Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

FSA Time Credits rule (2022)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


The FSA Time Credits rule is a significant rule issued by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) effective January 19, 2022, that codified procedures surrounding inmate eligibility for earlier release upon completing Evidence-Based Recidivism Reduction (EBRR) Programs or Productive Activities (PAs). Inmates not eligible for early release can earn other privileges while incarcerated. This rule is pursuant to the First Step Act of 2018.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Name: FSA Time Credits
  • Code of Federal Regulations: 28 CFR 523 and 541
  • Agency: Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
  • Action: Final rule
  • Type of significant rule: Other significant rule

    • Timeline

    The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

    Background

    The First Step Act of 2018 provides that inmates may earn prerelease upon successfully completing Evidence-Based Recidivism Reduction (EBRR) Programs or Productive Activities (PAs). These programs and activities are assigned to inmates based on assessments of their risk and needs; the time increments they can earn back are called Time Credits. Inmates with certain convictions are not eligible for prerelease, and those inmates can earn other privileges such as increased commissary, visiting, and telephone use. This rule defines the procedures and definitions necessary to institute the First Step Act.[1]

    Summary of the rule

    The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:

    “ This rule codifies the Bureau of Prisons' (Bureau or BOP) procedures regarding the earning and application of time credits as authorized by the First Step Act of 2018 (FSA), hereinafter referred to as “FSA Time Credits” or “Time Credits.” The FSA provides that eligible inmates earn FSA Time Credits toward prerelease custody or early transfer to supervised release for successfully completing approved Evidence-Based Recidivism Reduction (EBRR) Programs or Productive Activities (PAs) assigned to each inmate based on the inmate's risk and needs assessment. Inmates eligible to apply Time Credits under the FSA include individuals sentenced under the U.S. Code. As required by the FSA, an inmate cannot earn FSA Time Credits if that inmate is serving a sentence for a disqualifying offense or has a disqualifying prior conviction. However, such inmates may still earn other benefits for successfully completing recidivism reduction programming, such as increased privileges (commissary, visiting, and telephone) for participation in EBRR Programs or PAs, as authorized by the Bureau.[1][2] ”

    Summary of provisions

    The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “

    The final rule adopts a more straightforward and more administratively manageable approach that is consistent with the FSA's goal of promoting successful participation in EBRR Programs and PAs. For every thirty-day period that an eligible inmate successfully participates in EBRR Programs or PAs recommended based on the inmate's risk and needs assessment, the inmate will earn ten days of FSA Time Credits. If the inmate is determined to be at a minimum or low risk for recidivating and can maintain that risk level for the most recent two consecutive risk and needs assessments, that inmate may earn an additional five days of FSA Time Credits per thirty-day period.

    An eligible inmate must successfully participate in programs and activities that the Bureau recommends based on an individualized risk and needs assessment to earn Time Credits. An inmate will not be considered to be successfully participating if that inmate refuses to participate in or otherwise violates conditions, rules, or requirements of EBRR programs or PAs recommended based on the inmate's risk and needs assessment. However, temporary interruptions in participation that are unrelated to an inmate's refusal to participate or other violation of programming requirements, or that are authorized by the Bureau, such when a recommended program or activity is unavailable or at full enrollment, will not affect the inmate's ability to earn Time Credits.

    If an eligible inmate refuses to participate in the recommended program or activity, engages in misconduct that results in removal from the program or activity through placement in restrictive housing, or disrupts or fails to follow the conditions, parameters, or rules of the program or activity, accrual of Time Credits is paused until the inmate complies with programming or completes the disciplinary sanction. This methodology is intended to guide inmates back to the appropriate pro-social goals of programming and act as a deterrent for future misconduct, giving inmates a direct incentive to maintain clear conduct (behavior clear of inmate disciplinary infractions under 28 CFR part 541).

    By clarifying the method for awarding Time Credits in this manner to ensure it furthers Congressional intent of the statute, the Bureau hopes to increase the amount of FSA Time Credits that may be awarded to eligible inmates.[2]

    		”

    Significant impact

    See also: Significant regulatory action

    Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.

    Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic impact of $100 million or more. Executive Order 14094, issued by President Joe Biden (D) on April 6, 2023, made changes to Executive Order 12866, including referring to economically significant rules as section 3(f)(1) significant rules and raising the monetary threshold for economic significance to $200 million or more.[1]


    The text of the FSA Time Credits rule states that OMB deemed this rule significant, but not economically significant:

    “ Because this proposed rule may raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of implementation of the First Step Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that it constitutes a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and has reviewed it.[2] ”

    Text of the rule

    The full text of the rule is available below:[1]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 Federal Register, "FSA Time Credits," November 20, 2023.
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=FSA_Time_Credits_rule_(2022)&oldid=10360980"