Double-Cell Housing in Correctional Facilities

NY-ADR

6/27/18 N.Y. St. Reg. CCS-26-18-00004-P
NEW YORK STATE REGISTER
VOLUME XL, ISSUE 26
June 27, 2018
RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
PROPOSED RULE MAKING
NO HEARING(S) SCHEDULED
 
I.D No. CCS-26-18-00004-P
Double-Cell Housing in Correctional Facilities
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following proposed rule:
Proposed Action:
This is a consensus rule making to amend sections 1701.3, 1701.4, 1701.5, 1701.6, 1701.7 and 1701.9 of Title 7 NYCRR.
Statutory authority:
Correction Law, sections 112 and 138
Subject:
Double-cell housing in correctional facilities.
Purpose:
The rule is to provide protocols for the management of double-cell housing. The amendments are virtually all cosmetic.
Text of proposed rule:
Section 1701.3(c) is amended to read as follows:
(c) Upon approval by the commissioner or deputy commissioner for correctional facilities, the facility double-cell housing plan shall be submitted for authorization to the SCOC in accordance with Part 7621 of [this ]Title 9, NYCRR.
Section 1701.4(c)(2) is amended to read as follows:
(2) inmates shall be permitted to place a privacy curtain, approved by the deputy superintendent [of]for security, between the toilet and bed while the toilet is in use. The curtain shall not obstruct the view of either inmate from the front of the cell.
Section 1701.5(a) is amended to read as follows:
(a) Responsibility.
The deputy superintendent [of]for security shall be responsible for the selection of inmates for double-cell housing. The deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee shall conduct a risk assessment using the eligibility, suitability and compatibility criteria set forth in subdivisions (b), (c) and (d) of this section.
Section 1701.5(b)(2) is amended to read as follows:
(2) a general population inmate transferred for non-disciplinary reasons may not be assigned to double-cell housing in general confinement at the receiving facility, if the inmate meets all of the following criteria:
(i) the inmate has been with the department for at least two years following initial reception/classification and transfer to a permanent facility;
(ii) the inmate has had no Tier II or III disciplinary determinations of guilt within the last two years; and
(iii) the inmate has not volunteered for double-cell housing (a transfer sought by an inmate may be conditioned upon the inmate volunteering to be housed in a double-cell at the receiving facility).[; and]
[(iv) the inmate is not being transferred to Woodbourne Correctional Facility.]
Section 1701.5(c)(1) is amended to read as follows:
(1) Information assessment. When determining an inmate's suitability for a double-cell assignment, the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee shall review the information contained in the inmate population management system and other records as deemed appropriate to determine if factors exist that would preclude such assignment.
Section 1701.5(c)(3)(ii)(c) is amended to read as follows:
(c) any other documented behavior that, when coupled with such OMH designation, would lead the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee to determine that the inmate would not be an appropriate double-celling candidate.
Section 1701.5(c)(4)(iv) is amended to read as follows:
(iv) [Homosexual behavior]Same gender sexual violence. Inmates found guilty at facility disciplinary hearings of engaging in [homosexual acts]same gender sexual violence while incarcerated.
[Note: Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraphs (i) and (iv) of this paragraph, inmates in the special protective custody unit at Oneida Correctional Facility may be housed together so long as it is determined that the inmates do not pose a threat to each other.]
Section 1701.5(c)(5) is amended to read as follows:
(5) Since the assessment of an inmate's ineligibility for double-celling is based upon a history of demonstrated behavior in paragraph (4) of this subdivision and it is possible for the inmate to positively change such behavior, the deputy superintendent [of]for security may exercise a limited amount of flexibility when determining double-cell assignments. For this reason, an “override factor” has been included in the screening process and may be utilized when more recent history and behavior by the inmate show a positive adjustment factor mitigating in favor of double-cell housing despite earlier events. Whenever the override factor is utilized, the deputy superintendent [of]for security must provide the specific reason on the double-cell information sheet (see section 1701.9 of this Part).
Section 1701.5(c)(6) is amended to read as follows:
(6) Medical screening. (i) Medical records screening. The deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee shall provide a list of inmates under consideration for double-cell housing to the facility health services director or designee. The facility health staff shall conduct a medical records review prior to possible double-cell assignment and advise the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee of the existence of a medical condition that would preclude double-cell housing or require placement in a bottom bunk bed.
