    [Senate Hearing 118-777]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                           S. Hrg. 118-777

                        EXAMINING AND PREVENTING DEATHS
                          OF INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS
                               IN FEDERAL PRISONS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                                   __________

                              Serial No. J-118-54

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                            www.judiciary.senate.gov
                                www.govinfo.gov

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    63-048                      WASHINGTON : 2026
    =======================================================================

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                       RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois, Chair
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina,
    AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota                     Ranking Member
    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
    RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      JOHN CORNYN, Texas
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
    CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey           TED CRUZ, Texas
    ALEX PADILLA, California             JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
    JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  TOM COTTON, Arkansas
    PETER WELCH, Vermont                 JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
    LAPHONZA BUTLER, California          THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
                                         MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee

                 Joseph Zogby, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
          Katherine Nikas, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page

    Durbin, Hon. Richard J...........................................     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Horowitz, Hon. Michael E.........................................     3
        Prepared statement...........................................    40
        Responses to written questions...............................    49

    Peters, Hon. Colette S...........................................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................    54
        Questions submitted with no response returned................    64

                                    APPENDIX

    Items submitted for the record...................................    79

                        EXAMINING AND PREVENTING DEATHS
                          OF INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS
                               IN FEDERAL PRISONS

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                                  United States Senate,
                                    Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room
    G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard J. Durbin,
    Chair of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Durbin [presiding], Coons, Blumenthal,
    Booker, Ossoff, Welch, Butler, Grassley, Hawley, Cotton,
    Kennedy, and Blackburn.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
               A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        Chair Durbin. This meeting of the Senate Judiciary
    Committee will come to order.
        The Committee's going to consider a troubling report
    recently issued by the Justice Department's Inspector General
    regarding the deaths of incarcerated individuals in the Federal
    Bureau of Prisons. I welcome Director Peters and Inspector
    General Horowitz back to the Committee.
        In recent years, more than 300 people have died of
    unnatural causes in custody of the Bureau of Prisons--deaths
    that too often have been the result of mismanagement and
    operational failures.
        An investigation by The Marshall Project and National
    Public Radio 3 years ago found that the Thompson Federal Prison
    in my home State of Illinois had become one of the deadliest
    prisons in America because of the now defunct Special
    Management Unit.
        I was shaken by the allegations in that article and
    immediately asked Inspector General Horowitz to examine them.
    We will discuss the results today.
        After media reports late last year alleged that some adults
    in custody died while waiting for necessary medical care, I
    called on BOP to change its procedures, staff, and supply
    medical units so that incarcerated individuals could receive
    the care they needed.
        It is evident that many of the issues the Committee has
    highlighted over the years, including understaffing, overuse of
    restrictive housing, and employee misconduct, will continue to
    have deadly consequences if they go unaddressed.
        The Inspector General's report identified 344 non-medical
    deaths of adults in custody in its review period 2014 to 2021.
    A number of trends emerged that demonstrated increased risk to
    safety of individuals in BOP care.
        For example, 20 percent of these deaths were overdoses from
    contraband and prescription drugs. BOP continues to struggle
    with contraband interdiction, and lacks adequate treatment for
    thousands of individuals fighting addiction.
        Understaffing, particularly in health and psychology
    services, strains their ability to provide quality care.
    Violations of BOP policy by staff, quote, ``present significant
    barriers to the BOP's ability to ensure institutional safety.''
        This afternoon, my colleague, Senator Booker, Chair of the
    Criminal Justice Subcommittee, will hold a specific hearing on
    prison staffing crisis. I thank him for his leadership.
        BOP's lengthy and ineffective discipline process fails to
    bring accountability for staff misconduct, and BOP consistently
    fails to use post-death reviews and proper record keeping to
    identify corrective actions.
        This failure to learn from past mistakes is most troubling
    when examining the role of restrictive housing in custodial
    deaths. Suicides accounted for just over half of the 344 deaths
    CIG reviewed. Almost half of those suicides occurred in
    restrictive housing, which is more commonly known as solitary
    confinement.
        We have a stark reality when it comes to solitary
    confinement. This is cruel and unusual punishment that has been
    the norm in the United States for way too long.
        In 2012, I held the first ever congressional hearing on
    solitary confinement. At the time, nearly 8 percent of
    federally incarcerated individuals were in restrictive housing.
        After some progress under President Obama, we've returned
    to roughly the same percentage of people in solitary today.
        We know that overuse of solitary confinement causes lasting
    irreparable physical, emotional, and mental harm to
    incarcerated people. Moreover, it threatens public safety and
    strains prison budgets.
        I want to add, too, parenthetically, I understand some of
    the individuals we're talking about are dangerous people who
    need to be isolated under certain circumstances. I'm a realist
    about that. But this consistent reference of 8 percent is
    unacceptable.
        Earlier this month, the General Accounting Office released
    a report which I requested with Senator Coons. It found that
    the Bureau of Prisons has failed to implement 54 of the 87
    recommendations from two prior studies on restrictive housing.
        Let's be clear. The failure to decrease our over-reliance
    on restrictive housing is deadly. Deadly. That is why I held a
    follow-up hearing on the dangers this spring.
        Director Peters, I understand many issues we're discussing
    today have been problems for years, long before you arrived.
    But it's time for solutions and change. The lives of hundreds
    of Americans in Bureau of Prisons custody are at risk.
        My colleague, Ranking Member Senator Graham, is under the
    weather today and won't be able to join us this morning. And
    Senator Grassley was here momentarily to acknowledge the
    opening of this Committee meeting. He has another conflict in
    his schedule, as well. But I want to proceed.
        We're going to swear in the witnesses. Each will have 5
    minutes to provide an opening statement, then rounds of
    questions for each Senator present of at least 5 minutes.
        So I ask the individuals to please stand. Raise your right
    hand.
        [Witnesses are sworn in.]
        Let the record reflect that both have answered in the
    affirmative, I should say. And we will start with Inspector
    General Horowitz. You may proceed.
        Inspector General Horowitz. I'm sorry. Couldn't hear.
        Chair Durbin. Oh, I'm sorry.
        Inspector General Horowitz. There you go. Calling on me
    first, was that it?
        Chair Durbin. Yes, it is.
        Inspector General Horowitz. Thank you, perfect. Appreciate
    it.

    STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL E. HOROWITZ, INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S.
                 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, WASHINGTON, DC

        Inspector General Horowitz. Thank you, Chairman Durbin, and
    thank you to Members of this Committee for holding today's
    important hearing.
        I also want to acknowledge, with me are the team that
    worked on the Deaths in Custody Report and went to visit sites
    including USP Thompson, the prison that you mentioned in your
    opening statement.
        I've been Inspector General now for almost 12 years, and
    every year I've included the BOP in my annual report of the top
    management and performance challenges facing the Department of
    Justice.
        Yet, with some notable exceptions, the problems at the BOP
    seemed to only increase. Indeed, last year, the BOP was added
    to the GAO's high-risk list. To be clear, these are not new
    problems.
        Indeed yesterday, we released a compendium of over 100
    publicly issued OIG reports since 2002, reflecting the systemic
    challenges at the BOP that we've identified over the past two
    decades.
        Many of the 344 deaths that you mentioned that we found
    were due to suicide, homicide, drug overdose, or other unknown
    factors that we reviewed in the Deaths in Custody Report have a
    direct connection to these challenges.
        And by the way, as we reference in our report, so did the
    high-profile deaths of inmates Jeffrey Epstein in 2019 and
    James ``Whitey'' Bulger in 2018, as we detailed in those public
    reports that we issued.
        When the public wonders whether the treatment of those two
    high-profile inmates was unique, the answer sadly, from our
    Deaths in Custody Report, is that it was not. Many of the 344
    inmate deaths we discuss in the report were the result of
    similarly serious management and operational failures.
        These include long-standing management and operational
    challenges that involve serious staffing shortages including
    for correctional and healthcare positions, single-celling of
    inmates, inappropriate mental healthcare designations of
    inmates, ineffective contraband interdiction, an outdated
    camera security system, staff failure to follow BOP policies
    and procedures, and an ineffective untimely staff disciplinary
    process.
        Indeed, one or more of these challenges was a contributing
    factor in many of the inmate deaths in our scope. And these
    long-standing challenges continue to present a significant and
    critical threat to the BOP's safe and humane management of
    inmates in its care and custody.
        For example, we found that in nearly one third of the
    inmate deaths within our scope, contraband drugs or weapons
    contributed or appeared to contribute to the death.
        The rampant proliferation of contraband is a major
    challenge for the BOP resulting in the BOP partially closing
    its Federal penitentiary in Atlanta in 2021.
        And as our report notes, USP Atlanta had the highest number
    of deaths during the time period of our review. Ensuring that
    staff follows policies and procedures and are held accountable
    for serious wrongdoing is critical to improving the safety and
    security of BOP institutions for both inmates and the
    overwhelming majority of BOP employees who do their jobs with
    honesty and integrity.
        The OIG dedicates significant resources to investigate
    alleged criminal wrongdoing at BOP facilities, particularly
    sexual assault, and contraband smuggling.
        As we've seen through our ongoing criminal investigation at
    FCI Dublin, where the warden, chaplain, and several other
    inmates have been convicted of sexual assault charges, failing
    to timely identify and address criminal wrongdoing can spiral
    and poison an institution's culture.
        Relatedly, our ongoing use--our audit of BOP's use of
    restraints was prompted in large part by allegations that
    inmates at USP Thompson, which you referenced, and their
    Special Management Unit were routinely placing four-point
    restraints for extended periods of time and that inmates were
    otherwise mistreated while restrained. This unit was recently
    closed by Director Peters in response to these and other
    concerns.
        Let me now turn to suicide, which comprised, as you noted,
    the majority of the deaths we reviewed. More than half of those
    who died by suicide, as you noted, were in single-cell
    confinement, despite BOP policy that strongly disfavors the use
    of single-celling.
        Further, almost half the suicides, as you noted, occurred
    in restrictive housing units. Moreover, over 60 percent of
    inmates who died by suicide had been designated at the lowest
    mental health treatment level.
        None of these are new issues. The OIG has repeatedly
    identified them in our prior reports, and the GAO has also
    raised them.
        We made 12 new recommendations in our Deaths in Custody
    Report, and the BOP agreed with all of them. And we will
    carefully monitor the BOP's implementation of them.
        Effectively addressing these widespread systemic issues at
    the BOP requires a long-term vision and strategy from BOP and
    Department leadership, with support from the Office of
    Management and Budget, the Congress, and other important
    stakeholders.
        To be clear, the problems we've identified in our oversight
    work over the past 20 years won't be solved overnight. But they
    must be addressed with urgency to protect the health, safety,
    and security of BOP staff and inmates, and to enable inmates to
    successfully return to our communities upon their release from
    prison.
        And toward that end, I very much have appreciated my
    quarterly meetings with Director Peters and her desire to meet
    with me regularly. It's the first time in my 12 years as IG
    where that's occurred and we've, I think, made some important
    progress working together.
        Thank you, and I'd be pleased to answer any questions the
    Committee may have.
        [The prepared statement of Inspector General Horowitz
    appears as a submission for the record.]
        Chair Durbin. Thank you, General. Director Peters.

