dozen 
individuals who have died in prison waiting for a compassionate 
release request to even be reviewed, if not signed off on, by 
the Bureau of Prisons. That seems, to me, inconsistent with the 
presumption that we should be doing all that we can to 
alleviate the pain and suffering and death connected to COVID-
19 in the tight quarters of the Federal penitentiary.
    The last observation I will make, as my time has expired, 
is that you have mentioned consistently this notion that we 
have individuals who may have engaged in serious crimes and 
pose public safety risks. The example that we have been talking 
about, Marie Neba, is someone who was in prison on a nonviolent 
offense of Medicare fraud. In too many of these instances, it 
is the same situation. That is a shame, because a prison 
sentence should not be a death sentence.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Bass. Representative Jordan?
    Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Director Washington, has violent crime increased this year 
in major urban areas?
    Mr. Washington. The data indicates it has increased.
    Mr. Jordan. Aggravated assaults up 14 percent, homicide 
rates up 53 percent in major urban areas.
    In that environment, should big cities be defunding their 
police? New York City has defunded their police a billion 
dollars; Los Angeles, $150 million reduction in police force 
and in police budget; Austin, Texas, $150 million; San 
Francisco, $120 million; Philadelphia, $33 million; Baltimore, 
$23 million; Portland, Oregon, $16 million.
    Does that make sense to you, Director Washington?
    Mr. Washington. Not to me, as the head of a law enforcement 
agency that is charged with handling violent crime. In fact, in 
many of those cities, of course, we have deployed deputy U.S. 
marshals--
    Mr. Jordan. Yep.
    Mr. Washington. --to participate on various task forces to 
address the increase in violent crime.
    Mr. Jordan. In that overall environment, the increase in 
violent crime, cities defunding their police departments, 
should we be releasing more criminals early back into those 
neighborhoods?
    Mr. Washington. I don't think we should, Congressman.
    Mr. Jordan. That is exactly what Democrats want to do.
    It is not just--as the chairwoman said earlier, it is not 
just those, Director Carvajal, that you go through and make 
sure that they are not going to be a harm to the community. 
That is not what they said in their letter.
    As Congresswoman Lesko just pointed out, when they sent a 
letter to Attorney General Barr back in March, they said, 
assess all prisoners for release regardless of the type of 
institution in which they are housed--here is the key part--
regardless of the seriousness of their offense or the potential 
recidivism risk that they pose to the community.
    So, they wanted everyone to get released, in an environment 
where we already have a 53-percent increase in homicide rates, 
a 14-percent increase in aggravated assaults, and big-city 
mayors and big-city city councils, all run by Democrats, are 
defunding the police department. That is exactly what they 
wanted to do.
    Do you think that makes sense, Director Washington?
    Mr. Washington. Well, again, Congressman, from my agency's 
perspective, we have been very busy addressing violent crime in 
the United States.
    As you well know, we have initiated an Operation LeGend as 
a result of the death of young LeGend Taliferro in Kansas City, 
Missouri. A 4-year-old, in bed, gets shot and killed is not a 
thing that we want to happen in the United States.
    So, what we have done, of course, is participate in various 
cities around the country. Operation LeGend continues; I just 
received the data yesterday on the 20th week of Operation 
LeGend. For example, in Chicago, we have arrested 1,000 folks 
who fit the categories of either homicide, sexual assault, 
robbery, and things of that sort.
    Mr. Jordan. Yeah.
    I actually wanted to--I forgot one thing. It is worse than 
I just described. They not only want to release criminals back 
into communities where there is already an elevated State of 
violent crime, where the police are being defunded. They not 
only want to release people early, regardless of the 
seriousness of their offense. They want the taxpayers to pay 
for it. I forgot about that. They introduced legislation that 
said, we want to pay States to do what I just described. Such a 
deal for the taxpayer.
    I mean, this is the part--no wonder they are--think about 
the small-business owner in Portland, for example. You have a 
small-business owner in Portland who has paid all their local 
taxes, only to have their business in downtown Portland be 
destroyed this summer when the mob took over the streets. Now 
Democrats are saying, oh, now we want to use your Federal tax 
dollars to put more criminals on the streets.
    Does that make any sense to you at all, Director 
Washington?
    Mr. Washington. Well, Your Honor--``Your Honor''--
Congressman, I am not, of course, a politician. I just run a 
Federal law enforcement agency. From a law enforcement 
perspective, that doesn't make sense.
    Mr. Jordan. Doesn't make sense.
    Oh, there is one other step I--it gets better. There is one 
other thing. We just learned that 15 percent of the inmates in 
our Bureau of Prisons are illegal immigrants.
    Is that right, Director Carvajal?
    Mr. Carvajal. Non-U.S. citizens.
    Mr. Jordan. Non-U.S. citizens. The Democrats want them 
released as well. Regardless of the seriousness of their 
offense, they want taxpayer money to be used to pay the States 
to release illegal immigrants, regardless of their offense, 
back into communities where we have seen a 53-percent increase 
in violent crime and where those same cities are defunding 
their police. That might be the craziest thing I have ever 
heard, but that is exactly their policy.
    Frankly, Madam Chair, I would ask for unanimous consent to 
enter the letter you sent, along with Chairman Nadler, to the 
Attorney General which spells out what I just described.
    [The information follows:]

