BOP Administrative Remedy Process, In Pursuit of CARES Act Home Confinement (#4)

Okay, recap time. We submitted the BP-229, which was rejected because they claimed we used the wrong form. Then we submitted another CARES Act request to the Residential Reentry Management (RRM) office as directed by Regional Counsel. That submission was completely ignored and we received no response whatsoever regarding that submission. So the next step was to submit the BP-230 form. 

Sorry, I know all of this is exceedingly boring. It's no picnic for me, either. But I feel it's important to document this and put it out there for others who may be looking for information on the Bureau of Prison's Administrative Remedy Program and how they implement it. As a reminder, their policy manual states on page 8: 

"When deciding whether to reject a submission, Coordinators, especially at the institution level, should be flexible, keeping in mind that major purposes of this Program are to solve problems and be responsive to issues inmates raise."

Anyway, onward. We mailed BP-230 on February 7th. Post office tracking shows they received it on the 9th. It was stamped as received on February 16th. Their response to our BP-230 was dated March 7th, mailed on March 11th, and we received it on March 15th. The AR Policy states that they have 30 days to respond at the regional level.

Here's the cover letter we sent with the BP-230.

*****************************************************************************

February 7, 2022

 

Juan Baltazar, Jr., Regional Director

South Central Regional Office

U.S. Armed Forces Reserve Complex

344 Marine Forces Drive

Grand Prairie, TX  75051

 

RE: Administrative Remedy BP-230

 

Dear Regional Director Baltazar:

 

My name is Thomas --------, and I’m a halfway house inmate at the -------------------------------------, Texas. Enclosed is an Administrative Remedy for your office’s review.

 

I first submitted this Administrative Remedy on a BP-229 form. The response I received was that my request was denied because I used the wrong form. However, on the back of the BP-229 (blue) form, it says, “Requirement for submission of this request directly to the Regional Director, Bureau of Prisons. When the inmate believes that he may be adversely affected by the submission of this request at the institution level because of the sensitive nature of the complaint, he may address his complaint to the Regional Director. He must clearly indicate a valid reason for not initially bringing his complaint to the attention of the institution staff.”

 

I did not feel that my request was of a sensitive nature, so I DID submit the form to the institution staff. As was explained in the letter that I sent with my BP-229 (also enclosed), the institution staff advised me that they do not process administrative remedies and instructed me to send it to your office, hence the submission of the BP-229 to your office. 

 

Nevertheless, as instructed by your office, I am resubmitting my Administrative Remedy with the form that your office provided to me (BP-230).

 

I was unable to resubmit it within the prescribed time frame because (1) The denial letter was dated December 22 and was postmarked the 28^th. The halfway house staff delivered it to me on January 5th, 15 days after the date of the denial letter. (2) I was advised by Jason Sickler in Regional Counsel to NOT resubmit the Administrative Remedy and to instead, submit a CARES Act home confinement request to RRM, San Antonio.

 

I did submit the CARES Act home confinement request to RRM, which they received on January 10^thand I have not received a response from them.

 

So I am now re-submitting the Administrative Remedy.

 

Sincerely,

 

Thomas -----------

********************************************************

As I stated above, we received their response on March 15th. This is it:

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

DATE:  MARCH 7, 2022

FROM:    ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR

                SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE

TO:          THOMAS -----------, ---------------

                -----------------------------

                -----------------------------

                ----------------, TEXAS

FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS REGIONAL APPEAL IS BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED TO YOU. YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

REMEDY ID                :  ------------   REGIONAL APPEAL

DATED RECEIVED    :  FEBRUARY 16, 2022

SUBJECT 1                :  OTHER COMMUNITY PROGRAMS

REJECT REASON 1:    YOUR APPEAL IS UNTIMELY.  REGIONAL APPEALS (BP-10) MUST BE RECEIVED WITHIN 20 DAYS OF THE WARDEN/CCM RESPONSE OR RECEIPT OF THE DHO REPORT.  THIS TIME INCLUDES MAIL TIME.

REJECT REASON 2:  SEE REMARKS.

REMARKS:  YOU ACKNOWLEDGE R1 REJECTION RECEIVED BY 1/5/22, BUT R2 SUBMISSION DATED 2/7/22.  FOR DESIRED REVIEW COMPLETE AND SEND BP-9 (ENCLOSED) TO BOP RRM.