             STATEMENT OF HON. COLETTE S. PETERS, DIRECTOR,
               FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, WASHINGTON, DC

        Director Peters. Good morning, Chairman Durbin, Ranking
    Member Graham, who's not with us today, and Members of the
    Committee. I am pleased to be here with you and Inspector
    General Horowitz to discuss the Deaths in Custody Report. We
    welcome, agree with and----
        Chair Durbin. Could you pull the microphone just a little
    closer to you? Thank you.
        Director Peters. Yes. We welcome, agree with, and are
    implementing the report's recommendations and have plans to go
    even further and take additional steps to mitigate unexpected
    deaths in custody.
        I have spent my entire professional career working in the
    public safety field, including as a victim advocate, working
    with victims who lost loved ones. I know any unexpected death
    of an adult in our care and custody is tragic and it changes
    the lives of that person's family and loved ones forever.
        We also experience these deaths as a heavy blow. I have
    been in our institutions in the days following unexpected
    deaths, and I have seen our employees suffering due to the
    loss.
        Our core mission always is to care for those in our custody
    in hopes that they leave our facilities prepared to be good
    neighbors. When our best efforts are not successful and death
    does occur, we initiate review processes to understand the
    cause of these deaths so that we can prevent similar deaths
    going forward.
        But we can do better here and must ensure that our reviews
    go deep enough and our documentation is clear enough to support
    those reviews.
        Our psychological assessments conclude that many
    individuals who come to us come with mental illness and
    substance use disorders, making them more susceptible to
    suicide, overdose, and homicide. So to combat these deaths, we
    work on root causes and have incorporated evidence-based
    treatments like medication-assisted treatment.
        We train our employees to recognize those at risk of
    attempting suicide, refer at-risk people for help, and respond
    to suicide attempts. And also train on the appropriate use of
    CPR, AEDs, Naloxone, and cut down tools, ensuring our employees
    have access to those tools in the workplace.
        The report notes that suicides occurred when people were
    single-celled or in restrictive housing. That is why we now
    provide special training to those who work in restrictive
    housing and limit the use of single-celling.
        We have restrictive housing reforms underway now that will
    reduce the amount of time adults in custody spend in
    restrictive housing for disciplinary violations. We are
    creating a special post and restrictive housing to help those
    in custody transition from that restrictive housing environment
    to the general population, and we're going to add employees in
    restrictive housing during the overnight shift.
        We continuously work to combat contraband to reduce
    homicides and overdoses. This includes heightened screening of
    mail, detecting and intercepting drones, monitoring or
    terminating cellular communications, and continually monitoring
    intelligence and gang activity.
        To harness all of this intelligence, we are creating a new
    Chief Inspector position to identify system-wide patterns and
    problems, including that that would prevent deaths in our
    custody.
        On a departmental level, the Deputy Attorney General has
    also formed a working group of experts to better prevent
    suicides. Again, I want to be perfectly clear, our employees
    are our everything and fully staffed institutions and well-
    trained employees save lives. Yet it is no secret that our
    agency is in crisis as it relates to recruitment and retention.
        We are aggressively recruiting and utilizing incentives to
    maintain the employees we have, and while our efforts over this
    past year have gleaned results, we are still faced with an
    inability to compete with the private sector and other law
    enforcement agencies.
        As an example, at a Federal prison about an hour outside of
    Boston, a correctional officer recently quit his job for a
    better offer with better pay. The better offer, working at the
    local grocery store.
        On the law enforcement side, an ad running in the New York
    City Subway is advertising that city correctional officers can
    make around $130,000 after a few years on the job.
        While in the same amount of time, our officers, after we've
    implemented the 35 percent retention bonus, would be making
    about $90,000. The story is the same throughout the country. We
    need more resources to carry out our mission, implement our
    vision, and reach our goals.
        Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Graham, and Members of the
    Committee, thank you, once again, for this opportunity to speak
    on behalf of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and I welcome your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Director Peters appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Durbin. Thank you very much. My interest in this
    issue started many years ago when I read an article in The
    Atlantic magazine by Atul Gawande, a doctor in Boston, about
    the impact of isolation and solitary confinement on the human
    mind, not just in this correctional setting, but prisoners of
    war.
        He referenced our former colleague, John McCain, and what
    he went through after 5 years of that type of treatment, and
    what impact it had on him. And Dr. Gawande, who now works for
    the USAID, reminded us that the majority of prisoners will
    ultimately be released. If they're damaged in the process of
    serving time in prison, they'll take that damage out into the
    open society and others may suffer.
        So this has been a long-time issue. It's been 12 years
    since the first hearing under my leadership occurred in this
    Committee. I voiced concerns over reliance on solitary
    confinement, pleaded with the Directors--now and before you--to
    do something about it. I'm going to reintroduce my legislation,
    Solitary Confinement Reform Act, to limit the use of the
    practice.
        Director Peters, the latest statistics show that despite
    the decrease in Bureau of Prison's total population, since you
    were sworn in as Director in August 2022, the percentage and
    total number of individuals in restricted housing is actually
    higher than it was at that time.
        As of this month, approximately 7.9 percent, or 11,179
    people, are currently being held in some form of restrictive
    housing, an increase of 0.6 percent since September 2022.
        Director Peters, you previously pointed to your contract
    with the National Institute of Justice when asked about your
    plans to address restrictive housing. What is the status of
    that study?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. So the study is
    underway, NIJ has issued the contract, the individuals studying
    our restrictive housing have actually been onsite and are
    visiting facilities, looking at our policies, our practices,
    and interviewing employees.
        We've also--we're also not just waiting for the results of
    that report. We're beginning to implement restrictive housing
    reform.
        Currently, we have plans to approve a new policy that will
    actually reduce the amount of time an individual can be
    sanctioned to restrictive housing for disciplinary purposes. As
    I mentioned in my opening comments, we're adding additional
    resources to solve this problem, and in the short-term, as you
    well know, in your very own State, we shut down the Special
    Management Unit in quick order last year.
        Chair Durbin. Here's my concern. Since my first hearing on
    this issue in 2012, there have been multiple reviews of BOP
    policy.
        The latest came out earlier this month when the GAO
    published a report I requested. According to their report, BOP
    has not fully implemented 54 of the 87 recommendations from two
    prior studies on improving restrictive housing practices. One
    of those studies from 2014 was conducted by an external
    consultant. It made 34 recommendations, only 16 have been fully
    implemented.
        And a 2016 evaluation completed by the Department of
    Justice under the Obama administration, which President Biden
    ordered the Attorney General to implement in 2022, made 53
    recommendations and only 17 have been implemented.
        The time for studies is over. The death rate in our prisons
    is unacceptable. Damage to mental health is unacceptable. My
    question to you is, what steps can you commit to today to
    immediately reduce restrictive housing populations?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. I think there are a
    variety of things that we're doing today, including proving
    that policy that's been long-standing negotiated with our
    national union, and that will decrease the amount of time that
    individuals can actually be sanctioned to restrictive housing
    for disciplinary purposes.
        The data also reveals that many of the individuals that are
    in restrictive housing, are in there many times at their own
    choice because they fear their ability to walk in general
    population.
        So we are working on creating cultures and environments
    that are more normal and humane, so those individuals actually
    feel comfortable in general population.
        And then, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, we're
    creating positions who will work in restrictive housing and
    their sole responsibility will be working with those
    individuals who don't want to leave restrictive housing and
    help them transition into general population.
        We did this in the State of Oregon and it was very
    successful. So we're looking forward to rolling that out this
    year. We are also looking at best practices across the country
    and around the globe to implement changes.
        As I shared with you the last time that we met, this last
    year has been filled with strategic planning for the
    Department. We've rebooted our mission, our vision, our values,
    and many of the goals that we're working on will tie into
    restrictive housing, both a strong plan around restrictive
    housing reform, and building morale and working on our
    recruitment and retention issues, which are at the core of many
    of the issues, as the Inspector General pointed out.
        Chair Durbin. What percentage of people in restrictive
    housing volunteer to be in that housing?
        Director Peters. That number is almost 40 percent. And we
    are looking at the data as we get even closer into the data. It
    might even be higher than that, because we have individuals
    that are categorized as PC status, which falls into that 40
    percent, but also individuals that are on transition status.
    And those two could fit into that category.
        Chair Durbin. Aside from that category and those that are
    incarcerated because of their danger to cell--other prisoners
    and cellmates, I'd like to ask you, do you accept the premise
    that those who are put in restrictive housing involuntarily run
    the very real risk of serious mental illness or worse?
        Director Peters. Senator, I would argue that everyone who
    is in restrictive housing has the--will suffer from some form
    of mental or physical damage. I think even those that are
    agreeing or wanting to be in restrictive housing need to be
    educated on the fact that that isn't where they belong and that
    we need to be able to safely house them in GP.
        Just because they're volunteering to be there doesn't mean
    that the physical and mental wear and tear isn't happening for
    them, as well. And I think that's what that position that we're
    wanting to create to put into restrictive housing will help
    combat.
        We also have reintegration units for those individuals
    where we actually have step-down programs and units that help
    people get out of restrictive housing. And we need to do better
    there, as well.
        Chair Durbin. Thank you. Senator Blackburn.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good to see
    you again. Always appreciate our conversations with you. I know
    our hearing today is focused on deaths of the incarcerated.
        But I want to change the topic just a little bit and look
    at the treatment of our BOP officers and focus on what is
    happening with some of the assaults against our staff--BOP
    staff. And not only the physical, but the PTSD and some of
    those issues that occur.
        And yesterday I introduced the Safer Prisons Act, which
    would double the maximum term of imprisonment for assaulting a
    BOP correctional officer.
        And Director Peters, for you, I know you'd agree that these
    assaults present a real danger for the Bureau of Prisons. So
    I'd like to have your support on the Safer Prisons Act and have
    you support doubling that maximum term.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. Well, you know, there
    are processes with the Department of Justice in terms of
    component heads being able to support legislation.
        But I will tell you that the safety and security of our
    employees are the--are essential, they are our everything. If
    they don't feel safe----
        Senator Blackburn. Yes.
        Director Peters [continuing]. In our institutions then we
    have lost the core of our mission.
        Senator Blackburn. Let me ask you this, you mentioned
    hiring and retention as an issue. Do you think the safety or
    the lack of safety and protection plays into that difficulty in
    hiring and retention?
        Director Peters. I think that we do our best through
    augmentation and overtime in order to ensure that the posts
    that need to be filled are filled.
        But you and I have talked before, augmentation is a great
    resource in the short-term and we've been using it in the long-
    term to solve a long-term recruitment and retention problem.
        And it is making our people exhausted. They are riveted
    with overtime augmentation impacts, FSA programming and
    operations visiting is sometimes canceled because we don't have
    the people to support those posts. So we have a lot of work to
    do in this area and we've thrown every incentive and direct
    hire authority and everything that we can. But we need to go
    further.
        Senator Blackburn. You and I have previously discussed
    Jeffrey Epstein, and the Chairman knows I've been trying to
    subpoena his flight logs in Ghislaine Maxwell's little black
    book.
        I think it's essential as we look to break apart the sex
    trafficking rings that not only are here in the U.S. but have
    grown to be global entities--$150 billion-a-year business,
    globally trafficking human beings--primarily women and girls.
        So while Epstein was in BOP's custody, did you ever have
    access to his unredacted flight logs or to Ghislaine Maxwell's
    little black book?
        Director Peters. So as a former victim's advocate, I know
    that you and I share values around combating sex trafficking.