   
                       MR. JORDAN FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Mr. Jordan. With that, I will yield back.
    Ms. Bass. Representative Dean?
    For the record, the letter says ``assessed,'' not 
``released,'' I don't know of anyone on either side of the 
aisle who calls for defunding the police, and I love the way 
the Ranking Member talks about my city.
    Representative Dean?
    Mr. Jordan. Well, Madam Chair, the--
    Ms. Dean. Madam Chair--
    Mr. Jordan. --again, ``regardless of the type of 
institution in which they are housed, the seriousness of their 
offense, or the potential recidivism risk that they may 
present.'' I didn't write that. You did. I didn't--that is not 
a Republican language. That is you and Chair Nadler.
    So, if you are now saying ``the seriousness of their 
offense'' is not in the letter, that you want to strike that 
out, that is one thing, but that is not what you wrote on March 
30, 2020.
    Ms. Bass. We can debate the letter, but I would pose--
    Mr. Jordan. No, that is not debating the letter. That is 
what is in the letter.
    Ms. Bass. I would pose that you are mischaracterizing it, 
and I will call on Representative Dean.
    Mr. Jordan. I am reading your words.
    Ms. Bass. Representative Dean.
    Ms. Dean. I thank you, Madam Chair.
    I do want to say, I thought this was a serious body here to 
talk about governing and protecting public health and 
protecting public safety, and not a campaign commercial. I 
thought the campaign was over. Sadly, we are seeing 
mischaracterization of other Members' works very, very 
grotesquely.
    So, number one, I thank you both for the work that you do. 
I thank you for the teams that you have assembled and the 
extraordinary staff who puts their own lives and health at 
risk.
    What I would like to know more about is, during COVID, for 
example, compliance with mask-wearing among staff and among 
inmates. You able to get full compliance for simple mask-
wearing? Because you are challenged with confinement and close 
spaces.
    Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    It is a tough--just like with anything, it is enforcement 
and accountability and expectations. We expect people to wear 
it, we expect from the leadership that it be enforced, and we 
expect from everyone that they have personal accountability to 
follow the rules.
    We incorporated unannounced inspections. We welcome outside 
inspections. If there is any doubt, just this week, I sent 
someone to verify, because I had people complaining--I heard 
these complaints. They were concerning. We sent an unannounced 
team to an institution just for that reason.
    Ms. Dean. That is great, because you are in the business of 
supervising and overseeing. So, I would think you would have 
the tools in place to deal with, sadly, this pandemic and the 
need for these important measures.
    I, too, want to ask about the use of compassionate release. 
I want to make clear that, when you testified that some 18,112 
inmates were returned to home confinement, that is not 
compassionate release. From the records that we have seen, that 
I read about, only 11 people of nearly 11,000 folks in the 
first 3 months who had applied for compassionate release had 
received that.
    So, I want to be really clear. When we talk about 18,000 
people going to home confinement, they were going there anyway 
under the protocols as things were happening; they weren't as a 
result of COVID release. Am I correct?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, passage of the CARES Act and 
COVID caused us to place a high number of people who would not 
ordinarily have been considered, at least at this point in 
time, for home confinement.
    You are correct; the compassionate release numbers are 
lower. As I explained earlier, that is a lengthy process. Under 
our policy and by the guidelines of the statute, an inmate has 
to be showing extraordinary and compelling circumstances. That 
is not something we do in a day or two.
    Ms. Dean. I heard that answer. I appreciate that and the 
balancing of the urgency of COVID against the assessment of 
whether a person is appropriate for compassionate release. Some 
of those criteria were met in the cases that had been 
identified, and yet those folks were not released.
    Of the 18,000 who went to home confinement, can you break 
down that number for us? How many were headed to home 
confinement anyway? How many are because of your reassessment 
from COVID?
    Mr. Carvajal. I don't have the exact numbers in front of 
me. They change--
    Ms. Dean. Would you be able to provide that?
    Mr. Carvajal. I will tell you, as of right now--there is 
approximately 8,000 on home confinement currently, right now. 
About 50 or 60 percent of those are CARES Act, specific to the 
CARES Act, that would not have ordinarily been in home 
confinement at this point. I am not saying they weren't ever 
going to be eligible.
    Ms. Dean. I am worried about my time. Sorry to try to keep 
it tight.
    What I would like to ask you is if you would provide the 
chairwoman and the Ranking Member detailed data about those who 
have been released for compassionate care--I am hoping there is 
well more than 11 that we have learned about; that seems 
incredibly sad--and also the breakdown of the 18,000 and now 
8,000 who are in home confinement.
    I appreciate all of that. I am going to have no time. Darn 
it. I apologize.
    Ms. Bass. You can continue.
    Ms. Dean. I thank you.
    What I would like to ask about and shift to is something I 
have been very concerned about, which is the use of shackling 
of pregnant women while in confinement. Can both of you speak 
to the use of shackles on pregnant women in your agencies?
    Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Director.
    We don't do it. We have procedures in place. We amended our 
policy.
    It has happened one time since the passage of the FIRST 
STEP Act. It was documented. It was a mistake, for all 
practical purposes. The female was identified as being pregnant 
in the same day; the person didn't have time to enter it. We 
have good procedures in place to identify, respecting their 
rights. It was for less than 5 minutes.
    Aside from that, if it gets done, it gets reported all the 
way up to our medical director, our women, and special programs 
administrator; there is a review conducted. We use alternative 
means. We do not restrain pregnant or postpartum females in our 
agency.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you.
    Mr. Washington. I believe that is the same answer for the 
United States Marshals Service. Because we have the pretrial 
folks, folks under prosecution. We also have the statute that 
required that to be stopped. So we use alternative means.
    Ms. Dean. Well, I would quote others who have said that 
that is barbaric, and I appreciate that that has been banned. 
Thank you very much.
    Thank you for your consideration.
    Ms. Bass. Sure.
    Before I move to our last speaker, Mr. Washington, if you 
could confirm that in data, especially during transportation, 
okay? If you could confirm it. You said you believed it wasn't 
the case, so I just wanted to know if you could confirm it, 
especially during transportation.
    Mr. Washington. Yes, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you.
    Our final member is Representative Mucarsel-Powell.
    Let me just say, Representative Cline had to leave to go 
back to his office, but he wanted to express to you, as do I, 
our joy in working with you over the last couple of years and 