(ii) Physical assessment. Either prior to or within 48 hours after an inmate's placement in a double-cell, a physical assessment will be conducted. If facility health staff determine that a change in the inmate's current housing is required, that information shall be conveyed to the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee and the appropriate change in housing shall be made.
Section 1701.5(d) is amended to read as follows:
(d) Assessment of compatibility.
After an inmate's record has been appropriately screened and the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee has determined that the inmate is a suitable candidate, an assessment of compatibility with the other inmate assigned to the cell shall be made. The following criteria shall be used in making this determination:
Section 1701.5(d)(5) is amended to read as follows:
(5) Age. The respective ages of the inmates. Inmates age 60 and over must be assigned bottom bunk.
Section 1701.5(e) is amended to read as follows:
(e) Double-cell information sheet.
The list of factors governing both suitability and compatibility is not exhaustive. Other factors may also be considered. The double-cell information sheet (see section 1701.9 of this Part) has been developed to properly record each step in the screening/risk assessment process. Each applicable section must be completed by the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee. “Health service review results” and “mental health status” sections may be completed based on verbal or written input from the appropriate areas. A copy of the completed form should be forwarded to the inmate records coordinator and the movement and control officer for each inmate approved for double-celling.
Section 1701.6(c) is amended to read as follows:
(c) Secure area storage.
In addition to the property inmates may store in a double-cell, each inmate may elect to store up to two standard draft bags of personal property in a secure area designated by the superintendent for the duration of his[/] or her double-cell assignment. Form #2064 will be utilized to inventory all stored property. Upon written request, the inmate will be given access to such stored property once every 30 days to withdraw or store items.
Section 1701.7 is amended to read as follows:
(a) No inmate may refuse placement in double-cell housing.
(b) The movement of inmates out of double-cell housing shall be the responsibility of the deputy superintendent [of]for security.
(c) The movement of an inmate out of double-cell housing shall be based upon the length of time in double-cell housing, the needs of the facility, and the inmate's medical needs, program and work assignments.
(d) No inmate shall be confined in a double-cell for a period of more than 60 days unless such inmate volunteers to remain in the double-cell for a longer period of time. At the expiration of the 60 days, if an inmate does not volunteer to remain in a double-cell, the inmate shall be moved to a single-cell or multiple occupancy housing at either his or her current facility or a new facility.
(e) Inmates in double-cell housing will be specifically assigned to either the upper or lower bunk and may not change such assignment without the approval of the deputy superintendent [of]for security or designee. If the lower bunk was assigned for medical reasons, the [DSS]deputy superintendent for security or designee shall consult with medical staff before any change.
1701.9 Forms.
Form #3117
STATE OF NEW YORK - DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
SCREENING AND PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT FOR PLACEMENT IN A DOUBLE-CELL
D.I.N. ___ NAME: ___________
I. Medical Record Screening Review
A. Has the person been diagnosed to have any of the following communicable illnesses that are currently contagious?
AmebiasisDiptheriaLymphogranuloma venereumRubella
ChancroidE. coli 0157:H7MeaslesSalmonellosis
Chickenpox/ Herpes ZosterEncephalitisMeningitisShigellosis
Chlamydia trachomatisGiardiasisMeningococcemiaSyphilis
CholeraGonococcal InfectionMumpsTuberculosis
CrytosporidiosisHepatitisPertussisTyphoid
PlagueYersiniosis
B. Has the person been noted to currently have symptoms that indicate an acute illness which could be contagious at this time? No Yes If so, please specify these symptoms:
C. Are there known medical contraindications to him being placed in a double-cell? (e.g., any conditions noted in I-A or B above or chronic debilitating disease, skin lesions, open sores, cardiac condition-stage 4) No Yes (single-cell)
D. Are there any known medical indications requiring him to be placed in a bottom bunk bed? (e.g., medically documented - back problems {through radiologic or surgical physician review}, medication for seizure disorder, diabetes/insulin dependent, age over 60 years, permanent physical disability {e.g., amputee, rheumatoid arthritis}, diagnosis of sleep apnea, current acute injury or serious medical conditions {e.g., fractures, recent MI, advanced arthritis}) No Yes (bottom bunk)
Report answers to C. and D. to the DSS or designee immediately.........