        The Epstein situation happened before my tenure----
        Senator Blackburn. Yes.
        Director Peters [continuing]. At the Federal Bureau of
    Prisons. So I was not a part of any of that evaluation and
    would turn to the Inspector General for any of those questions.
        Senator Blackburn. Okay.
        Inspector General Horowitz. Senator, I don't--I don't know
    the answer as I sit here. We can certainly make an inquiry.
        Senator Blackburn. I would like to have that answer in
    writing, if you will?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Yes--I mean, we'll ask the
    BOP----
        Senator Blackburn. I----
        Inspector General Horowitz [continuing]. Obviously, we
    don't have----
        Senator Blackburn. Right----
        Inspector General Horowitz [continuing]. The information
    you're looking for----
        Senator Blackburn. Absolutely.
        Inspector General Horowitz [continuing]. For we'd have to
    ask the BOP.
        Senator Blackburn. I appreciate that. But I would like a
    response in writing.
        I also, Director Peters, there is----we have heard that BOP
    is helping to transport migrants from the Southern Border into
    the country. And the Bureau has confirmed that it has provided
    transportation for migrants since CBP has been inundated with
    the surge at the Southern Border.
        And we've talked before about the extensive staffing
    challenges at BOP and the negative consequences that come with
    that. So are you comfortable with having to dedicate your
    resources that are already stressed to alleviate President
    Biden's Border surge?
        Director Peters. So as a fellow law enforcement agency
    inside the Departments, we, of course, support supporting other
    components in helping with crises. It's one of the things that
    we do well. But----
        Senator Blackburn. Let me ask you this. My time's about to
    run out. Have you ever transported an individual who was on the
    Terrorist Watch List?
        Director Peters. Senator, I don't know the answer to that
    question.
        Senator Blackburn. Could you look into that and respond in
    writing?
        Director Peters. I will have my team look into it and we'll
    get back to you with information that's available.
        Senator Blackburn. Excellent. And my time is up, but as
    always, I'm going to mention the Memphis facility and you and I
    have such an ongoing conversation around that and I do look
    forward to getting an update on that from you.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you.
        Director Peters. I did check this morning, and it looks
    like the timelines that we have provided the last time we
    checked are on target.
        Senator Blackburn. Excellent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator. Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thanks Mr. Chairman. Thanks for having
    this hearing.
        You know, correctional officers, as I know from having been
    United States Attorney and then Attorney General of our State
    in Connecticut, are among the hardest working and least
    appreciated, whether at the State level or Federal level. They
    have to deal with dangerous situations every day. Their work is
    out of public sight for good reason, because obviously they're
    in confinement situations.
        And so I am very, very sympathetic to the points that you
    made, Director Peters, about the need for retention,
    recruitment, and appreciation of the working conditions and the
    compensation that they deserve.
        And I wonder, short of additional compensation, whether
    there are working condition issues that could be addressed?
    Mandated overtime, other kinds of demands placed on them, that
    maybe can be mitigated through better scheduling, better
    accommodations for them in their leisure moments during the
    job. Maybe you can comment.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. Well, I appreciate
    those comments greatly. I think you're right. They are unsung
    heroes. They're people that don't get lifted up.
        And I will say to any other law enforcement agency, I think
    correctional officers have the toughest beat in public safety
    and the wear and tear, you know, the data--one in three have
    PTSD. Many are exhausted with overtime and augmentation.
        And so yes, we have to change the cultures inside our
    institutions. We're working on creating more normalized and
    humanized environments so that they feel less institutional.
        Our maintenance and repair backlog is about $3 billion. So
    when I visit our institutions, our wardens are just as excited
    to show me the new FSA programming and treatment as they are
    the walls that are crumbling and the stairwells that are
    crumbling.
        And so that type of an environment is no place for anyone
    to live or work. And so we have a lot to do to change the
    environment for our correctional officers.
        The Fed survey says that the Federal Bureau of Prisons is
    the worst place to work in Federal Government. So we have a lot
    of work to do to help support our correctional officers who are
    exhausted.
        Senator Blumenthal. Correctional officers work behind bars.
        Director Peters. That's right.
        Senator Blumenthal. They work 8 hours a day, sometimes
    more, with people--let's be very blunt--who have often
    committed very violent acts that put them behind bars. And so
    the more we can do to improve those institutional settings, the
    more we can change the environment for them, and perhaps the
    way they react to the challenges they face. Would you agree?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. I agree
    wholeheartedly.
        And while we have issued every authority in our power, like
    we've increased the base salary for COs by $2000, we have
    recruitment and retention incentives across the country, we
    have direct hire authority.
        The bottom line, as I said in my opening comments is, we
    need to pay them more. That base, the retention incentive and
    recruitment incentives, are band aids. We have to figure out
    how to increase that base salary so that we can hire the best
    and the brightest and keep them.
        Senator Blumenthal. Mr. Horowitz, in 2014 I led an effort
    called the Death in Custody Reporting Act.
        Congress passed it. The President signed it.
        It included, among other things, a requirement for a study.
    We are here 10 years after the passage of that measure. There
    has been no study of the data with respect to arrest-related
    and in-custody deaths.
        I agree wholeheartedly with the Chairman that the time for
    studies is over. We need action. But studies sometimes can be
    informative and can guide action in the right direction. Would
    you agree that study should be done?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Absolutely, Senator.
        In fact, one of the reasons we undertook this work was
    because there wasn't a set of data out there. And we shouldn't
    have to be the--the first line of defense on these issues.
    Right? It should be the Department itself. It should be the
    component itself that does that. It's not happening as it
    should.
        Senator Blumenthal. And you point out, I think, and I think
    Director Peters you make the point, as well, that half of the
    344 deaths by suicide have occurred with respect to prisoners
    who are in single-cell housing or in solitary confinement.
        Now, I recognize that there are significant mental health
    components to the reasons for the suicide, but the correlation
    between that fact--isolation in a single cell and death by
    suicide--maybe ought to give us reason to change some of those
    policies. Would you agree?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Absolutely, Senator. I think
    there are several figures that jump out here.
        One is the fact that half of the folks are--roughly half
    were in single cells, roughly half, little less, were in
    restricted housing.
        And the one I mentioned in my opening, which is that over
    60 percent of the suicides--of the individuals who died by
    suicide were in the lowest mental health category.
        Of the four categories, they were deemed to not need mental
    health treatment. That's over 60 percent of people. And that's
    very concerning. That's something that needs to be addressed,
    and something frankly we've highlighted before as a problem and
    an issue.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. I want to thank the Chairman
    for having this hearing. I want to thank you both for your
    public service. Correctional policy isn't the most glamorous,
    but it is among the most important of what we do in criminal
    justice. And thank you both for your work. Thank you.
        Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator. Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to
    both of our witnesses for your testimony.
        Director Peters, you have inherited leadership of a deeply
    troubled institution, and I suspect you some days feel like
    your job is more akin to trying to change the direction of an
    aircraft carrier than lead an agile and well-resourced
    organization, because BOP is frankly neither. And I appreciate
    the determination, openness, and vigor with which you've
    approached this task.
        And to Inspector General Horowitz, it was very encouraging
    to hear that the two of you are working together, responsibly,
    that instead of viewing the IG as a hostile party, you, as a
    BOP Director, are engaging around these issues.
        Nonetheless, as the Chairman pointed out--and I want to
    thank you Chairman Durbin for your engagement and determination
    on this issue over many years--there are lots of
    recommendations that have not yet been fully implemented.
    There's lots of important policy work to do here.
        As Senator Blumenthal just said, Federal corrections is a
    really important part of our criminal justice system. It
    doesn't get the attention that it needs and deserves.
        I've long been concerned with the overuse of solitary
    confinement, and have appreciated the chance to work with
    Chairman Durbin in support of his Federal Solitary Confinement
    Reform Act now for several congresses.
        Director Peters, I just want to say I appreciate your
    leadership in establishing an internal task force and
    partnering with the National Institute of Justice to develop
    further recommendations on this issue. But we've got lots of
    recommendations over many years of work.
        Inspector General, let's put aside, just for the moment,
    the issue of policy implementation and first--focus first on
    the need to have policies to implement. Can you just briefly
    elaborate on what is lacking at an overall policy level now in
    terms of addressing restrictive housing in single-celling?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Thank you, Senator. So that is
    one of the significant recommendations we've made in the past
    many years ago, 2017 report, about the lack of an overall
    policy guidance for when people should be put in restrictive
    housing and when they should be single-celled. And we weren't
    alone in that, actually.
        The BOP itself put together a 2021 task force and asked
    what should they do. They listed 11 recommendations, I believe
    it was. And one of them was implement the OIG's earlier
    recommendation and put in place this policy. And that is still
    an open recommendation.
        So there needs to be an understanding among all the wardens
    in all 121 institutions that what, when, and how should single-
    celling be used.
        Let me just, if I could, Senator, just give you a sense
    during COVID.
        A directive went out from BOP leadership to not use single-
    celling as a quarantine method unless there was an
    extraordinary reason to do so.
        Well, seven of the suicides were quarantined individuals
    during COVID, not because they were acting up, but because of
    COVID quarantine. By the way, five of the seven hadn't had the
    review done before they were single-celled to see if they had
    indicia of mental health illness or potential, and after-action
    reviews indicated that maybe all seven did.
        Senator Coons. Striking. Director Peters, can you just
    respond to that particular question about having a policy in
    order to be able to implement it?
        Director Peters. Absolutely. And so here's what we've done.
        First, I want to say thank you for your comments about the
    partnership with the Inspector General. I'd love to say
    publicly that the partnership has been exceptional.
        I am the former Inspector General of the State of Oregon,
    so I know very much to respect his very hard job. And we are
    working on implementing all of the recommendations. Here's what
    we've done as it relates to the fine point of the question that
    you've asked.
        We have a policy, a restrictive housing policy that has
    been under review and negotiation with the National Union for a
    very long time. We are so close to finalizing that policy,
    which will implement a lot of the Inspector General and GAO's
    recommendations.
        Furthermore, we have an exceptional relationship with the
    National Union and the incoming President is working with us
    directly, and we're going to come up with a plan to streamline
    policy adoption so that we don't have significant delays and
    have this be a barrier to implementation of the Inspector
    General and GAO's recommendations.
        So we also have a future state and plan on how these policy
    negotiations will happen going forward.
        Senator Coons. Good. That's encouraging.
        I would hate to see the clock run out on your opportunity
    to resolve these long-standing issues and to have the union at
    the table and BOP leadership at the table and be implementing
    some of the IG's recommendations on this critical area. It's
    encouraging to me.
        I'll be following this and I know the Chairman will be
    legislating. Could I briefly ask one more question, Mr.
    Chairman, with the forbearance of my colleague down the dais?
        When a Federal defendant is found mentally incompetent to
    stand trial, my understanding is if they're released on bail,
    they're then required to be returned to custody to see if their
    competency can be restored in a BOP facility.
        But there's few facilities with this capacity. They have
    very long wait times, and that means that mentally ill, but
    presumed innocent people can end up in terminable incarceration
    before they get the help they need and before the criminal
    justice process can proceed.
        This has led to charges being dropped in some cases due to
    speedy trial issues. Director Peters, can you speak about what
    BOP has been doing about this? And will you work with me on
    helping identify ways that Congress can help specifically on
    this issue?
        Director Peters. Yes. Thank you, Senator.
        So this is another issue--a long-standing issue that the
    Department has had around lack of resources that are resulting
    in this backlog of these reviews. And here's what we've done in