the leadership that you have displayed here in Congress. We 
just want you to know how much you will be missed, and we hope 
we see you again in the future.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you so much, Chair Bass.
    To all my colleagues in the committee, it has been the 
greatest honor to serve with all of you, even in the most 
contentious times, and I truly will carry these experiences 
with me. I hope that we will all meet soon again, after I am 
done with serving here in the House of Representatives.
    Thank you so much, Chair.
    Thank you to the witnesses for appearing this morning. It 
is such an important public health issue. I wanted to just 
start at setting the record straight and responding to some of 
the points that the Ranking Member has made.
    He continues to accuse Democrats of failing to keep our 
communities safe. That is the farthest thing from the truth. It 
is actually Republicans and Members like him who are trampling 
on the Rule of law and trying to overturn the will of the 
people.
    Just yesterday, one of the President's attorneys called for 
Chris Krebs to be taken out and shot--Chris Krebs, the security 
official who Trump fired because he wouldn't go along with the 
lies from the Administration, because he said that there was 
absolutely no evidence of fraud.
    It is the Democrats who are fighting to save lives during 
this pandemic. It is the Democrats who are constantly trying to 
keep our communities safe and to save the lives of those who 
are incarcerated, because we realize that there is respect and 
dignity to every human life.
    Now, Director Carvajal, I sent you a letter with 
Representative Demings back in April. In my district, we have 
one of the prison bureaus, FCI Miami. It is a low-security 
facility that holds about 900 inmates and employs several 
hundred staff. A hundred-and-thirty-nine inmates at FCI Miami 
have tested positive for COVID-19, and, unfortunately, we have 
lost 1 life there at that facility.
    So, I would just urge you that you would make voluntary 
testing available to staff immediately. It is very difficult 
for them to travel long distances to get those tests. It is not 
just for the safety of the inmates and the staff; it is also 
for the safety of our community here in Miami.
    Now, I wanted to turn quickly to another issue, and that is 
the deployment of the BOP teams to respond to the protests over 
the murder of George Floyd.
    In June, we received reports that showed that tactical BOP 
teams were sent to Washington, DC, and Miami. The riot team 
sent to Miami sat in a hotel for a few days and left after the 
protests in Miami because they were nothing but peaceful. There 
were no Federal buildings at risk. We didn't see any sort of 
violence.
    Director Carvajal, why were tactical BOP teams sent to 
Miami? If you can shortly, quickly answer that question.
    Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, they were there only a few 
hours. We actually redirected them back to DC. Yes, they were 
deployed.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Who made that decision, and what was 
the rationale for that?
    Mr. Carvajal. As you know, Congresswoman, we are a 
component of the Department of Justice. The Attorney General 
and the Department of Justice requested assistance in the law 
enforcement mission. They called us. I made the decision after 
consulting with my leadership team to make sure that we could 
send the number of personnel, and we did.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Are these teams trained in civilian 
crowd control?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, they are trained in crowd 
control. It is actually what we do.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. So, I am assuming that the 
special operations response teams received training on 
appropriate non-inmate crowd control since June?
    Mr. Carvajal. We have a contingency plan and training in 
place to train for civil disturbances. That is non-prison-type 
disturbances. We train our personnel and our tactical teams in 
just that.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. Thank you.
    Director Washington, since June 2020, how many times have 
BOP agents or employees been deputized as U.S. marshals?
    Mr. Washington. Since June of 2020? I don't recall any BOP 
agents being deputized as U.S. marshals.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay.
    Mr. Washington. Is that the case?
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Go ahead, Director Carvajal.
    Mr. Carvajal. If I may assist there, our personnel who were 
deployed are deputized by United States Marshals. It was done 
on site before they ever took to the patrolling.
    That was done because, by statute, our arrest authority is 
limited in the BOP, and anytime we are deployed--we often 
deploy; it just doesn't get media attention. We respond to most 
every major national disaster out there. Our staff are always 
deputized before they go out on patrol.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Let me ask you something that I saw. 
Some of the BOP personnel were concealing their identities by 
removing their nametags and other identifying badges. Who 
directed them to do this, and what was the purpose of that?
    Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, I would like to correct the 
record. I appreciate you asking me that question.
    No one was instructed to remove anything. I got asked that 
question during a virtual press conference, and I answered it 
very bluntly. I failed to properly mark our people because we 
deployed in such a quick manner--we don't usually worry about 
that. Having an institution marker on you doesn't mean nothing 
in a major city if you don't know where that prison is located.
    We did correct that immediately. Within 2 days, we 
appropriately marked all our staff. There is a standardized 
marking for them now.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Well, I thank you for that, Director 
Carvajal, because we actually did see that Federal agents were 
unidentified, and it poses a risk to the safety, to the overall 
safety, of our community. So, I do hope that you hold those 
that did that and did not follow the appropriate procedures 
accountable.
    Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Ms. Bass. Thank you very much.
    Before we adjourn, I just want to say, one, I want to thank 
you again, both of our witnesses, for coming today. Let me 
thank you for taking the time to come and let me also thank you 
for your work. In addition to raising concerns we want to know 
how we can best help you.
    We would have liked to have done a second panel. If we had 
done a second panel, I would have invited Donte Westmoreland, 
who was sentenced to 7 years in Kansas. It was a first-time 
marijuana charge. Ironically, if he had been from California, 
what he had done would not have even been a crime. In fact, he 
could have opened his own business.
    I want to say that public safety is safety from violence 
but also safety from COVID in terms of the general community. 
My concern is both for the inmates but also the staff. The 
staff are dying as well, not just the inmates.
    So, reducing the prison population safely protects the 
health and safety of inmates and the general community. That we 
will continue to call--as it says in the memo, ``We further 
urge you to assess the risk of contracting COVID-19 of every 
individual in BOP custody.''
    With that, this concludes today's hearing, and we adjourn.
    [Whereupon, at 10:49 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
    