***********************************************************************************

Note a couple of things. First, they lie about when they received our submission. Post office tracking says they received it on February 9th, but they didn't stamp it received until the 16th. So they've just given themselves an extra week to respond. AR Policy says they are supposed to respond within 30 days. The rejection letter says, concerning time limits imposed upon inmates, "This time includes mail time". Do they impose that rule on themselves as well, or is it just the inmates that have that mail time limit imposed? So, they received it the 9th of February and they mailed their response on the 11th of March. They mailed it at exactly 30 days, but we didn't receive it until day 34.

The AR process requires lots and lots of paperwork. The inmate has to provide several copies of each page submitted. Copies of the forms, the requests, and the responses have to be mailed with each submission. Inmates in prisons are severely limited in their access to paper, envelopes, stamps, copiers, typewriters, and actually posting something in the mail.  While Tom was in the prison, the mailroom often held outgoing and incoming mail for days. Tom was rarely able to buy stamps from the commissary. The whole time he was there, the printer did not work.  Access to a copier was limited and you had to buy a typewriter ribbon from the commissary to use a typewriter, if you were even lucky enough to get to use it. Typewriter ribbons were scarce.

So I can imagine that it is extremely difficult for inmates that are housed in the prisons to obtain what they need for each submission and to meet the time limits imposed upon them, especially since they have no control over how long the mailroom takes to send out or deliver their mail. I can hardly imagine going through this process without someone on the outside helping.  Thankfully, Tom is able to come home on the weekends, we have everything we need to make the required copies, and although Tom cannot go to the post office himself during the week, I'm able to get everything mailed quickly.

Also note that they direct us to use the BP-9, which is the first form we submitted and they rejected it because they said it was the wrong form. We're at a loss as to what to do at this point. How can one follow such incomprehensible instructions?

Click here to return to the beginning of our BOP Administrative Remedy for CARES Act Home Confinement.

What Next? In Pursuit of CARES Act Home Confinement (#3)

Okay, so to recap, we submitted the Administrative Remedy form BP-229 and it was rejected by the BOP.  Click on links to see these documents.

When we hadn't received a response by the 20th day as described in the Administrative Remedy Policy, I had our counsel call the RRM office to see if he could get any information about it.  Click on "rejected" link above to see the timeline of the AR.  He was forwarded to South Central Regional Counsel, Jason Sickler. This is the man who advised us to submit the AR in the first place, which is what set us on this Administrative Remedy path. Well, he told our counsel that if the response we receive is not satisfactory (remember, we had not received a response or any kind of acknowledgement at that time), then instead of submitting the next level of AR, we should submit another CARES Act home confinement request to the RRM.

Personally, I wanted to do both (1) submit the CARES Act request, AND (2) file the BP-230 as directed by the rejection notice. But our counsel said we shouldn't do that. We should follow Regional Counsel's advice and submit the CARES Act request because doing both would confuse the RRM and gum up the system. So we only submitted the CARES Act request, along with a cover letter as follows:

COVER LETTER

January 10, 2022

Regional Reentry Manager, 727 East Cesar E. Chavez Boulevard, Suite B-138, San Antonio, TX  78206

RE: CARES Act Home Confinement Request

Dear Regional Reentry Manager:

My name is Tom ------, and I am a halfway house inmate at the -----------, in Tyler, Texas.

Enclosed is a request for CARES Act home confinement. I would appreciate you considering this request. I believe I fulfill the requirements of CARES Act home confinement.

Please note that South Central Regional Counsel advised me to submit this request to your office, not to halfway house staff.

Thank you for you time and help with this matter.

Respectfully,

And CARES Act Home Confinement Request

 

This serves as my request for CARES Act home confinement consideration.

 

I.              Case Background

 

On July 7, 2018, I was indicted for Conspiracy to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371) and Evasion of Payment for Taxes (26 U.S.C. § 7201). Following a jury trial, I was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment followed by three years supervised release. I was subsequently designated to FCI Bastrop Camp to serve my sentence. I have since been released from FCI Bastrop Camp and am currently housed at the ----------------------, halfway house in Tyler, Texas.