    the last year.
        We have added additional beds at our--40 additional beds at
    our facility in Chicago to help us peel back this backlog.
        We are looking at adding additional beds this year at
    another facility that we've yet to determine, but are working
    on a plan.
        We have also worked to create a psychology review team--
    that's a traveling team that's going to travel across the
    country now to help work on this backlog.
        And then further, we're working on a program where we can
    hire individuals who have their Ph.D., but yet haven't
    completed their dissertation, that would be able to come and
    help with these reviews, as well.
        So this is a long-standing issue that we're trying to fix.
    It's a conversation that I've had with the U.S. attorneys on
    many, many occasions. But it is certainly in our sights.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. Thank you both, and thank you,
    Mr. Chairman, for your leadership.
        Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Coons.
        As we mentioned earlier, Senator Booker's Subcommittee on
    Crime is having a hearing this afternoon on staffing in the
    Federal prisons, which has come up in this morning's meeting
    many, many times. So let me recognize Senator Booker.
        Senator Booker. First of all, thank you very much for this
    hearing and I'm grateful for the two witnesses being here.
        Before I get to just a question on staffing in general, I
    just want to talk about mental health and the well-being of
    both people that are incarcerated, as well as the mental health
    of a lot of our incredible correctional officers.
        Suicide rates for both groups are alarming to me.
    Nationally, according to this society for suicide prevention,
    it's about 14 out of every 100,000 Americans die of suicide
    annually.
        That number alone should cause concern for all Americans
    that it's so high. But people in custody die at rates that are
    much higher.
        According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2019 it
    was up to 20 out of every 100,000 persons. So I'm wondering,
    first, maybe perhaps Director, for the people that are
    incarcerated, what steps is the BOP taking to curb this
    extraordinary rate of individuals committing suicide in
    custody?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. So we've done a
    variety of things and while one suicide on our watch is one
    suicide, too many, I think the things that we have implemented
    at the Bureau are represented in the data in that our suicide
    rate is less than the general population and less than State
    corrections. And I think it has to do a lot with the psychology
    resources that we do have.
        While I am going to argue for more and better pay for those
    doctoral level psychologists, they do do incredible work in
    terms of finding those individuals that need resources, and
    then we wrap those resources around them, and we have more work
    to do.
        We have--are looking at our after-action reports, looking
    to see if those need to be more substantive. Are we sharing the
    data across the country when we find issues that need to be
    resolved, resolved? I personally, Senator, read every
    reconstruction report and then meet with a multidisciplinary
    team to talk about what we've learned and how we're going to
    implement changes going forward.
        Senator Booker. And then just sticking with inmates, in an
    OIG report, there was a discussion of the inmate companion
    program in which institutions may utilize individuals who are
    in BOP custody in lieu of BOP staff. And it seemed to have some
    really promising success.
        The report indicates that both detained individuals and
    staff found several benefits from the program. Staff explained
    that program participants were more effective than BOP staff at
    suicide watches because they took better notes and interacted
    more frequently than staff.
        And so I'm just wondering, can you provide the Committee
    with additional information on this program? And is it
    promising, and something that you may want to expand?
        Director Peters. Yes. Thank you, Senator. So, as I've
    traveled to more than 40 of our institutions in the last year.
    I've had the privilege of meeting some of these companions. And
    not only does the data bear that it is a productive program,
    but just hearing the anecdotal stories about their ability to
    connect better with a peer, if you will, than maybe a
    corrections professional would be able to do, has been quite
    profound.
        And they take their job so seriously. So we train them. We
    just don't select random adults in custody. We have a really
    clear selection process, and then we train them like we train
    our staff on looking for those predictive characteristics that
    we're looking for. And then that----
        Senator Booker. And just to jump in, so far as
    interrupting, because I want to try to get two more questions
    in, and respect Senator Ossoff's time.
        Just law enforcement in general has real challenges with
    mental health, and the suicide rates of law enforcement in
    general are difficult. Can you just talk about the--the BOP
    personnel really quick, and then I'll get my other question out
    on the staffing issues for correctional officers?
        Can you just provide the Committee with an update on some
    of the financial incentives that you've talked about before?
        I just still find it astonishing that correctional officers
    are at the very bottom of all Federal law enforcement. That the
    amount of money they make to me is, why would you--better to go
    be a TSA agent or jobs like that than it is for--in terms of
    the compensation.
        So can you address both the mental health and wellness
    steps you're taking for correctional officers? And then just
    those financial incentives, which seem to be urgently needed?
    And frankly, I think these incredibly hard workers need to be
    paid more.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. Well, I certainly
    appreciate your passion around the mental health of our
    corrections professionals who are often unsung heroes in the
    toughest law enforcement beat.
        And the data is startling. One in three have symptoms of
    PTSD. That means more anxiety, more depression. That means more
    reliance on substance abuse and higher levels of divorce. Over
    90 percent are obese or in the overweight category. Over 90
    percent have hypertension or pre-hypertension, which means
    they're on the track for cardiac disease.
        And so the data is staggering. And what we're finding
    across the country, in some places, they can leave the Federal
    Bureau of Prisons and work for State corrections and make two
    to three times more, let alone the bonuses that we're battling
    against at fast food organizations.
        So it is incredibly difficult. We have thrown every
    incentive that we can at this problem--every recruitment
    incentive, every retention incentive. We've increased the base
    salary by $2000 for correctional officers. That's the amount of
    authority that I have.
        But the bottom line, as I said in my opening comments, is
    like you are referring, we need to increase that base salary.
    We need to pay more. And when we compare to other law
    enforcements, I also want to remind the Committee that the
    average onboarding for law enforcement in this country is 21
    weeks. And our officers receive about six.
        Senator Booker. It's truly unfortunate. And I'm hoping you
    can answer for the record, my second part of that question
    about some more detailing of the financial incentives. But I
    appreciate the indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Booker. Senator Cotton, you
    would be next, but if you'd like a minute, Senator Ossoff.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator
    Cotton, and thank you both for being here. It's a pleasure to
    see you both again.
        Director Peters, following up on Senator Booker's question
    about retention incentives, at USP Atlanta, as at so many
    facilities, there are severe staffing issues, a real difficulty
    recruiting and retaining staff. I had sent you a letter asking
    that BOP undertake what efforts it could to add retention
    incentives, take steps to ensure that those correctional
    officers are well paid and can be retained.
        And you've replied, which I appreciate, just like your
    commitment to continue working with my office to make sure that
    we are treating those correctional officers well, paying them
    properly, and retaining their services.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. I'm certainly
    committed to that. We have thrown every incentive that we can
    that's in our authority at recruitment incentives, retention
    incentives.
        And at the core of many of the issues that the Inspector
    General reveals, is a lack of staffing. And so this is
    incredibly important to us. As I said in my opening comments,
    while the incentives have proven a band aid effect, we need to
    increase the base salary for these correctional officers so we
    can hire the best and the brightest and then keep them.
        Senator Ossoff. Well, I'm hoping we can work together to
    identify some additional tools that may be available for the
    team at USP Atlanta. Let's remain on the subject of staffing.
        In 2021, BOP hired a contractor to develop a tool that was
    intended to help the Bureau to determine necessary staffing
    levels for safety at BOP facilities. Correct?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Ossoff. And in March 2023, so a year ago
    approximately, BOP reported that the tool was still being
    tested in three of BOP's six regions and said it would be
    rolled out to all six BOP regions by June of 2023. Did that
    happen?
        Director Peters. Senator, I'm not sure exactly when it was
    rolled out, but we have completed the initial data analysis as
    it relates to those employees who are in the correctional
    services program division, and they're recommending an
    additional 3,500 positions in that category going forward.
        Senator Ossoff. And how many regions is that tool currently
    being used, and is it being used for USP Atlanta, for example?
        Director Peters. So I think it's important to understand
    that that tool is to help us plan for future budget planning
    and request. It won't--that tool won't help me with the crisis
    today because I already cannot fill the positions that you've
    paid for today. And so----
        Senator Ossoff. But in how many regions is that tool
    currently being used?
        Director Peters. All six. That 3,500 is all six. And then
    Senator, the next category that they're working on right now is
    health services, which we have difficulty maintaining and
    recruiting staff in that category, as well.
        Senator Ossoff. My office--several offices on this
    Committee have asked for a demonstration of this tool and been
    told that BOP won't provide it because the tool is still being
    refined. Can you make sure that we are able to view and observe
    and participate in a demonstration of that tool within the next
    several weeks?
        Director Peters. Senator, I will work with my team and see
    the availability and where we're at with the tool and our
    ability to share it with you.
        Senator Ossoff. We don't--we can't understand why we can't
    see. It doesn't make any sense. We should be able to come and
    see the tool.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. I'll work with my team
    and see what we can do.
        Senator Ossoff. Well, I hope that we can come and see it in
    short order.
        I understand BOP conducted an inspection of FPC Alderson
    earlier this year. My team has requested a copy of that
    inspection report. Sounds like BOP is working on it. Do I have
    your commitment to get that to us promptly?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. You have my commitment
    to work with your team to get it to you as quickly as we can.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you very much.
        Inspector General, your report has detailed how BOP staff
    were in some cases not carrying out key duties, including
    required inmate mental health assessments, counts and rounds
    and trainings among others. It found that these operational
    failures contributed to deaths in custody. How significant a
    role did under staffing play in those failures?
        Inspector General Horowitz. I think it's a very significant
    problem here. It's been a challenge that we've seen not only in
    deaths, but as we've gone to prisons to inspect them, and the
    problems that go both for correctional officers who are
    substantially understaffed ultimately being asked to work
    sometimes voluntarily, sometimes mandatory overtime.
        Then we have augmentation, which is pulling healthcare,
    potentially educational staff, potentially facility staff,
    potentially to cover the duties of the correctional officers,
    which has a cascading effect. Meaning, there are long waits for
    First Step Act training, healthcare staffing can be shortages
    are exacerbated and things like that. So it's a big challenge.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Inspector General.
        With my remaining time Director Peters, I want to follow up
    on an issue at USP Atlanta. As you know, a PSI investigation
    that I led several years ago found very substantial flow of
    contraband into the facility, including weapons and narcotics.
    IG's recent report found that contraband drugs or weapons
    contributed to nearly one third of deaths in custody at BOP.
        What steps, Director, have you taken to address the flow of
    contraband and the threat that poses to public safety at BOP
    facilities and in particular at USP Atlanta, please?
        Director Peters. At USP Atlanta, the issues that were
    uncovered still fall into these two categories: lack of
    staffing, and our maintenance and repair backlog.
        As we were able to show you during your visit at USP
    Atlanta, that facility structure was crumbling and it allowed
    for hiding contraband inside our institutions.
        So we're working to maintain our facilities in a way where
    they are safe and secure. But we're also working every day to
    interdict contraband in our institutions through the use of
    detecting and stopping drone activity, looking at the mail, and
    looking at ways to stop drugs from coming in via the mail.
        We work diligently to ensure that anyone entering our
    institution has a background check and is physically screened
    before they come inside.
        So this is something that is absolutely top of mind as you
    well know and pointed out. Contraband is a significant issue
    and can lead to lost lives or even impact the safety and
    security of our employees.
        Inspector General Horowitz. Can I just speak to the
    contraband issue because it's such a significant issue. It's
    connected to, we found, one third of the deaths in our review
    and in the report.