                                APPENDIX

=======================================================================


                STATEMENT OF DONTE WESTMORELAND

    Dear Chairwomen Bass, Ranking member Jordan, and Members of 
the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime,

    My name is Donte Westmoreland. Six weeks ago, I was sitting 
in a cell at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Kansas, 
serving nearly an 8 year sentence for allegedly selling (1 
pound) of marijuana. I received this very lengthy sentence even 
though I had a no criminal history score. Fortunately, after 
serving nearly 4 years of my sentence, it came to light that 
prosecutors had concealed exculpatory evidence and my 
conviction was overturned.
    I grew up in Stockton, California where I was raised by my 
grandmother. My mother had many challenges of her own which put 
me in position to be the sole supporter for our family. It was 
difficult maintaining a household financially I had my two 
younger brothers and my grandmother was receiving public 
assistance at the time. I focused mostly on being a caregiver 
for my grandmother, I was an athlete in high school and 
graduated in 2013. My dream was to keep moving forward with my 
education, but I knew that was unlikely given the circumstances 
of my situation. My grandmother encouraged me to visit colleges 
she would say, ``There is more to life than just taking care of 
me, experience life you only have one.'' I knew deep down that 
was not possible, but it encouraged me to visit universities 
across the states, including Kansas.
    This was interrupted by my arrest on March 8, 2016. I chose 
to take this case to jury trial because I felt I was not guilty 
of the crime in addition I was forced to go to trial with sick 
unprepared counsel. Right before my trial, my grandmother, the 
woman that raised me, suffered extreme distress. She ended up 
passing away during the trial and my 10 and 11 year old 
brothers were placed in the foster care system, where they 
remain today. On May 22,2017 I was sentenced to serve nearly an 
8 year prison term which was ironically my youngest brothers 
birthday.
    There have been a few moments that really brought 
everything home for me. One came while I was watching TV in 
prison and saw a news story saying that Missouri, the State 
right next to me, had legalized medical cannabis and was 
issuing licenses for cultivators and retailers and talked about 
billions of dollars of wealth that was going to be generated by 
the legal industry. But there I was sitting in prison for 
allegedly doing the same thing. What was criminal in Kansas was 
considered entrepreneurial in the bordering State of Missouri.
    Another moment I can never forget came when I learned that 
COVID had infected other prisoners and guards in the prison I 
was incarcerated in. I did all I possibly could to protect 
myself, but that's difficult when you have no control over the 
people who are housed with you, and you have no control over 
the air you breath and limited access to personal protective 
gear. It's really terrifying, just waiting and hoping you don't 
get it. In the end, despite my best efforts I became infected 
with the virus. At the moment I felt as if I was sentenced to 
death, behind a first time marijuana offense. I recovered, but 
five prisoners and two guards that were in the same facility 
died from Covid.
    I knew some of them personally--here today, gone tomorrow. 
I honestly did not know what my future held at that point.
    My charges are still pending. It is still possible that I 
could be returned to prison to serve out my nearly 8 year 
sentence, if prosecutors in Kansas choose to put me on trial 
again, but I've been encouraged lately. I've been encouraged 
that the citizens of all five states that had cannabis reform 
initiatives on the ballot decided to approve those measures, 
including in conservative states like North Dakota and 
Mississippi. I have also been encouraged by the Biden 
Administration announcement that they intend to make federal 
cannabis reform a priority. I'm really encouraged to have been 
invited to submit this written testimony to the House Judiciary 
sub-committee on crime.
    My story is not unique. Today 40,000 people are serving 
prison sentences for non-violent cannabis convictions, even 
though cannabis has been completely legalized in ten states and 
made legal for medical purposes in a large majority of states. 
These prisoners are disproportionately people of color, who are 
four times more likely to be arrested on cannabis charges than 
are White people. Sometimes they were traveling from a State 
where their possession of cannabis would have been legal or 
just a minor offense but had the bad luck of being pulled over 
in one of the states that still has not passed reform 
legislation, as was the case with my arrest.
    Today, I am trying to rebuild my life and avoid being sent 
back to prison in Kansas. I cannot get time back, but I can 
make the most of the time I have now. I very much hope that 
this sub-committee and congress will take whatever steps are 
necessary to make sure that in the future nobody else has the 
kind of experience that I had.
    Thank you for the opportunity to share my story. I 
appreciate it very much.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================


QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED BY DIRECTOR MICHAEL CARVAJAL 
                 SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR KAREN BASS

                        (1) Vaccinations

    On November 23rd, the Associated Press reported that the 
BOP has instructed wardens and other Bureau of Prisons staff 
Members to prepare to receive a COVID-19 vaccine within a 
number of weeks. Though the American Medical Association 
recently passed a resolution stating that both prison staff and 
incarcerated people ought to be among the first to receive the 
vaccine, reports indicate that the BOP only intends to use 
their initial supply for vaccinating staff.

                           Questions

    (a) How much of the vaccine does the BOP need to provide 
coverage to all those in your custody and for all personnel 
working in your facilities?
    (b) Do you have reason to believe that you will not be 
receiving a sufficient amount of the vaccine? If you received 
an adequate amount of the vaccine how would you prioritize who 
initially receives the vaccine?
    (c) Is it true that BOP intends to only vaccinate staff, in 
the first instance? If so, what is the reasoning behind this? 
What is BOP's timeline for providing the vaccine for those in 
custody?
    (d) Is there a BOP policy on distribution of the COVID-19 
vaccine? If so, please provide a copy.
    (e) Who has been consulted in developing this policy?
    (f) When will the BOP share this policy publicly and post 
the information on its website?

                     (2) Prisoner Transport

    As we understand it, the Bureau of Prisons has a limited 
moratorium on prisoner transport. It has been reported that, 
from the outset of the pandemic, BOP has continued to accept 
inmates from local and private facilities, via the U.S. 
Marshals Service, without first requiring a negative COVID-19 
test. The BOP's own internal guidance was not mandated on 
outside entities, to include the U.S. Marshals, whose continued 
transfer of COVID-19-positive inmates, and in some instances, 
visibly and seriously ill inmates, arguably resulted in the 
proliferation of COVID-19. Indeed, over the months of the 
pandemic, the virus has ``spiked'' at different BOP facilities 
and several facilities have become hot spots for COVID-19 
(e.g., Terminal Island, Oakdale, Elkton, Butner, Fort Dix, 
etc.).
    Yet, as of November 23, 2020, BOP has apparently lifted 
even the limited prisoner transport moratorium it had in place. 
Social visits, as we understand, have also resumed.

                           Questions

    (a) Our country is in the midst of the worst spike in cases 
since the beginning of the pandemic. People are dying from 
COVID-19 at extraordinary rates. We know that COVID-19 can 
spread into and in correctional institutions when prisoners are 
transferred from one location to another. Why, at this time, 
has BOP lifted the moratorium on prisoner transfers?
    (b) Regarding social visits, why have these resumed? Is BOP 
conducting any kind of contact tracing in relation to social 
visits?
    (c) How do you justify the policy of simply accepting 
whatever persons the Marshals bring to BOP, without regard for 
whether they are infected and would, therefore, spread the 
virus into a BOP facility?

                   (3) BOP COVID-19 Protocols

    The Justice Department's inspector general has reported 
that the Federal Correctional Complex in Oakdale, Louisiana, 
failed to isolate or quarantine prisoners who were exposed to 
or who tested positive for COVID-19. The report found that 
``some inmates who had tested positive were left in their 
housing units for up to 6 days without being isolated.'' In the 
BOP's COVID-19 Pandemic Response Plan, released on September 8, 
2020, the BOP requires that a person who tests positive for 
COVID-19 be immediately placed under medical isolation.