Signed: ___________ Date: ___
II. Physical Assessment (A physical assessment as indicated below must be conducted prior to or within 48 hours of placement in a double-cell.)
A. Based upon your physical assessment of the person, does he or she:
No | Yes - Appear acutely ill?
No | Yes - Have evidence of persistent cough?
No | Yes - Currently have severe diarrhea?
No | Yes - Have respiratory check sounds that could indicate an acutely communicable illness?
No | Yes - Have skin rashes, jaundice or lesions that could indicate an acutely communicable illness?
B. From your physical assessment of this person, are there medical contraindications to him being placed in a double-cell? (e.g., any conditions noted in Part II. A.) No | Yes (single-cell)
C. From your physical assessment of this person, are there medical indications requiring him or her to be placed in a bottom bunk bed? No | Yes (bottom bunk)
Report answer to B. to the DSS or designee immediately.........
Signed: ___________ Date: ___
Rev. [8]06/[01]16
Form 2201
STATE OF NEW YORK - DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
DOUBLE-CELL INFORMATION SHEET
CORRECTIONAL FACILITY___________
D.I.N.: ___________
NAME: ___________
D.O.B.: ___________
DATE: ___________
I. SUITABILITY History and Behavior
No | Yes – Victim Prone
No | Yes – Assaultive
No | Yes – Enemies (at facility)
No | Yes – Homicidal
No | Yes – [Homosexual Behavior]Same Gender Sexual Violence
No | Yes – Extremely violent nature of the instant offense or criminal history
"Yes" in any above category requires override reason prior to affirmative double cell recommendation.
Reason for Override
________________
No | Yes – Has the inmate been with DOCS for at least 24 months?
No | Yes – Has the inmate remained free of Tier II or III convictions within the last 24 months?
No | Yes – Has the inmate volunteered for double-cell housing?
If "Yes" in[ both] all of the above [two ]categories, the inmate is currently ineligible for double-celling.
No | Yes – Is the inmate over 6′5″, over 299 lbs.[ or over 69 years old]? If "yes" do not double-cell.
No | Yes – Is the inmate 70 years of age or older? If “yes” do not double-cell, unless inmate volunteered.
Health Services Review Results
Approved
Disapproved
Date: ___________
bottom bunk only
......................................
Mental Health Status
OMH Level 1
No | Yes – If "Yes" inmate may not be double celled.
OMH Level 2/3
No | Yes
Approved
Disapproved
Comments:
________________
......................................
D.S.S. (or designee) Review: APPROVED | DISAPPROVED
Comments:
________________
Signature ___________ Date ___
II. COMPATIBILITY CELL _ _ - -__ - - _ _ _
CANDIDATE _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ CURRENTLY ASSIGNED _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _
AgeRaceAgeRace
16-21Black16-21Black
22-35Hispanic22-35Hispanic
36-59White36-59White
60+ bottom bunkOther60+ bottom bunkOther
LanguageReligionLanguageReligion
EnglishChristianEnglishChristian
Spanish OnlyMusli[n]mSpanish OnlyMusli[n]m
Other ___JewishOtherJewish
Other ___Other
Years to E.R. D.SizeYears to E.R. D.Size
less than 3less than 150 lbsless than 3less than 150 lbs
3-8150-2603-8150-260
9-15261-2999-15261-299
16+16+
Rev. [8]4/[0]18
Text of proposed rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Kevin P. Bruen, Deputy Commissioner and Counsel, NYS Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, 1220 Washington Avenue, Harriman State Campus, Albany, NY 12226-2050, (518) 457-4951, email: [email protected]
Data, views or arguments may be submitted to:
Same as above.
Public comment will be received until:
60 days after publication of this notice.
Consensus Rule Making Determination
These amendments to 7 NYCRR Part 1701 are virtually all cosmetic in nature. Because the changes are not substantive, no person is likely to object to the amendments of the rule as written.
Job Impact Statement
A Job Impact Statement is not being submitted with this notice, for the proposed rule will have no adverse impact upon jobs or employment opportunities, nor does the proposed rule impose any reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements upon employers. The proposed rule only affects the housing of inmates.
End of Document