        We've been on inspections and we were at FCI Tallahassee,
    for example, an inspection, and our team went. And what you saw
    there in terms of challenges on contraband with inmates
    potentially smuggling contraband, inmates who were working near
    the fence lines could easily have something thrown over a fence
    to them.
        Inmates who went out to collect garbage were not being
    checked as they brought bags back into the facility. Some basic
    stuff that you would think it's not sophisticated to figure out
    how to try and interdict those kinds--that kind of contraband.
        And not surprisingly, by the way, the prison with the
    highest number of deaths in our report was USP Atlanta, which
    had been closed in 2021 precisely because of the hundreds--of
    the dozens of cell phones and drugs found in the prison.
        And so this is a major problem. We've had a staff search
    policy recommendation open for years that has not been
    implemented--a basic search policy for staff coming in to the
    facility, that hasn't happened either.
        So there are a lot of challenges on the contraband issue
    that are very significant, that we are concerned is
    contributing to inmate deaths, both from homemade weapons and
    from drugs being brought into the facility.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you both.
        Director Peters. Thank you.
        Chair Durbin. Senator Cotton.
        Senator Cotton. Director Peters, the Inspector General
    noted in his statement for today's hearing that solving the
    Bureau's staffing shortages is, quote, ``One of the building
    blocks to begin to address the chronic challenges facing the
    BOP.'' He also said that significant staffing shortages have
    had a, quote, ``cascading effect'' on your Bureau's facilities.
        When you testified six months ago, I asked you how many
    correctional officer positions were filled. You didn't have an
    answer at the time.
        Last month you did an interview with ``60 Minutes.'' You
    also didn't have an answer. Do you have an answer today for how
    many correctional officers you currently have on payroll?
        Director Peters. Yes, Senator. We have almost 40,000
    authorized positions across the organization, and 14,899 of
    those are correctional officers. We are going to 100 percent
    fund those positions. They are only 82 percent filled at this
    time.
        Senator Cotton. 14,899 are correctional officers?
        Director Peters. Yes, correctional officers. The
    individuals that you would think, in your mind, are on the
    units safeguarding are custodians.
        Senator Cotton. And you said 40,000, that's your total
    personnel. Right?
        Director Peters. That's our total personnel.
        Senator Cotton. What are you authorized and funded for by
    Congress for correctional officers?
        Director Peters. For correctional officers, we are
    authorized at that 14,899 number. And it's 100 percent funded.
        Senator Cotton. Are you sure you're not authorized about
    20,000?
        Director Peters. 20,000 is the correctional officers series
    position, that's 20,466. That includes correctional officers,
    lieutenant, correctional services officers, which are in our
    receiving and discharging unit, and also that number includes
    correctional counselors.
        Senator Cotton. Okay--14,899 is what you have today. Do you
    know what you had six months ago?
        Director Peters. No, Senator. I don't have that number.
        Senator Cotton. Do you know how many new officers have been
    hired over the last six months? New correctional officers?
        Director Peters. I know that we've made progress in the
    last year. We have moved our overall recruitment and retention
    from 87 percent last year to 90 percent. We moved our
    correctional officer fill from 70s into about 82 percent now.
        Senator Cotton. Right. In 2022, the Congress passed the law
    requiring that your employees spend 90 percent of their time on
    their primary responsibility. So a correctional officer spends
    90 percent of his time being a correctional officer. An HVAC
    technician spends 90 percent of his time doing HVAC work.
        The Bureau hasn't complied with that law, to my knowledge.
    Six months ago when you were here, I asked how much time your
    employees are spending on average on their primary
    responsibility. You didn't have an answer. Do you have an
    answer for that today?
        Director Peters. I do, Senator, and it's different in every
    institution. In some of our institutions--we'll take USP
    Thompson right now. Because we've been able to lower the number
    of--lower the mission, we needed fewer employees. And so we're
    not relying on augmentation and overtime. When you look at
    Brooklyn, we are relying on it substantially because of the
    lack of staffing.
        Many of my officers are working 16 hours regularly and
    we're having to engage in augmentation on a daily basis at that
    institution, which as you well know, while those psychologists
    or teachers, whomever is being augmented, is fully trained and
    prepared to do that work, it also means that they're not able
    to do their current job as you're alluding to.
        Senator Cotton. Yes. So I take your point that you could
    average across all of your facilities, but that average is not
    particularly meaningful, because each facility is its own world
    and a facility that is well balanced is going to have everyone
    doing 90 percent of their job, whether it's HVAC or teacher or
    counselor, correctional officer, another facility might be
    unbalanced and rely heavily on augmentation and overtime. Is
    that right?
        Director Peters. That's correct, Senator. And in those
    facilities where we are fully staffed or more full staffed,
    we've just given clear direction to those wardens to begin
    over-hiring so that if they're in an economy where we're
    actually able to bring in correctional officers, we'll hire
    them and then we'll TDY them to some of these other
    institutions that are in more dire straits.
        Senator Cotton. Okay. But based on your answer, I assume
    you know the answer on a facility-by-facility basis, you have
    that data available to you?
        Director Peters. That's correct, Senator.
        Senator Cotton. Is that data public in any of your
    published reports?
        Director Peters. I will have to check on that and see.
        Senator Cotton. If it's not--if it is, please send us the
    link. If it's not, could we get those--that data----
        Director Peters. We will work----
        Senator Cotton [continuing]. For the Committee?
        Director Peters [continuing]. With your staff----
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        Director Peters [continuing]. To see what we can share.
    Yes, Senator.
        Senator Cotton. I want to talk briefly about challenges
    staffing up. Your correctional officers start out at the GS-5
    salary level, making $48,000 a year.
        My understanding is, they can top out at $74,000 a year. By
    contrast, Border Patrol officers can start as high as $68,000,
    and they can top out at $113,000--even without becoming a
    supervisor.
        Does the Bureau have trouble competing with the pay of
    other Federal law enforcement agencies?
        Director Peters. It's great trouble competing with other
    law enforcement agencies.
        I'll pick on Brooklyn again. As we look at State
    corrections in New York, individuals can make two or three
    times more working for the New York City Corrections Department
    than the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
        So even after we issued a 35 percent retention bonus at
    Brooklyn, that allows someone after a few years to be making
    $90,000 a year for State corrections in the same time period to
    be making about $130,000 a year.
        Senator Cotton. Okay. In the last major Appropriations Bill
    that Congress passed in December 2022, Congress asked the
    Bureau to consider increasing pay to match those other agencies
    and asked for a review to be submitted no later than last June.
    Has that review been submitted yet?
        Director Peters. Senator, I don't know. I can check. I will
    tell you that this year I was able to the--increase the base
    salary of correctional officers by $2000. I didn't have the
    authority to go beyond that.
        Senator Cotton. Okay. Please do get back to us.
        One final point, since you and Mr. Horowitz both raised
    about contraband in prisons. I think, like, maybe the most
    dangerous kind of contraband in prisons is cell phones. Cell
    phones aren't going to kill anyone themselves, but they enable
    the commission of many other heinous crimes in prison.
        That's one reason why I've introduced the Cellphone Jamming
    Reform Act, which would make it clear to State prisons that
    they can use targeted jamming to block cell phone signals in
    prison housing units.
        We've had some resistance from the telecom industry. I wish
    they would come to their senses on this issue. But Ms. Peters,
    have you conducted pilot programs in your facilities on micro-
    jamming and managed access systems?
        Director Peters. We have, Senator, at a variety of our
    institutions, both in terms of detection and jamming. Both
    prove very successful.
        What my employees are telling me is the detection versus
    the jamming is the most helpful because then we can
    investigate, figure out who actually has it, who brought it in,
    and solve the greater flow of the contraband problem.
        Senator Cotton. Okay. And Mr. Horowitz, since you addressed
    the issue, would you like to make any comment on cell phones in
    prisons based on your work?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Yes, Senator. Couldn't agree
    more.
        I often say, a cell phone in a prison is a deadly weapon.
    We investigated a murder for hire carried out on a Federal
    correctional officer in Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, where the hit
    was put on by someone in the prison.
        And one of the things I've asked for, and I'd be happy to
    work with you, Senator, on this--smuggling a cell phone into a
    prison is a Federal misdemeanor. It's not a felony. And that--I
    was surprised by that, frankly.
        I, having been an AUSA for many years. I assumed, of
    course, it had to be a felony. It isn't.
        And what we've found, by the way, I'm going to tie
    contraband to sexual assault. As you know, we have a major
    problem with sexual assaults in prison. Not just on female
    inmates--obviously on female inmates, but also on male inmates.
        And one of the things we found is that contraband is used
    to groom inmates. It's the way to gain favor by a correctional
    officer or BOP employee--it's not just correctional officer,
    BOP employee--to gain favor.
        We prosecuted a chaplain in a Federal facility in New
    Hampshire for bringing in contraband cell phones and other
    items. So that is something--we shouldn't have to make the
    bribery case, which is what we have to do to bring the felony
    charge, as you know. As a former prosecutor, that's what we
    strive to do.
        But finding the person with the contraband, it's a lot
    easier to make those cases. We get a lot more prosecuted, and
    get a lot of the very small fraction of BOP staff who are
    engaged in misconduct, out.
        Because the other thing I know, I met with President White
    the other day, I know this from my time as a prosecutor in New
    York where I prosecuted some corrupt police officers.
        There is not a single BOP employee who wants to work next
    to a corrupt employee or a dangerous inmate, right, who's
    engaging in crimes. So we all have to focus on that.
        Senator Cotton. All right. Tank you, both.
        Director Peters. Thank you.
        Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Cotton.
        I think there's some valuable suggestions for legislation,
    and I'm happy to work on a bipartisan basis to see if we can
    move some of those forward.
        I'd like to ask--be more specific. We've talked about
    staffing in so many different respects, and I'm sure Senator
    Booker will address many of them this afternoon. But I'd like
    to zero in on the health staff because it appears that this is
    one of the real deficiencies.
        And what we've identified as we go forward through the
    reports, is that identifying potentially suicidal individuals,
    which takes some expertise in mental health, managing
    medication, mental health treatment, is going to call for
    certain specialty training or education.
        Let me ask Director Peters, what has been your luck in
    recruiting people in those categories?
        Director Peters. It's been a challenge. And as you and I
    have discussed before, we have to consider ourselves a
    healthcare organization.
        So many of our people come to us with severe mental health
    issues, and they are 10 years older biologically than their
    chronological age based on the lack of preventative healthcare
    and lifestyle choices. So we have a sick population and
    recruiting and retaining medical professionals is incredibly
    difficult.
        I visited some of our institutions where health services
    was half filled and we're having to TDY people across the
    country. So we're doing a variety of things.
        We're leaning into telehealth in order to ensure more
    quality care. Our recruitment for medical professionals, we
    just approved a 25 percent recruitment incentives. We have
    individual incentives across the country for doctors that said
    they were going to leave, psychologists that said they were
    going to leave.
        And so we're doing everything in our authority. But I will
    tell you that doctors in our care can leave and make almost
    double what they're making for us in the community. And so this
    is something that we're working on. This is something that is
    very troubling.
        But we have to figure out, again, like I said with
    correctional officers, how to increase the base pay for our
    medical professionals so that we can provide the quality care
    we need to provide.
        Chair Durbin. Are you familiar with the National Health
    Service Corps?
        Director Peters. Yes.
        Chair Durbin. Are there applicants for jobs in Bureau of
    Prisons who are going to have an opportunity for loan
    forgiveness if they take those jobs?
        Director Peters. Senator, I don't know the answer to that,
    but I'm happy to look into it and get back to you.
        Chair Durbin. I want to look into it, as well. I think we
    have to.
        General Horowitz, do you have any thoughts on that?
        Inspector General Horowitz. I don't know the answer, but I
    think it is something that's important to look into. We've also
    noted the importance of public health service professionals and
    considering how to bring more of those individuals----
        Chair Durbin. I think if we're looking for incentives to
    bring in healthcare professionals--and they're certainly
    needed, they're needed so many different places.
        But they're needed in the Bureau of Prisons. The incentive