                           Questions

    (a) At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, you stated 
that prisoners who test positive for COVID-19 are isolated, but 
we keep hearing that they are not--and COVID-19 keeps spiking 
in BOP facilities across the country. What specific steps were 
taken and are still being taken, in every BOP institution, to 
address the Inspector General's findings?
    (b) More generally, what resources are being provided to 
individual facilities to ensure that incarcerated people are 
able to practice good hygiene?
    (c) Is the BOP taking steps to ensure compliance with mask 
and social distancing requirements in its facilities? What 
steps are those?
    (d) At this point in time, what is the status of the supply 
of personal protective equipment for
    staff and prisoners? Could Congress be doing more to ensure 
you have what you need?

                          (4) Testing

    It has been reported that as of November 3, the Bureau of 
Prisons had tested roughly 56% of its population and, in 
addition, that the BOP only tests those who show symptoms of 
COVID-19. In early October, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator 
Cory Booker, and Representative Nanette Barragan introduced 
legislation to improve the BOP's response to COVID-19. This 
legislation calls for weekly surveillance testing, expanded 
contact tracing in prisons, and expanded data collection. This 
type of legislation is necessary because there is cause for 
concern that the BOP is not taking adequate steps to locate 
individuals who are positive for COVID-19, or to conduct 
appropriate contact tracing to limit further spread.

                           Questions

    (a) Is this the type of intervention from Congress that 
would be helpful to you?
    (b) What is the BOP's testing strategy? How many prisoners 
have been tested as of this date
    (c) Has this testing strategy been made public?
    (d) Were public health officials consulted in the 
development of this strategy? Who was consulted?
    (e) Does the BOP have procedures in place for contact 
tracing in the event an incarcerated person or staff member 
begins showing symptoms of COVID-19 or tests positive for 
COVID-19? If not, why not? If so, what are these procedures? 
Where are these procedures made public? Were public health 
officials consulted in the development of this strategy?
    (f) Can you guarantee that every prisoner released from a 
BOP facility has been tested before being released or 
transferred from the facility? What is the procedure if a 
prisoner tests positive before being released or transferred?
    At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you stated that 
BOP corrections officers were, in some instances, reluctant or 
refusing to be tested for COVID-19.
    (g) How pervasive is this reluctance to be tested?
    (h) What can Congress do to assist BOP in obtaining both 
availability of testing for staff, as well as compliance with 
testing by staff?

                   (5) Compassionate Release

    The Department of Justice has instructed federal 
prosecutors responding to a motion for compassionate release to 
take the position that being at risk of death or serious 
illness from COVID-19, due to Centers for Disease Control-
identified risk factors, is ``an extraordinary and compelling 
reason'' within the meaning of the statute. BOP could also take 
this position and either request the release of prisoners with 
serious risk factors or approve their requests for release. 
During the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd you made clear that 
the compassionate release process is more complicated than 
merely home confinement because it essentially results in the 
actual reduction of a person's sentence. We understand that; 
although we also understand that it is ultimately the court 
that decides whether or not to reduce the sentence.
    During the hearing, you acknowledged that federal courts 
have granted approximately 2,000 motions for compassionate 
release. The vast majority of these have been to protect 
prisoners vulnerable to COVID-19. By contrast, federal courts 
granted 166 reduction in sentence motions between January 2019, 
when the First Step Act was enacted, and the end of February 
2020.
    Based on information obtained through the Freedom of 
Information Act, the Marshall Project has reported that, during 
the first three months of the pandemic, BOP approved 11 of the 
10,940 compassionate release requests it received. That 
represents 0.1 percent of requests received.
    The data did not indicate whether any of those approvals 
were based on a heightened vulnerability to severe illness from 
a COVID-19 infection.

                           Questions

    (a) Beyond the first three months of the pandemic, has the 
rate of approval continued to be 0.1%? In other words, is the 
BOP Office of General Counsel still approving only 
approximately 0.1% of compassionate release requests?
    (b) Has BOP approved any compassionate release requests 
based on a heightened vulnerability to severe illness from a 
COVID-19 infection?
    (c) How many requests for sentence reduction motions have 
wardens or BOP denied during the COVID-19 emergency period? Out 
of how many requests?
    (d) How many motions for sentence reduction has the Bureau 
of Prisons filed on behalf of prisoners in its custody since 
the beginning of the COVID-19 emergency period?
    (e) Why hasn't BOP filed more reduction in sentence motions 
for prisoners?
    (f) Does BOP have any plans to increase the use of 
compassionate release? If so, what are these plans, and, if 
not, why not?
    (g) Has the Bureau informed all prisoners it deems possible 
candidates for compassionate release of their right to request 
relief?

                      (6) Home Confinement

    On March 27, 2020, Congress came together to unanimously 
pass the CARES Act, which authorized the Attorney General to 
expand dramatically the use of home confinement to protect 
vulnerable individuals from COVID-19. Attorney General William 
Barr made the finding that triggered this expansion on April 3, 
ordering BOP to expedite its use of home confinement. But, 
later, a judge found, after hearing the testimony of the Warden 
of FMC Devens, that BOP has adopted a policy that is ``utterly 
inconsistent'' with the Attorney General's directive to 
maximize home confinement. The Department of Justice's 
Inspector General, too, has found that BOP has failed to fully 
use its early-release authorities to transfer vulnerable 
individuals to safety at hard-hit facilities like Lompoc 
Federal Correctional Complex (FCC) and Oakdale FCC.
    When you appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 
June, you testified that BOP was ``prioritizing'' home 
confinement over compassionate release. Congress is interested 
in understanding what you mean by this. Yet BOP has not 
answered calls by Members of Congress--including several on 
this Committee--to produce detailed data about releases to home 
confinement. During the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you 
stated that 18,000 prisoners have been released to home 
confinement since the start of the pandemic, but could not give 
specific numbers on the ones that have been released 
specifically under the authority of the CARES Act.

                            Question

    (a) When will BOP produce data about the exact number of 
transfers into home confinement pursuant to CARES Act 
authority, rather than other authorities that existed prior to 
the CARES Act? (This question was asked by at least three 
Members of Congress at the hearing.)