II.            Consideration Factors

 

CARES Act home confinement is governed by the nine factors presented in the April 13, 2021, memorandum by Assistant Director Andre Matevousian (“Memorandum”).[1] These factors and application to my case are discussed below:

·      Disciplinary History: “Reviewing the inmate’s institutional discipline history for the last twelve months.”

 

I have maintained clear conduct during my term of incarceration. I have not been charged nor found guilty of any disciplinary code violation.

·      Verifiable Release Plan: “Ensuring the inmate has a verifiable release plan.”

 

Please see Section III below, where my reentry plan is presented.

·      Nature of Current Offense: “Verifying the inmate’s current or a prior offense is not violent, a sex offense, or terrorism-related.”

 

My crime of conviction was for federal tax-related offenses. These offenses were not violent, sexual, or terrorism-related. Additionally, I have not previously been convicted of a crime.

·      Detainers: “Confirming the inmate does not have a current detainer.”

 

I have no pending detainers.

·      Low or Minimum Security: “Ensuring the inmate is Low or Minimum security.”

 

Other than quarantine periods, during which I was incarcerated at the low-security FCI Bastrop, I have remained a minimum-security inmate at FCI Bastrop Satellite Prison Camp. I am currently housed in the ------------------------------ halfway house in Tyler, Texas.

·      Low or Minimum PATTERN Score: “Ensuring the inmate has a Low or Minimum PATTERN recidivism risk score.”

 

My unit team has notified me that my PATTERN Score is minimum risk. Specifically, my General Score is -6 and the Violent Score is -1.

·      Violent and/or Gang-Related Activity in Prison: “Ensuring the inmate has not engaged in violent or gang-related activities while incarcerated.”

 

Since my admission to the Bureau of Prisons, I have not been involved or associated with those who engage in violent or gang-related activities.

 

·      COVID-19 Vulnerabilities: “Reviewing the COVID-19 vulnerability of the inmate, in accordance with CDC guidelines.”

Redacting this part because of privacy.

·      Time Served: “Confirming the inmate has served 50% or more of their sentence; or has 18 months or less remaining on their sentence and have served 25% or more of their sentence.”

On June 28, 2021, I was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. I arrived in federal prison on July 20, 2021. Upon arrival in federal prison, I was awarded the standard prorated good conduct time, resulting in an approximate 81-day reduction in sentence. My current release date is October 29, 2022.

 

With the above calculations in mind, even without taking into consideration the good conduct time, I have served over 25 percent of my sentence.

 III.          Reentry Plan

If this request is approved, I will live in my home, the house located at ---------------------------------, TX -----, which has been inspected and approved by both a probation officer and a BOP inspector. The only other resident is my wife, ---------------, who has no serious underlying health conditions. If granted home confinement, both my wife and I can be reached at ------------ (landline which meets all halfway house requirements), ------------ (my approved cell phone), or ------------ (---------- cell phone). Additionally, I can provide my own transportation from the halfway house in Tyler to the release residence, using my own halfway house approved vehicle. As a resident of the halfway house, I was required to obtain employment, which I did. I am currently employed by ------------------------.

IV.          Conclusion

 Thank you for considering this request. If approved, I will return home with my wife, where I will ensure to comply with all terms of home confinement. This placement will enable me to reduce my COVID-19 risk by being able to socially distance and following other CDC best practice

---

[1] Memorandum from Andre Matevousian, Bureau of Prisons Assistant Director, Correctional Services Division (Apr. 13, 2021).

Click HERE to return to the beginning of our BOP Administrative Remedy for CARES Act Home Confinement.

BOP Response to Administrative Remedy BP-229 (#2)

 The response that we received to Tom's BP-229 Administrative Remedy Request (go here to read that request) was this:

****************************************************************************

REJECTION NOTICE - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY

DECEMBER 22, 2011

Illegible signature

FROM:  ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR, SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE

TO:  -----------------------------------, TX

FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW, THIS REGIONAL APPEAL IS BEING REJECTED AND RETURNED TO YOU.  YOU SHOULD INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH ANY FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE REJECTION.

REMEDY ID        : ------------  REGIONAL APPEAL

DATE RECEIVED    : DECEMBER 13, 2021

SUBJECT 1        :  OTHER COMMUNITY PROGRAMS

REJECT REASON 1:  YOU DID NOT SUBMIT YOUR REQUESET OR APPEAL ON THE PROPER FORM (BP-10)

REJECT REASON 2:  YOU MAY RESUBMIT YOUR APPEAL IN PROPER FORM WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS REJECTION NOTICE.