    of loan forgiveness may make a difference. At least we ought to
    try it.
        I also want to want to say that, I'd go out on a limb and
    believe that at the Federal level, we have so many areas where
    we need healthcare professionals, that we ought to think more
    seriously about some type of program that is federally
    inspired, that results in a workforce that is absolutely needed
    at this point.
        Senator Welch, do you need a minute more to adjust to the
    circumstances, or are you ready?
        Senator Welch. I thank you for keeping----
        Chair Durbin. I'm recognizing you.
        Senator Welch. Well, I appreciate that. Thank you very
    much.
        And Director Peters, it's good to see you. We talked about
    the situation in Vermont where we don't have a residential
    reentry facility. It's a really serious issue.
        As you know, individuals with 12 months or less on their
    sentence are eligible to transfer to that residential facility.
    It really makes a big difference. They can receive assistance
    with housing, treatment, unemployment. And it's been proven, as
    you know, to reduce recidivism.
        In Vermont, this is really pretty shocking to me and to
    Senator Sanders and to Congresswoman Balint.
        Vermont is one of only two States that does not have the
    benefit of that facility. Hawaii being the other one. And they
    had one, and I think they're looking to get another--to get a
    replacement.
        And I know when we spoke about this, you had indicated that
    we were going to get one. But you clarified that you misspoke
    and it was going to be a reporting facility instead.
        Reporting facility is not worth it.
        [Poster is displayed.]
        Senator Welch. Reporting would mean that people have to go
    to Providence, Rhode Island. It's a long way from Burlington.
    Or they'd have to go to Manchester, New Hampshire. Very, very
    long way. Or maybe Boston.
        So it just doesn't do the job. And I think after you
    clarified that, you indicated that if the Vermont delegation
    researched the matter and determined that a residential
    facility was necessary, you might change course.
        And we did our research. And most prominently among them we
    checked with the attorneys, and most importantly, with our
    Federal judges.
        And Chairman Durbin, I ask unanimous consent to be able to
    submit a letter to Director Peters into the record.
        Chair Durbin. Without objection.
        [The information appears as a submission for the record.]
        Senator Welch. So we were surprised, this is the
    delegation, when we got a letter from the Bureau of Prisons on
    Friday, indicated that you planned to proceed against our
    consensus and not provide this residential treatment facility.
        As I mentioned, our office did speak to the stakeholders,
    including the Chief Judge Crawford. And he wrote to you in
    December expressing his strong belief that Vermont absolutely,
    absolutely needs a reentry center.
        And Chairman Durbin, I request permission to submit his
    letter into the record.
        Chair Durbin. Without objection.
        [The information appears as a submission for the record.]
        Senator Welch. And in his letter, he wrote--the Chief
    Judge, that, ``The lack of a facility in Vermont interferes
    with every pro-social activity necessary to return to normal
    life, including the long-term employment, connecting with
    family, and locating housing.''
        And Chief Justice Crawford added, ``Our judges all
    believe--our judges all believe that opening a residential
    reentry center in Vermont is a significant step toward the
    improvement of public safety and rehabilitation.''
        And the Chief Judge attached a report from the chief
    probation officer further outlining the need for a center. And
    we've heard this from our attorneys, both in the defense and
    the prosecution side. And I understand you've received this
    letter.
        So what's the deal? How do we get our residential reentry
    program in Vermont so that we're not essentially the only State
    in the country that doesn't have the opportunity to provide the
    benefit of these services to people who really need them?
        Director Peters. Well, thank you, Senator. Well, first off,
    thank you for the conversations we've had around this table and
    individually one-on-one around this issue. I am always happy to
    take in new information----
        Senator Welch. No, let's get to the point.
        Director Peters [continuing]. That we haven't received.
        And I will get to the point, Senator.
        So our market analysis determined that since there are so
    few individuals releasing back to Vermont, that it's not
    financially feasible for a residential reentry center.
        And we're actually really optimistic about the day
    reporting center. The day reporting center will provide all of
    the wraparound services----
        Senator Welch. So----
        Director Peters [continuing]. That a residential reentry
    center will.
        Senator Welch [continuing]. So I don't think you've
    provided the market study to us, to take a look at.
        Director Peters. Senator, I can work with your team and
    mine to see what we can share with you around that study.
        Senator Welch. Well, you know, I don't understand about the
    market study.
        We've got the probation officers, we've got the judges in
    the district saying, ``Hey, we need this.''
        And, why is it that Vermont would be the only one State in
    the entire Nation--along with Hawaii, temporarily--that doesn't
    have it? I mean, why do we need a market study? We've got
    defendants. We've got judges. We've got the need.
        Director Peters. Senator, again, it's all around resources
    and trying to balance those resources we have.
        Senator Welch. Well, that's a different question. That's a
    different question.
        If you're saying the market study says we don't need it as
    much as New York City, maybe that's right. But we need it in
    Vermont. That's what I'm saying. And every other State has it
    basically. And we don't.
        Director Peters. Senator, again, I'm happy to take any new
    information that you have and look at it, of course.
        But we do feel confident in our decision around the day
    reporting center that it's going to be able to----
        Senator Welch. All right----
        Director Peters [continuing]. To help more people----
        Senator Welch [continuing]. We've got to work on this more.
        I mean, they're two totally different things. A reentry
    center provides resources to people when they're coming back in
    to society.
        The reporting center, they're going down, you know, it's a
    long way. There's no follow through. You don't get the
    resources.
        And it is just astonishing to Senator Sanders, to
    Congresswoman Balint, and to me, that somehow this market study
    says Vermont is unique in that we don't need, or deserve, or
    should have the benefit of the same services that are provided
    in every other State in this great country of ours.
        Director Peters. Senator, again, happy to have further
    conversation. We are optimistic about the day reporting
    center----
        Senator Welch. Just to be clear, I'll talk to you.
        But what we want is a reentry center. And that's what our
    Chief Judge is saying we need. Thank you.
        Director Peters. Thank you.
        Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Welch. Senator Grassley.
        Senator Grassley. Ms. Peters, would the Bureau of Prisons
    let correctional officers supervise adult inmates if the
    officer hadn't successfully cleared an FBI National Crime
    Information Center background and fingerprint check?
        Director Peters. Senator, it's my understanding that our
    policies and practices require that background check prior to
    employment.
        Senator Grassley. Well, if that's the case, I'd like to say
    something not just for you, but for my colleagues.
        If folks who haven't passed an FBI background check aren't
    allowed to supervise adults, we shouldn't give them custody of
    unaccompanied alien children.
        However, the Office of Refugee Resettlement doesn't require
    FBI background checks for all sponsors, and it refuses to give
    law enforcement information on the sponsors even if the child's
    well-being is in question.
        It seems to me this would have to stop. And I hope this
    Committee brings in more witnesses on this subject and takes up
    meaningful legislation to protect our kids.
        Mr. Horowitz, I'm going to take advantage of you being here
    to ask a follow-up question. I wrote you on November the 2nd
    last year about your review of the Justice Department obtaining
    phone records of Members of Congress and staff.
        In response, you said your report will likely cover most,
    if not all of the eight categories of information that I asked
    for.
        It's been said that the Justice Department obtained these
    records to investigate alleged leaks related to the discredited
    Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
        But I'm concerned that the Justice Department used this as
    an excuse to keep tabs on Congress as we conducted oversight of
    the Department relating to the Crossfire Hurricane. Can you
    provide an update on the scope of your review? And when you
    expect to issue your findings?
        And a second question related to this is, did the Justice
    Department apply the same investigative standards to its agents
    and staff or other officials in the executive branch who may
    have leaked the information, as did Members of Congress and our
    staff?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Thank you, Senator.
        And I'll give you an update on timing and where we are. We
    are planning to cover, as I said in my letter to you, the
    issues that you referenced in the categories we spoke about
    there. We are actually in the process of drafting the report.
    So we will hopefully be able to get out in a reasonable amount
    of time.
        I will just add, because so much of these issues cover
    highly classified information, as you know from our prior
    reviews, we have to go through the Department and the various
    Intelligence Community processes to get it to the point where
    we can issue it.
        So I always put that caveat on any reports we have that
    involve classified information. But we are working to get it
    done. We've made good progress.
        And the second question you raised, the issue you addressed
    is one that we're also assessing.
        Senator Grassley. They do exactly the same thing for their
    own staffers.
        Inspector General Horowitz. We're--that's one of the issues
    we're assessing. And we will report on that, Senator.
        Senator Grassley. Director Peters, in February 2024,
    Justice Department's Inspector General report on deaths in the
    Bureau of Prisons facilities found the FCC Hazelton had 14
    deaths from 2014 to 2021.
        Last year, September 12th, 2023, I, along with Chairman
    Durbin, Senators Manchin and Capito, wrote to you about
    additional allegations of serious misconduct occurring at FCC
    Hazelton. Some of the allegations include prison staff
    falsifying records involving releasing the wrong inmate, prison
    escapes, inmate medical assessment time, attendance sheets, and
    staff's physical assaulting inmates.
        So you've yet to respond to our letter. Why not? And what
    are you doing to straighten out the significant problems at
    Hazelton that we brought to your attention?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. Well, we take all of
    those allegations very seriously and when we learn that someone
    has not done the job that we've required of them, we
    investigate it and hold them accountable.
        Hazelton, like many of our institutions, is suffering from
    a lack of staffing. We are having difficulty recruiting and
    retaining there. One of the things that we have done recently
    is we've actually closed down a unit in order to deploy staff
    to the rest of the institution.
        And so, like I said earlier, recruitment and retention is
    crisis at the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and Hazelton is not
    alone in that problem.
        Senator Grassley. Is the problem that I brought to your
    attention entirely related to the number of people you have on
    staff and nothing else?
        Director Peters. Senator, I think it's a variety of things.
    We talked about contraband and having to tackle the very
    serious issues of contraband inside our institutions.
        As you look at the older facility of Hazleton and the
    maintenance repair backlog, I think that can add to it.
        I think we also have to talk a lot about the work that the
    Inspector General and I have been working on to clear up our
    backlogged investigations. The number of staff that we've added
    to our Office of Internal Affairs.
        When I started, there were less than 30 employees in that
    Office. And now we're looking at almost 150 with direct
    oversight directly to central office in order to not only shore
    up that backlog, but to hold people accountable in a swift and
    sure fashion.
        Senator Grassley. Thanks to both of you for answering my
    questions.
        Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Grassley.
        I believe Senator Kennedy is still--has a first-round
    opportunity, and I understand Senators Booker and Ossoff would
    like a second-round opportunity. Senator Kennedy.
        Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General, how are
    you?
        Inspector General Horowitz. I'm doing well. Good to see you
    again, Senator.
        Senator Kennedy. I'm a big fan.
        Director Peters, you're the Director of the Bureau of
    Prisons. Is that right?
        Director Peters. That's correct, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. You came from--you used to run the
    corrections system in Oregon. Right?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Kennedy. Yes. Oregon legalized drugs. Is that
    right?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Kennedy. Oregon's about to reverse that. Is that
    correct?
        Director Peters. Senator, I'm not familiar with the policy
    proposed to reverse that.
        Senator Kennedy. Oh, you just ignored Oregon.
        Director Peters. Oregon still has a very special place in
    my heart, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. You haven't read any of the articles
    about the reversal?
        Director Peters. I haven't, Senator.
        Senator Kennedy. You don't know anything about it?
        Director Peters. Correct, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. Wow. You're in charge of
    implementing the First Step Act, Director?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Kennedy. How many criminals have you released into
    the First Step Act?
        Director Peters. So First Step Act for the overall release
    since the initiation of the First Step Act is--I have that
    exact number in front of me.
        Senator Kennedy. You don't know off the top of your head?
