(1) the classification process, which shall include:

(i) identification of qualifying inmates,

(ii) designation criteria,

(iii) referral for designation,

(iv) designation, and

(v) review procedures;

(2) a mechanism by which an inmate who is classified CMC may appeal such classification;

(3) criteria and procedures for inmate transfer and movement;

(4) temporary release, earned eligibility, and merit time evaluations.

Statutory Authority

Section 112 of Correction Law grants the Commissioner of DOCS the superintendence, management and control of the correctional facilities and inmates confined therein and to promulgate rules and regulations for this purpose.

Legislative Objective

By vesting the commissioner with this rulemaking authority, the legislature intended the commissioner to promulgate such rules and regulations that will provide for the safe, secure and orderly operation of correctional facilities and to help ensure public safety.

Needs and Benefits

This proposed rule making will provide the department with the means to expeditiously revise or amend Central Monitoring Case procedures as deemed necessary and in the best interests of the public safety. This is needed to ensure that inmates who are identified as Central Monitoring Cases are reviewed and approved by Central Office staff prior to transfer to another facility, including those facilities that offer programs for Temporary Release or for transfer in connection with possible release from DOCS custody, pursuant to Articles 24 and 26 of Correction Law. The proposed rule will have no impact on the inmate population as it relates only to a classification scheme that is necessary to ensure the safe, secure and orderly operation of correctional facilities and to properly allocate security resources. The proposed rule making will also create parity between the rule and DOCS Directives.

Costs

a. To agency, the state and local governments: None

b. Cost to private regulated parties: None. The proposed amendment does not apply to private parties.

c. This cost analysis is based upon the fact that this proposal merely simplifies the text of the rule and allows the commissioner to revise internal management procedures as necessary.

Local Government Mandates

There are no new mandates imposed upon local governments by this proposal. It does not apply to local governments.

Paperwork

There are no new reports, forms or paperwork that would be required as a result of amending these rules.

Duplication

These proposed amendments do not duplicate any existing State or Federal requirement.

Alternatives

Several alternatives have been considered. Leaving the existing rule unchanged was considered, however, this is not acceptable as it would require DOCS to continue a regulation that is out of parity with existing procedures. A line by line revision to the rule was considered, but, due to the complexity of the existing rule, this is unacceptable as it would require an onerous and lengthy revision to the rule and would do nothing to reduce the complexity of the rule. The only alternative left for consideration was a repeal of the existing rule and promulgation of a new, simpler rule.

Federal Standards

There are no minimum standards of the Federal government for this or a similar subject area.

Compliance Schedule

The Department of Correctional Services will achieve compliance with the proposed rules immediately.

A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for this proposal since it will not impose any adverse economic impact or reporting, record keeping or other compliance requirements on small businesses or local governments. This proposal merely clarifies the authority of the Commissioner to promulgate internal management procedures with regard to the designation of inmates as Central Monitoring Cases for the purpose of tracking the movement of inmates so designated throughout the correctional system.

A rural area flexibility analysis is not required for this proposal since it will not impose any adverse economic impact or reporting, record keeping or other compliance requirements on rural areas. This proposal merely clarifies the authority of the Commissioner to promulgate internal management procedures with regard to the designation of inmates as Central Monitoring Cases, for the purpose of tracking the movement of inmates so designated throughout the correctional system.

A job impact statement is not submitted because this proposed rule will have no adverse impact on jobs or employment opportunities. This proposal merely clarifies the authority of the Commissioner to promulgate internal management procedures with regard to the designation of inmates as Central Monitoring Cases, for the purpose of tracking the movement of inmates so designated throughout the correctional system.