REJECT REASON 3:  SEE REMARKS.

REMARKS:  USE THE ATTACHED YELLOW BP-10 AND RESUBMIT.

****************************************************************

So there are a few important things to note about this rejection. First of all, from what I understand, a "rejection" is not an answer. It's not a "denial" or any kind of approval. It simply is a "start over".

Secondly, note what the Administrative Remedy policy (link is in post from March 16th which is linked above) states on page 8, "When deciding whether to reject a submission, Coordinators, especially at the institution level, should be flexible, keeping in mind that major purposes of this Program are to solve problems and be responsive to issues inmates raise.” Is it considered "flexible" to reject a submission because it's on the "wrong form", especially when the use of the form is explained in the cover letter? 

Thirdly, note the dates.  The rejection notice states that we have 15 days to resubmit on the form they chose. However, the rejection letter was dated December 22, postmarked the 28th, and handed to Tom by the halfway house staff on the evening of January 7th.  That’s 17 days after the date of their rejection notice, which left no time for Tom to respond within their time limit.

Still Not Home...the Pure Evil of the Bureau of Prisons (#1)

Yes, it's March 16th and Tom is still incarcerated at the halfway house.

It's hard to find the energy or the time to write this all down. And I've been spending so much time fighting against the bureaucracy that it leaves me with little time to do other things that aren't absolutely necessary.

Tom has been getting weekend passes since the week of Christmas, so that's a blessing. Looking forward to weekends is what gets me through the weeks. But for the rest of the week, I'm still running the farm by myself. Kidding season is looming and I have to decide if I should plant a garden. I feel like I should because of the uncertain economy. But, really? A garden for one person? Tom and I have been working on the weekends to prepare it, but I'm having second thoughts.

So what I really want to document is the Bureau of Prison's Administrative Remedy (AR) program. It's supposed to be a program that inmates use to resolve various issues. Our prison consultant prepared an Administrative Remedy for Tom and we submitted it back in December. I've read the AR policy numerous times so that I'll know what to do and we have tried to follow it as best we can. The problem is, the BOP doesn't follow it. They don't follow the timeline; they don't provide the forms we need; it's hard to figure out who the forms need to be submitted to; they find every little excuse and make up excuses to deny requests.

We submitted Tom's AR to request a review of his placement in a halfway house rather than being released to home confinement under the CARES Act guidelines. Tom is eligible on every point, the Warden at the prison approved his home confinement. But the Residential Reentry Management (RRM) office denied his home confinement. We have been unable to find out why they denied it and how they even have the authority to override the Warden's decision. They absolutely refuse to tell us anything.

The first step of the AR process is to try to resolve the issue "informally". Although, the AR policy says that halfway house inmates are exempt from this step, we did it anyway. We told the halfway house staff that Tom was supposed to be on home confinement and could they help us get this error corrected. They refused. Our prison consultant also sent letters on Tom's behalf to the Warden and sent those same letters to RRM and Regional Counsel, along with phone calls to those offices.

So the second step is to submit a form BP-9. They also call this form a BP-229. I don't know why they have two different numbers for the forms other than to create confusion. Tom was able to pick up a BP-229 from a box at the halfway house. He got the last one. As far as I know, they never replenished the supply of those forms. This form is supposed to be filled out and given to the case manager/counselor, which Tom did. But his case manager handed the form back to him a few days later and said they don't process ARs and he'd have to mail it to the RRM, which we did. 

The following posts will contain the letters and documents that we've sent so far. It's too much to put it all into one post because it's months worth of pleadings.

Click here to see what the AR forms BP-229, BP-230, and BP-231 look like, except they are in triplicate (or quadruplet, I can't remember). The BP-229 is blue and the BP-230 is yellow. I haven't seen a 231 yet, so I don't know what color it is. Note that the forms are identical except for the sentence that tells you about submitting the next level of forms if you are not satisfied with the response you got.

Anyway, this request was sent to RRM in December along with a cover letter and the BP-229 form.

