[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]