        Director Peters. Sorry, Senator. So 70 percent of those
    that were released, we have about 30,000 individuals that have
    been released since the passage of the First Step Act.
        Senator Kennedy. So you've released 30,000 criminals onto
    the First Step Act.
        Okay. And how many of them when you--before you released
    them, did you contact any of their victims to say, ``We're
    about to let this guy out'' ?
        Director Peters. Senator, it's my understanding that that
    notification happens through the U.S. Attorney's Office. But I
    will check into that and get back to you.
        Senator Kennedy. You don't know?
        Director Peters. Senator, I don't.
        Senator Kennedy. Have you followed up with the U.S.
    Attorneys to say, ``Do you have a system to say, `Hey, we're
    about to let this guy out. Would you, you know, we want to be
    sure the victim's contacted.' ''
        Director Peters. As a former victim's advocate, I share
    that value, that victim notification should happen. I'll check
    on the process and I'll get back to you.
        Senator Kennedy. But you don't know if it's happening?
        Director Peters. That's correct, Senator.
        Senator Kennedy. Wow. Okay. Of the 30,000 criminals you let
    free, how many of them have come back? Have committed a crime
    again or hurt somebody else?
        Director Peters. So that number is one that we're still
    looking at as it relates to the recidivism rate for those that
    were released on the First Step Act.
        Senator Kennedy. You don't have any idea?
        Director Peters. No, Senator.
        Senator Kennedy. You don't have anybody at the Bureau that
    can count?
        Director Peters. I do not have that number in front of me
    today, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. So let me get this straight. The First
    Step Act was passed in 2018. This is 2024. Am I right so far?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Kennedy. That's six years. And in six years you've
    let 30,000 criminals go. Right?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Kennedy. And you don't have the slightest idea how
    many of them committed another crime and came back?
        Director Peters. I don't have that number in front of me
    today, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. And you run the Bureau of Prisons?
        Director Peters. That's correct.
        Senator Kennedy. And how many employees do you have?
        Director Peters. About 40,000 employees.
        Senator Kennedy. Oh my God. Oh my God.
        General, I know you got a lot to do, but could you give us
    a hand here and let's find out whether the First Step Act
    worked and how many--if we've released 30,000 criminals after
    six years, our Director here doesn't know how many have--have
    committed another crime and come back. Can you help us?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Senator, I can certainly follow
    up on that issue.
        I will just say, in terms of work we've done in the past,
    for example, on compassionate release, and going to the Bureau
    of Prisons--this is before Director Peters was there--and
    asking them for data on compassionate release because that was
    one of the issues that has come up. How----
        Senator Kennedy. Excuse me for interrupting, but I'm not
    talking about compassionate release.
        Inspector General Horowitz. No, I understand. I'm just
    saying----
        Senator Kennedy. You know, my colleagues said, we were told
    that--that it would save money and it would be in the interest
    of public safety to release criminals from prison.
        I didn't vote for it, but the majority rules, and so
    Congress did.
        And Director Peters at the Bureau of Prisons, and her
    colleagues, released 30,000 criminals, all of whom were there
    for a reason. Okay? They didn't just go to prison for a free
    toaster. They were there for a reason.
        And so her Department let them go.
        And after six years, we don't have the slightest idea--not
    a single one of the 40,000 of her employees know how many have
    committed a second crime and come back.
        So how the hell are we supposed to figure out whether it
    worked?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Senator----
        Senator Kennedy. Your people ought to hide their head in a
    bag, Director, that you can't come here in front of this
    Congress and answer that question. I'm sorry, I interrupted you
    with my speech.
        Inspector General Horowitz. No, that's okay.
        I was just going to--my bottom-line point on it was, I've
    often looked to those questions on things like compassionate
    release and other programs. And one of the challenges we found
    is the Department just doesn't have good data--halfway houses.
        Congress is spending about a half a billion dollars a year
    on halfway houses. There's really not great recidivism data on
    that, either.
        Senator Kennedy. Well----
        Inspector General Horowitz. Are they working----
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. Well, before we do this, we
    need to find out.
        Look, I believe in justice. I believe in treating everybody
    fairly.
        But there are people out there--I don't know why, if I make
    it to heaven, I'm going to ask. They're not mixed up. They're
    not confused. They're not sick. It's not that their mama or
    daddy didn't love them--or, not enough.
        They just hurt other people. And they take other people's
    stuff. And we have to separate them from society. And the
    Director let 30,000 of these folks go and can't tell me today
    how many have come back.
        I just--I just find it takes my breath away with 40,000
    people. How many of your 40,000 people actually coming to work
    or are still working from home, Director?
        Director Peters. The super majority of our employees come
    to work every day, because we're running 24/7 institutions.
        Senator Kennedy. What percentage are coming to work every
    day?
        Director Peters. The percentage is quite high. I don't have
    the exact number.
        Senator Kennedy. You don't know?
        Director Peters. But the super----
        Senator Kennedy. Well, maybe there's your problem.
        Director Peters [continuing]. The super majority of our
    individuals----
        Senator Kennedy. If they're not coming to work----
        Director Peters [continuing]. Come to work at our
    institutions----
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. They can't give us the
    answer.
        I've gone over, I'm sorry Mr. Chairman. This is--this is
    why people--this is why people hate government and don't trust
    government.
        Chair Durbin. So I'd like to respond concerning the
    Grassley-Durbin First Step Act, signed into law by President
    Donald Trump----
        Senator Kennedy. I thought you might have a response.
        Chair Durbin [continuing]. By President Donald Trump.
        I almost want to repeat that because this notion that it's
    soft on crime--I don't consider Chuck Grassley soft on crime. I
    don't consider Donald Trump soft on crime.
        Let me tell you the numbers. The numbers that we have. Some
    30,000 released, the recidivism rate for people released under
    the First Step Act is 12.4 percent. Seven out of every eight
    individuals released under the law have not been rearrested, or
    charged with a new crime.
        By comparison, DOJ estimates that in the decade before the
    First Step Act was passed, 43 percent of the people formerly
    incarcerated in BOP were rearrested within three years of their
    release. Is the First Step Act working? I would submit it is.
        Senator Kennedy. Would you give her a question, Mr. Chair?
        Chair Durbin. When I finish.
        Senator Kennedy. I'm sorry. Excuse me for interrupting.
        Chair Durbin. The point I'm making is, we decided with the
    Trump administration and Senator Grassley's leadership that we
    were going to take a different approach to releasing people
    from prison.
        We would give them an opportunity to be trained, educated,
    skilled, in many ways, more prepared for release. Because 80
    percent, I believe, in the system are going to be released
    someday--who don't want them to commit another crime or create
    another victim.
        I would submit this is a success. Don't put your head in a
    bag--or whatever Senator suggested. Stand up tall and try to
    make it better. And I'm ready to do that.
        But the First Step Act was a constructive reform of the
    penal system. And I think it was a good idea and I stand by it.
    I'll submit to your question.
        Senator Kennedy. Thank you. And I appreciate as usual,
    Dick, you made good points.
        Here's my point. I didn't vote for the First Step Act
    because I was afraid this was going to happen. And what I hear
    you saying is that of the 30,000 that the Director released,
    over 3,000 committed another crime and are back. Here's my
    question. How come you know that and she doesn't----
        Chair Durbin. Because she's probably looking for----
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. And the 40,000 people at
    Bureau of Prisons, who are supposed to give us this
    information, don't know.
        Chair Durbin. Well, I'd like to say, in all fairness, she's
    under oath.
        And I think when you ask for numbers, she wants to make
    sure she tells you a number she can live with. I have this
    information. I think it's probably close to being a hundred
    percent accurate. But I wouldn't say under oath it is.
        So I think, give her a fair opportunity to respond. I mean,
    it just might not be the type of thing----
        Senator Kennedy. But----
        Chair Durbin [continuing]. That comes----
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. But----
        Chair Durbin [continuing]. Rolling off the tongue.
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. But it is not your job. And I
    appreciate the information and I'd like to see the study that
    shows that. I just don't understand why the Director has no
    idea.
        Chair Durbin. Well----
        Senator Kennedy. She didn't say, she was uncertain and she
    wanted to go back and check. She said, ``I don't know.'' And I
    just find that extraordinary.
        Chair Durbin. I'm assuming since she's under oath, it's an
    honest answer.
        We have two other individuals who are seeking a second
    round. I believe Senator Booker is first.
        Senator Booker. I hate to distract from my questions. But I
    just want to defend the bipartisan work that we all did--86
    Senators voted for it, and the dramatic drop in recidivism
    rates--that is not the Bureau of Prison's job to track, it's
    the Justice Department's job to track it--is stunning.
        I mean, this has literally saved the United States of
    America hundreds of millions of dollars. It has lowered crime.
    The data shows we max people out in prison don't prepare them.
    You can't keep them by law.
        So when people max out and don't have halfway houses, don't
    have the kind of resources that people that were released
    during this have, their recidivism rates are through the
    charts.
        So we have to be smart on crime. And one of the biggest
    growths of bureaucracy I've seen in my life is a prison
    industrial complex in the United States of America. And it's
    not making us safer. So I understand that.
        And then the second thing in your defense, the mission of
    the BOP is not to necessarily track folks after they're gone.
    From what I understand, having done a lot of reading and prep
    for the later hearing, that's not your mission.
        Your mission is to hold them securely, prepare them,
    programs, hold--so forth. So that, if we want to get, Senator
    Kennedy, if we want to get the head of the Justice Department,
    I'm all for grilling them.
        But you're--you're one of these folks that we're giving you
    too little resources to do too much work. And that's what I'd
    like to jump into. And I have a lot of frustrations, obviously,
    with what's going on.
        But I've watched you now, as a professional, struggle
    mightily to meet the demands that have put on you in a moment
    where Congress is not giving you the resources necessary to do
    your job, even. In facilities that are outrageously decrepit.
        I mean, your Fiscal Year 2022 is estimated that the BOP
    needs $2 billion in funding to repair facilities. But the BOP--
    this is my challenge to you, has requested $200 million for
    infrastructure repairs. Congress allocated $59 million. But is
    it not true that people are dying in your facilities because
    there's no air conditioning?
        Director Peters. Senator, your data points around the
    maintenance and repair backlog are absolutely spot on.
        And that number has grown since we last reported that $2
    billion. It is now closer to $3 billion because we continue to
    have roofs that are crumbling. We continue to have HVACs that
    have stopped working.
        And if you look at the amount of money that we typically
    get from Congress, it's about a hundred thousand dollars a year
    to solve that $3 billion problem. And the cost of one roof
    replacement alone is a million dollars.
        Senator Booker. Yes. And I just point this out to say
    again, this is a, a pattern here. Your employees could
    literally leave your job and not make 10 percent more, 20
    percent more, but a hundred percent more and not have to work
    hour--and you know this.
        And I'm going to bring this out in the hearing later on
    today. When you have to hold somebody over on a shift, what
    does that do to a family suddenly, where they can't pick up
    their kids for school?
        Director Peters. Senator, I hear it all the time when I'm
    walking the halls of our institutions. It isn't just the
    physical wear and tear, and mental wear and tear of that
    overtime and augmentation. It is what impacts their family.
        Senator Booker. Yes. I talked to the Capitol Police when we
    had them working, held over on shifts. They just weren't
    allowed to leave. And now suddenly their whole family is in
    crisis.
        Director Peters. That's right. We hear all the time. They
    had their week planned out on who was picking the kids up from
    daycare, who was cooking. And the Federal Bureau of Prisons
    messes with that schedule, day in and day out, for our
    families.
        Senator Booker. Yes, and we preach how much we support law
    enforcement. This is utterly shameful.
        A February 2024 GAO report found that by October 2023, the
    BOP housed approximately 8 percent of its prison population in
    solitary confinement.
        One of the things I--I'd like for you to address is the
    report noted significant racial disparities with Black
    individuals comprising less than half, 38 percent of the total
    Federal prison population, but represented over half, 59
    percent of those in solitary. Can you address that for me?
        Director Peters. Yes, Senator.
        And this is an issue that's been studied across the
    country, both in Federal corrections and in State corrections.
    And often what we find is the level of gang activity that