December 11, 2021

 

Juan Baltazar, Jr., Regional Director

South Central Regional Office

U.S. Armed Forces Reserve Complex

344 Marine Forces Drive

Grand Prairie, TX 75051

 

            RE: Administrative Remedy

 

 

Dear Regional Director Baltazar:

 

My name is Thomas ______, and I’m a halfway house inmate at the _________________, in _____, Texas. Enclosed is an Administrative Remedy for your office’s review.

 

Please note that I initially filed this administrative remedy with my Case Manager at the halfway house. Upon receipt, my Case Manager advised that they do not process administrative remedies. Instead, I was instructed to file this initial administrative remedy with your office. If this is not the case, I would appreciate you forwarding this administrative remedy to the proper official.

 

In reviewing Program Statement 1330.18, Administrative Remedy Program, and 28 C.F.R. § 542.13(b), I see that it states:

 

“Inmates in CCCs are not required to attempt informal resolution. An informal resolution attempt is not required prior to submission to the regional or Central Office as provided for in § 542.14(d) of this part.”

 

With the above policy provision in mind, this administrative remedy is being filed directly with your office. Please also note that my Case Manager directed me to use the enclosed administrative remedy form for submission.

 

Thank you for your time and help with this matter.

 

 

Respectfully,

Attachment to BP-229

This administrative remedy seeks a review of my placement as a regular halfway house inmate. As discussed below, I believe I should have been released to CARES Act home confinement, not regular halfway house. 

Please note my counsel discussed this matter with the South Central Regional Counsel on November 30, 2021. Regional counsel advised that I should submit this administrative remedy to correct the matters discussed below. 

I.               ISSUE BACKGROUND

On November 18, 2021, I was released to the ______________________________, Texas. At the time, I believed I was being released to home confinement under the CARES Act. Upon arrival, the halfway house director advised my family and me that I was not released under the CARES Act but per regular end-of-sentence halfway house.

At my arrival, both my family and I spoke with the halfway house director and case manager regarding this confusion. Both reviewed my Bureau release order and confirmed that I was a regular halfway house inmate, not a CARES Act home confinement inmate. Both also advised me that the release order was atypical. 

While I was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment, the Bureau appears to have awarded me 345 days of halfway house placement. This is an unusual amount of halfway house placement, particularly for an inmate who has served less than five months in custody. 

While I am grateful for the expanded halfway house placement, I believe an error has been made, whereas I was erroneously placed in RRC custody instead of CARES Act home confinement. 

II.             RESIDENTIAL REENTRY CENTER REFERRAL PACKET HISTORY

What complicates this matter further is that the FCI Bastrop Warden approved me for CARES Act home confinement in August 2021. Unfortunately, my case manager submitted my CARES Act home confinement verification to the incorrect release jurisdiction, requiring resubmission. 

I understand that my CARES Act home confinement referral was resubmitted in September 2021, at which point U.S. Probation completed my home inspection. Then, in early November 2021, I was placed in quarantine before my release. 

III.           POLICY APPLICATION

It appears three release modes were contemplated by my FCI Bastrop Camp case manager and RRM Dallas: regular halfway house, CARES Act home confinement, and Elderly Offender Pilot Program home confinement. 

The legislative history of 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(1) is clear: inmates who do not have a significant need for reentry assistance are not to be kept in the halfway house longer than 6-months. The 12-month provision of the statute is for those inmates who have a significant need for reentry assistance, for which I am not one. This is what leads me to believe an error has occurred. 

It does not appear I yet qualify under the Elderly Offender Home Confinement Pilot Program. While I fulfill most of the requirements, I have not yet served 2/3 of my sentence. As such, I believe my current RRC placement was not made under this provision. 

The final provision is CARES Act home confinement, which my Warden approved in August 2021. I believe I fulfill the requirements for this placement. While my case manager states in § 12 of the RRC referral packet that I have only served 18.3 percent of my sentence, I believe this calculation is erroneous. When accounting for prorated good conduct time, I have served over 25 percent of my sentence, which is required for CARES Act home confinement when the inmate has 18 months or less remaining to serve. 

IV.           REQUESTED RESOLUTION

Considering the above discussion, I believe my case manager erroneously submitted me for regular halfway house placement instead of the indicated and approved CARES Act home confinement placement. With this in mind, I respectfully request a review of my halfway house placement to determine if I should have been placed on CARES Act home confinement. If so, I request that I be placed on CARES Act home confinement.

Go HERE to see next step in this process, the BOP's response to AR.