     (7) BOP Pandemic Response at Carswell Prison for Women

    FMC Carswell, the hospital prison for women in Fort Worth 
Texas, has reported over 500 cases of COVID and six deaths. 
Half of those in the medical facility and 38 percent of those 
in the compound have tested positive. During the first three 
months of the pandemic, 349 women, about a quarter of the 
prison's inmates, asked for compassionate release. The warden 
denied or failed to respond to 346 of them, including a request 
from Marie Neba, a woman with stage 4 cancer serving a 75-year 
term for Medicare fraud. The government opposed her subsequent 
motion for compassionate release. Even when she was on her 
deathbed after contracting COVID-19, the warden refused to 
grant her compassionate release so she could die without being 
in handcuffs. At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, you 
stated that ``most people'' who are not released ``aren't 
released . . . because they have committed a crime of violence 
or sex offense or they have a detainer or an Act of 
terrorism.''

                           Questions

    (a) With regards to the Carswell prison, please provide 
specific data to show that most of those who have not been 
released have not been released because they have committed a 
crime of violence, a sex offense, an Act of terrorism, or have 
a detainer.
    (b) What justification is there for denying virtually every 
woman in a hospital prison compassionate release? What was the 
justification for denying Marie Neba?

                      (8) Employee Issues

    In recent weeks, the Inspector General of the Department of 
Justice has issued multiple negative reports about the Bureau 
of Prisons' handling of the COVID-19 crisis, revealing 
substantial mishandling of the crisis coupled with national 
grievances from the National Prison Council.

                           Questions

    (a) What steps have you taken to improve collaboration with 
the national union to address the continued threat of COVID-19 
in our federal prisons and their surrounding communities?
    (b) Is there anything Congress can do to assist you with 
issues involving BOP employees?
    (c) Specifically, what additional resources do you need to 
address their concerns? What are your main issues when 
addressing the national union?

            (9) Use of Restraints on Pregnant Women

    At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you testified that 
only one pregnant woman in BOP custody has been restrained 
since passage of the First Step Act, and only for a short 
period of time.

                            Question

    (a) Can you confirm that restraints were not used on Andrea 
Circle Bear at any point while she was in BOP custody?

                     (10) Social Distancing

    On October 27, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Bureau 
of Prisons over its handling of COVID-19 at the federal 
facility in Butner, NC. Among other things, the complaint 
alleges that the BOP has not reconfigured housing units to 
allow for social distancing. During a Senate Judiciary 
Committee hearing in early June, Director Carvajal committed to 
new efforts by the Bureau to create ``alternate living 
[spaces]'' in recognition that the current layout of 
correctional settings is ``not made for social distancing.''

                           Questions

    (a) Please identify what percentage of BOP facilities have 
been subject to such adjustments, especially in light of COVID-
19's current and expected acceleration this winter?
    (b) How is the BOP ensuring and enforcing social distancing 
if housing has not been adjusted?
    (c) How is the Bureau ensuring continued access to 
religious worship and services for prisoners that complies with 
CDC safety guidelines?

          (11) Transparency in Demographic Information

    As of November 25, there were 4,159 identified COVID-19 
cases in Bureau of Prisons custody, 19,563 recoveries, and 145 
deaths among incarcerated persons, and 1,339 current cases, 
1,824 recovered, and 2 deaths among staff Members that have 
been reported. Alarmingly, even this limited data reveals a 
large number of coronavirus cases among incarcerated people and 
correctional staff, yet the data does not indicate the 
demographic information--such as age, sex, gender, race, 
disability, or sexual orientation--of staff or incarcerated 
people under BOP custody. According to data from the COVID 
Tracking Project, Black people nationwide are dying at over two 
times the rate of White people (113 deaths per 100,000 compared 
to 55 deaths per 100,000). To date, Black people account for 
19% of COVID-19 deaths where race is known. In light of these 
types of concerns, many Members of Congress have requested that 
BOP collect and report demographic data.

                           Questions

    (a) Is BOP recording any demographic information for 
positive/negative cases, recoveries, hospitalizations, and 
deaths? If so, what demographic data is being recorded?
    (b) Given that demographic data is necessary to learn 
whether any demographic groups are experiencing greater impact 
from the virus (and whether there are any disparities in terms 
of treatment or outcomes), can the data BOP has been collecting 
pertaining to COVID-19 be disaggregated to permit reporting 
about demographic information?
    (c) Going forward, will BOP commit to collecting and 
reporting demographic data?

            (12) Quarantine and Solitary Confinement

    Across federal facilities, rolling lockdowns and 
quarantines have restricted movement and increased solitary 
confinement. Reportedly, these have had the unintended 
consequence of deterring prisoners from reporting symptoms for 
fear of being placed in isolation or locked down. Public health 
officials have recommended de-densification efforts, as well as 
the use of medical isolation as uniquely distinct from punitive 
solitary confinement. Yet, reportedly, punitive isolation 
continues to be used in BOP in response to the pandemic. A June 
2020 report found a 500% increase in solitary confinement in 
federal and State jails in response to the outbreak of the 
COVID-19 pandemic.

                           Questions

    (a) Please provide the BOP's policy for quarantine during 
the COVID-19 pandemic. Have individuals who tested positive 
while in the process of being released been allowed to self-
quarantine at home?
    (b) Will you pledge to immediately stop the practice of 
using solitary confinement as a substitute for medical 
isolation? If so, how does BOP plan to institute the use of 
medical isolation in place of punitive solitary confinement?

               (13) First Step Act Implementation

    As you know, the First Step Act, mandated the development 
and implementation of robust recidivism reduction programming 
in the Bureau of Prisons. Our communities--not to mention 
correctional staff--cannot afford an entire 2021 where the 
majority of federal prisoners go without constructive 
programming. According to the Council of State Governments, 
over 20 states already use electronically secure tablets to 
provide educational and rehabilitative programming for 
prisoners.