    happens inside our institutions often drives that number.
    That's still unacceptable to me.
        I think we have so much work to do in restrictive housing
    reform, and we have to ask those hard questions about the
    disproportionate number of individuals of minority status who
    are in restrictive housing.
        Senator Booker. Yes, and I'm hoping that's something that
    my staff can work with you on, as well.
        And then the final thing I just want to say is, the
    Chairman said it. I think there's room for a lot of bipartisan
    work here to try to address these issues.
        The shamefulness of what's happening as a result of the
    lack of funding for facilities, for personnel, and for certain
    position line items is outrageous implications of the United
    States of America and its support of law enforcement officers,
    and creating inhumane conditions in prisons.
        The one thing, the very small point to the Inspector
    General that was brought out and I want to talk to Senator
    Cotton, who I'm going to be sitting with chairing, and is the
    Ranking on this Committee, is this idea of the inability to jam
    cell phone signals.
        And the fact that it's a misdemeanor to bring in something
    that you said under oath is a--tantamount to a deadly weapon.
        And I'm wondering--number one, on the jamming issue, the
    only pushback my staff could say that they get is the need for
    Federal public defenders when meeting with their client to be
    able to access the internet. Is there a workaround that you see
    to that concern?
        And then, number two is the--do you think it would be
    enough of a deterrent if it was suddenly not a misdemeanor, but
    a felony?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Yes, Senator. I think on both
    those issues, there's certainly a workaround.
        I think one of the issues--I think Senator Cotton had it
    right, the FCC and the technology companies have opposed it or
    raised concerns about it in part because of the inability, I
    think, and Director Peters can speak to this, as well, to limit
    the jamming or limit the interference to the grounds itself of
    the facility as opposed to some of the perimeter areas,
    particularly where there are homes nearby.
        And so I think there are--those are some of the issues that
    have been at issue here.
        But many State prisons have been doing this for years.
    California has been involved in jamming technology. We've done
    work in this space, our office over the years, and have seen
    other States successfully do it. So it's clearly doable. We're
    glad to see the BOP moving forward. But there are some areas
    they have to be careful about. And----
        Senator Booker. But the misdemeanor to the felony.
        I mean, if somebody is caught sneaking a cell phone in,
    they're fired. Right? They lose their job. Is that not enough
    of a deterrent?
        Inspector General Horowitz. Well, here's the issue.
        From a union standpoint, if they're a union member, there
    is an ability to litigate that question on a misdemeanor. A
    felony charge--if someone's convicted of a felony charge, my
    understanding is they're out. My understanding is, if it's a
    misdemeanor or it never prosecuted and is, you know, if it's
    only a misdemeanor, Federal prosecutors are not taking these
    cases.
        So no one's getting prosecuted for a misdemeanor. Right?
    There's lots of felonies to be prosecuted. So the problem is,
    they're not being prosecuted and that leaves it to the BOP's
    administrative process only to deal with the problem.
        Senator Booker. Yes.
        Inspector General Horowitz. And that sometimes does not, as
    I understand it, result in removal of individuals.
        And I have multiple examples, I'm happy to come speak to
    your staff about them and to you, as well, where we have had
    cases involving sexual assaults that were the result of some
    grooming food--bringing in food is a misdemeanor. Well, think
    about how that's an enticement to female inmates, potentially,
    and a grooming tool. It just shouldn't happen.
        Senator Booker. No, I agree with you. And not to be a
    little lighthearted on this, but I want you to clarify for the
    record when you say that nobody is prosecuted for Federal
    misdemeanors. That's not an invitation to anybody on this dais
    to commit misdemeanors.
        Inspector General Horowitz. I am--you are correct. And
    there are rare occasions where there are misdemeanor charges
    brought. But almost every U.S. attorney's office in the country
    has lots of felony cases.
        Senator Booker. Because Senator Durbin's staff, I just want
    to make sure they heard that they should not do Federal
    misdemeanors. Thank you, sir.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Durbin. Thanks for the help, Senator. Senator Ossoff.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the
    second opportunity.
        On this point about disciplinary procedures, it's the
    Office of Internal Affairs at BOP that handles investigations--
    internal investigations of staff misconduct. Correct, Director?
        Director Peters. That's correct. As soon as we refer all
    allegations to the Office of the Inspector General, once they
    review and determine that there's nothing criminal in nature,
    then they kick it back to us and we engage in the
    administrative investigation.
        Senator Ossoff. So let's update on the OIA backlog.
        PSI investigation a couple years ago into the sexual
    assault of female inmates in BOP facilities found that there
    was about 8,000 backlogged cases at OIA. And at that time,
    about 2 years ago, BOP told us that it would take about 2 years
    to clear the backlog.
        BOP just provided to my office an update that there are
    still over 7,300 pending cases before OIA. So that's about a 7
    percent reduction.
        You said publicly, I think in a CBS interview last month,
    that it would take about 2 years to clear the OIA backlog. So 2
    years ago, BOP said 2 years to clear the backlog. This year,
    BOP says 2 years to clear the backlog. Why? And when will it be
    cleared?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator.
        So I, too, share your frustration in the time it's taking
    to clear the backlog. But it hasn't been for lack of a plan.
        So, as I shared with you, we had just under 30 employees in
    the Office of Internal Affairs. And since you and I last spoke,
    it simply took us until last fall to get those positions
    filled.
        And so now we're at about 150 individuals who are in the
    Office of Internal Affairs who report directly to headquarters
    so that there's that centralized oversight that you wanted.
        We now have them fully trained and we're just starting to
    see a chip down of that backlog. But we're not just looking at
    the backlog, we're looking at other ways to clear the backlog
    by looking at, as an example, how many of these investigations
    could actually be handled at a lower level, at the warden
    level. If you have an employee that comes in and is 5 minutes
    late, you're considered AWOL.
        That AWOL gets kicked to the Office of Internal Affairs.
    We're asking the question, does that really need to be
    investigated by a special investigative agent at headquarters?
    Or is that something the warden can handle, and then would it
    be more swift and sure action?
        Senator Ossoff. So I'm glad to hear you've added capacity
    in personnel and you're looking at changing procedure. So when
    will it be cleared?
        Director Peters. So I asked for that exact update before
    this hearing because I knew you would ask. And the answer is,
    we are hoping to have it cleared within the next 2 years.
        Senator Ossoff. Two years. Well, I hope this is the last
    time that it'll be, again, ``2 years.'' But I do appreciate the
    effort that you've clearly invested into trying to rectify
    this.
        Director Peters. Thank you.
        Senator Ossoff. Getting back to some of the staffing issues
    and staff compensation and retention incentives. And again, I
    hope that we can work together to find additional tools for
    retention and recruitment at USP Atlanta, in particular.
        But we've been talking about how BOP personnel are
    underpaid and they can't--you can't compete in this labor
    market against other law enforcement agencies. We talked about
    health staff. So how much more do they need to be paid?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. So right now, we have
    about 45 percent of our employees receiving some form of
    incentive. And what we're finding in communities like New York,
    the New York Department of Corrections, you can get paid two or
    three times more for working for them. So the answer varies
    depending on where our facilities are and what issues we're
    faced with.
        In rural areas, we are faced with just having saturated the
    market, and we've hired everybody that lives in those areas. In
    the urban areas, we're competing, as I said earlier, with fast
    food chains and grocery stores.
        Senator Ossoff. So, I understand that these labor markets
    are regional.
        Let's try it this way. How much more in the next Fiscal
    Year does BOP need to be appropriated in order to resolve the
    fact that you can't currently offer competitive salaries?
    What's the number?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. I don't have that
    number today. But we're looking at proposing a new salary
    rate--salary rate table. And so my H.R. team is working on that
    data right now. So we will have that during our next budget
    ask.
        Senator Ossoff. And what concerns me is, you know, you've
    got to go to DOJ, and then DOJ has to go to OMB, and justify
    your annual budget request. And OMB's going to come back and
    say, ``Well, why do you need this many more hundreds of
    millions or billions of dollars for personnel? '' And if you
    can't justify that through some rigorous demonstration, some
    rigorous analysis, then your request for the PBR is going to
    get denied.
        So for the next Presidential budget cycle, are you going to
    have a specific number, a specific appropriation that you need
    from the Congress that's backed up by rigorous analysis in
    order to resolve this competitive salaries issue?
        Director Peters. We hope to have that number, not just in
    the recruitment and retention category, but the other main
    crisis issue around maintenance and repair backlog.
        Senator Ossoff. Okay. I'm just out of--my last point was
    just, you know, I mentioned earlier my team's trying to look at
    this, this staffing tool.
        I can't--you know, the Senate Judiciary Committee accesses
    a lot of sensitive information. We conduct a lot of rigorous
    oversight. We're asking to come and review a tool that you use
    to determine staffing levels.
        Racking my brain sitting here, I can't think of any reason
    why your Office of Legislative Affairs would deny my staff and
    Members of this Committee the opportunity to view how that tool
    functions. I can't think of any reason at all. So we need to
    get our teams together, get in the room, look at the tool, see
    how it works. Okay?
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator. I've said again and
    again, we want to be as transparent as possible. I suspect the
    reason is that it's still a work in progress----
        Senator Ossoff. Well, we can look at the--we can look at
    works in progress.
        Director Peters. I'm happy to have this conversation with
    you. We've even talked around the executive team, if we would
    be able to, once the product is completed, have it be an
    outward facing product so that the public could even see it.
    That's still being deliberated by individuals inside our
    organization. But I'm happy to work with you Senator.
        Senator Ossoff. Yes, please just let my team have a look.
        Director Peters. Thank you.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you.
        Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Ossoff. And I want to
    thank all the Members who participated in this hearing today.
        I've made this a special item in the agenda of the
    Committee to focus on corrections because I felt for a long
    time that we're fast and loose when it comes to sentencing and
    criminal procedure and the like. And we ought to see what
    happens next for those who are, in fact, convicted, and are
    incarcerated as a result of it.
        Historically, I know some great people have had things to
    say about corrections.
        One of them I quoted before was Nelson Mandela, who himself
    spent 18 years in prison on Robben Island in South Africa, and
    then went on to be elected president of his country. But he
    said, ``No one truly knows a nation until one has been inside
    its jails. A nation should not be judged on how it treats its
    highest citizens, but its lowest ones.''
        The purpose of this hearing was to make it clear that a
    Federal prison sentence should never be a death sentence.
    Never. And in too many circumstances it has been. We're lucky
    to have you, Director Peters. I'm glad you took this job. It's
    a tough one.
        Director Peters. Thank you, Senator.
        Chair Durbin. It's a challenge and I think you're handling
    it well. We don't agree on everything, but that's never going
    to happen. But I do respect you very much for all the work that
    you're putting into this effort.
        General Horowitz, you are a treasure to this Government and
    to this country. You keep us honest, and that's your job, and
    you do it well. We're lucky to have you.
        And I want to say for all of the workers in the Bureau of
    Prisons, but especially those who are at risk in the discharge
    of their duties, thank you. We could not keep this country safe
    without you. And I appreciate all of those at every level of
    the Bureau of Prisons who make that possible.
        There'll be some questions for the record. You've seen them
    before. You better respond or General--Senator Grassley will
    remind you that you didn't. And others will, too.
        I don't want to pick on Chuck, but he loves to get his
    letters answered.
        So thanks for being here today. And this hearing stands
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:48 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
        [Additional material submitted for the record follows.]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                A P P E N D I X

    The following submissions are available at:

      https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-118shrg63048/pdf/CHRG-
        118shrg
        63048-add1.pdf

    Submitted by Senator Welch:

     Crawford, Hon. Geoffrey W., letter and attachment to Director
        Colette Peters, Federal Bureau of Prisons, December 12, 2023..     2

     Vermont Members of Congress Hon. Bernard Sanders, Hon. Peter
        Welch, and Hon. Becca Balint's joint letter to Director
        Colette Peters, Federal Bureau of Prisons, December 12, 2023..     6

                                     [all]