                           Questions

    (a) How are rehabilitative programming and productive 
activities taking place during this period of modified 
operations in BOP?
    (b) What is the Bureau's strategy for continued recidivism-
reducing programs in the likely event of a ``third wave'' of 
COVID-19 this winter or future acute outbreak?
    (c) Is BOP able to use electronically secure tablets for 
programming, as over 20 states around the country already do?
    During this pandemic, it is critical for federal prisoners 
to continue to receive support and accountability from family 
Members, loved ones, and faith leaders. A March 2020 BJS report 
using 2018 data found that 15 out of 122 federal facilities had 
``video conferencing available to prisoners to communicate with 
individuals outside of the criminal-justice process.''
    (d) Today, in December, 2020, how many facilities now have 
that capacity?
    One key goal of the bipartisan First Step Act was to 
facilitate greater BOP partnerships with outside third-party 
institutions able and willing to provide evidence-based 
programming and productive activities.
    (e) Has the BOP made efforts to communicate or advertise 
the opportunity for third party program providers to apply?
    (f) If so, how many program applications from external 
program providers are submitted, approved, or rejected at this 
time?
    In its explanatory statement for FY21 Commerce-Justice-
Science appropriations, the Senate Appropriations Committee 
expressed the concern that the BOP's request for First Step Act 
implementation ``covers existing programming, including 
educational and counseling programming, which existed at BOP 
long before the FSA.''
    (g) Is this an accurate description of the Bureau of 
Prison's budget request?
    (h) How will BOP clearly distinguish between investments 
and programming that preceded and followed the First Step Act 
so that the public and lawmakers can clearly track the Bureau's 
progress?

   (14) Deployment of BOP and USMS Personnel During Protests

    A June 2020 report by the Office of the Inspector General 
called into question Special Operations Response Team (SORT) 
training and specifically identified a number of dangerous 
elements of regular SORT training. As you indicated during the 
BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, BOP agents or employees 
can be--and were this past summer--deputized as U.S. Marshals.

                           Questions

    (a) Since June 2020, how many times have BOP agents or 
employees been deputized as U.S. Marshals? When and for what 
purpose?
    (b) Regarding the June 2020 deputization of BOP personnel 
as U.S. Marshals, how many complaints has the BOP received 
concerning use of force or behavior contrary to regulations? 
What is the status of those investigations?

            (15) Issues Raised in Recent OIG Reports

    The Office of the Inspector General identified that the 
BOP, among other DOJ agencies, has implemented procedures to 
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act's requirements 
to document and report deaths of individuals in custody.

                           Questions

    (a) What specific procedures has the USMS implemented to 
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act?
    The Office of the Inspector General found that the BOP 
lacked procedures in place to ensure that vendors provided food 
that meets USDA and FDA standards.
    (b) What specific steps, if any, has the BOP taken to 
ensure it serves safe, edible food?

 (16) Questions Pertaining to Pandemic Response at Ft. Dix FCI

    (a) Recently a moratorium on inmate transfers to Ft. Dix 
FCI was lifted, despite a continued rise in positive COVID-19 
cases at the facility. Since the moratorium was lifted on 
November 24, 2020 multiple buses have arrived at the facility 
carrying inmates that tested positive for COVID-19 upon 
arrival. What is the BOP's rationale behind continuing to move 
COVID-19 positive inmates to a facility with an outbreak of the 
virus?
    (b) Recently the publicly available number of active COVID-
19 cases on the BOP's COVID-19 dashboard dropped by nearly 200 
overnight for Ft. Dix FCI. Can you please explain the reasoning 
behind the decision to confirm that these inmates are no longer 
carriers of the virus and do not pose a threat to spread COVID-
19 to other inmates and correctional officers? Were all of 
these inmates tested to ensure they were negative for COVID-19?
    (c) Multiple reports in the media have indicated a severe 
lack of quality medical care for COVID-19 positive inmates at 
FCI Ft. Dix. What is the BOP's procedure for caring for 
symptomatic COVID-19 patients? What is the procedure for BOP 
medical staff if an inmate's condition rapidly deteriorates?

    (17) Questions Submitted on Behalf of Congressman Eric 
       Swalwell, Member of the House Judiciary Committee

    These questions pertain to Michael Cohen, who, until May of 
2020, was imprisoned at FCI Otisville.
    (a) Which BOP officials reviewed Mr. Cohen's conditions of 
release? Who ultimately approved the conditions of release, to 
include prohibitions on his ability to write or publish 
materials?
    (b) Did BOP officials receive any communications from the 
Department of Justice or White House concerning Mr. Cohen's 
conditions of release? If so, please produce those documents 
and communications in their entirety.
    (c) Which BOP or U.S. Marshals monitored Mr. Cohen while he 
was released from federal correctional custody? Who in the 
Department of Justice reviewed the reports of Mr. Cohen's 
compliance? To whom were reports of his compliance forwarded?
    (d) Upon his release, what, if any, communications did the 
Department of Justice or the White House have with BOP 
officials concerning Mr. Cohen's behavior or compliance with 
the conditions of his release?
    (e) Did BOP officials receive any communications from the 
President's personal counsel concerning Mr. Cohen's conditions 
or terms of release. If so, please produce those documents and 
communications in their entirety.
    (f) Which BOP officials reviewed and who ultimately 
approved the transfer of Mr. Cohen from furlough and home 
confinement to jail?

 QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED MICHAEL CARVAJAL FROM REP. 
                          VAL DEMINGS

    1. On August 26th, I met with representatives from FCC 
Coleman and Bureau of Regional Director Jeff Keller. During 
that meeting we discussed the deployment of BOP created 
``strike teams'' to inspect and audit certain BOP facilities 
regarding their use and compliance with BOP COVID-19 protocols 
and provide recommendations to rectify issues identified

    a. LWith regards to the work of the ``strike teams,'' which 
facilities were inspected?
    b. LWhat specifically were the teams directed to audit and 
inspect?
    c. LWhat were the results of these audits and inspections?
    d. LDid any policy recommendations result from the audits 
and inspections?
    e. LWill you commit to providing this Committee with the 
results of the audits and inspections, including any policy 
infractions, resulting discipline, and recommendations?

    2. With the critical budgetary concerns and shortages, what 
was the rationale for purchasing UV body scanners for some of 
its facilities, in lieu of more effective COVID-mitigation 
measures?
    3. What steps has BOP taken to mitigate staffing shortages 
and issues that are COVID-related? Is BOP still widely using 
``augmentation'' to respond to staffing issues?

QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD DONALD W. WASHINGTON FROM CHAIR KAREN 
                              BASS

            (1) Transparency and COVID-19 Protocols

    The U.S. Marshals Service has custody of over 61,000 
individuals awaiting trial, sentencing, or transfer into the 
Bureau of Prisons, about 70% of whom were held in over 850 
different state, local, or tribal facilities under the terms of 
intergovernmental agreements. Despite repeated requests from 
this Committee and other Congresspeople, and in contrast to the 
BOP, there is no public source that reports the number of 
COVID-19 cases among those in USMS custody, nor have you 
published a COVID-19 response protocol. Basically, the only 
information the public has about what is happening in USMS 
custody in relation to COVID-19 is contained in occasional 
statements given to the press. Most recently, your agency 
reported that 6,676 individuals in its custody had tested 
positive for COVID-19 and that 20 had died. During the hearing 
before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
Security of the House Judiciary Committee you indicated that 
this information is sometimes difficult for the USMS to obtain, 
but, during the hearing, you were requested to provide it 
nonetheless.

                           Questions

    (a) What is the current data regarding the number of 
infections, hospitalizations, and deaths, for both detainees 
and staff?
    (b) Will you commit to begin immediately publishing on the 
USMS website basic COVID-19 data (as the Bureau of Prisons 
does) and as has been repeatedly requested by Members of this 
Committee and others in Congress?
    (c) Does the USMS have a COVID-19 protocol that it requires 
contract facilities to follow? How are you auditing compliance 
with that protocol? If no protocol exists, what audit 
procedures has the USMS adopted to ensure safe and humane 
conditions during this crisis? Will you commit to publishing 
those audits immediately?

            (2) Movement of Prisoners and Transfers

    Over the past months, there have been numerous reports that 
the U.S. Marshal Service's failures to adequately test or 
screen individuals for COVID-19 have led to the spread of the 
disease across the country. In August, the Office of the 
Inspector General reported that ``USMS's decentralized system . 
. . creates potential safety issues as detainees are 
transferred between facilities and to and from federal 
courthouses and U.S. Attorney's offices.''

                           Questions

    (a) What steps, if any, is the USMS taking now to remedy 
these failures and in response to the OIG's report?
    (b) Will you commit to publishing data about transfers and 
testing protocols?
    We have heard accounts of people in Marshals custody being 
moved across State and county lines and placed into local jails 
with no information on their transfer paperwork about whether 
they have been tested for or have COVID-19. In light of this 
information, there is a legitimate concern that individuals in 
your agency's custody are contributing to community spread of 
the coronavirus, when placed in contract facilities around the 
country. Some local courts and jail administrators have worked 
hard to protect people in jails and the community from the 
pandemic by decreasing the jail population, providing adequate 
PPE, and other measures.

                            Question

    (c) Can you guarantee that Marshals policy and practice 
during the pandemic has not been at cross-purposes with these 
local efforts or led to community spread of the coronavirus?

                     (3) Access to Counsel

    The pandemic has sharply curtailed pretrial access to 
counsel, given that in many instances attorneys cannot meet 
with their clients in person and given that many facilities are 
in virtual lockdown. Attorneys with clients in USMS custody are 
no exception. There are ample examples of the challenges 
experienced by pretrial detainees from the lack of access to 
counsel, including being able to get needed medical attention 
during this pandemic.

                           Questions

    (a) Has the USMS issued directives to its contracting 
facilities about how they must facilitate access to counsel 
during the COVID-19 pandemic?
    (b) Has the USMS undertaken any national efforts to support 
the expansion of video conferencing for legal visits in local 
(public or private), state, and tribal facilities? If so, will 
you commit to publish those communications, or to produce them 
to this Committee?

                (4) Demographic Data Collection

    According to data from the COVID Tracking Project, Black 
people nationwide are dying at over two times the rate of White 
people (113 deaths per 100,000 compared to 55 deaths per 
100,000). To date, Black people account for 19% of COVID-19 
deaths where race is known. The U.S. Marshals Service does not 
make racial demographic data--pertaining to cases, recoveries, 
and deaths--available to the public.

                           Questions

    (a) Is the USMS recording any demographic information for 
positive/negative cases, recoveries, hospitalizations, and 
deaths? If so, what demographic data is recorded? If data is 
being recorded, why has that data not been made publicly 
available?
    (b) Can you promise to make any demographic data you have 
been collecting publicly available as soon as possible?

            (5) Use of Restraints on Pregnant Women

    In 2008, the Bureau of Prisons ended the practice of 
routinely shackling pregnant women and the First Step Act of 
2018 outlawed the practice except in very limited 
circumstances. Both the American Correctional Association and 
the National Commission on Correctional Healthcare have adopted 
standards opposing the use of shackles; however, these 
standards are only guidelines and are voluntary. At the end of 
the December 2, 2020 BOP/USMS hearing, your staff indicated 
that you would be reporting to the Committee the number of 
times restraints were used on pregnant women in USMS custody. I 
have reviewed your December 28, 2020 annual report to Congress 
pertaining to USMS compliance with section 301 of the First 
Step Act of 2018.

                           Questions

    (a) Please provide information about the number of times 
restraints have been used on pregnant women in USMS custody, 
for as far back as you have been collecting such data. Please 
provide details pertaining to each instance that restraints 
were used and the rationale for their use.
    (b) Your December 28 report provides USMS data pertaining 
to the use of restraints on pregnant women, from October 1, 
2019 through September 20, 2020. Please provide the same data 
since September 21, 2020.
    (c) The case of Andrea Circle Bear (a.k.a., Andrea High 
Bear) was mentioned during the December 2 hearing. Ms. Circle 
Bear was eight months pregnant, gave birth while on a 
ventilator, in BOP custody, and ultimately died from COVID-19. 
Can you confirm that restraints were affirmatively not used on 
Ms. Circle Bear when the U.S. Marshals transported her from 
South Dakota to FMC-Carswell, in Texas?
    (d) More generally, what is the USMS's policy regarding the 
use of restraints on pregnant women? What is your specific 
policy pertaining to the use of restraints while transporting 
pregnant women?

             (6) Issue Raised in Recent OIG Reports

    The Office of the Inspector General identified that the 
BOP, among other DOJ agencies, has implemented procedures to 
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act's requirements 
to document and report deaths of individuals in custody.

                            Question

    (a) What specific procedures has the USMS implemented to 
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act?

                             [all]