[House Hearing, 116 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS AND THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE ======================================================================= HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION __________ WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2020 __________ Serial No. 116-92 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 44-392 WASHINGTON : 2021 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JERROLD NADLER, New York, Chair MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania, Vice-Chair ZOE LOFGREN, California DOUG COLLINS, Georgia, Ranking SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas Member STEVE COHEN, Tennessee F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., Wisconsin Georgia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas KAREN BASS, California JIM JORDAN, Ohio CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana KEN BUCK, Colorado HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York MARTHA ROBY, Alabama DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island MATT GAETZ, Florida ERIC SWALWELL, California MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana TED LIEU, California ANDY BIGGS, Arizona JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland TOM McCLINTOCK, California PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania J. LUIS CORREA, California BEN CLINE, Virginia SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota JOE NEGUSE, Colorado W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida LUCY McBATH, Georgia GREG STANTON, Arizona MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas PERRY APELBAUM, Majority Staff Director & Chief of Staff CHRIS HIXON, Minority Staff Director ------ SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY KAREN BASS, California, Chair VAL DEMINGS, Florida, Vice-Chair SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Ranking Member LUCY McBATH, Georgia F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida Wisconsin CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana STEVE CHABOT, Ohio HAKEEM JEFFRIES, New York LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island TOM McCLINTOCK, California TED LIEU, California DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona MADELINE DEAN, Pennsylvania GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida BEN CLINE, Virginia STEVEN COHEN, Tennessee W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida JOE GRAUPENSPERGER, Chief Counsel JASON CERVENAK, Minority Counsel C O N T E N T S ---------- December 2, 2020 Page OPENING STATEMENTS The Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California.. 1 The Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Ohio. 4 WITNESSES Michael Carvajal, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, United States Department of Justice Oral Testimony................................................. 6 Prepared Statement............................................. 8 The Honorable Donald W. Washington, Director, United States Marshals Service, United States Department of Justice Oral Testimony................................................. 13 Prepared Statement............................................. 14 STATEMENTS, LETTERS, MATERIALS, ARTICLES SUBMITTED Letter from Sentencing Project, Research and Advocacy for Reform submitted by the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California for the record......................... 20 Letter from Shane Fausey, National President, Council of Prison Local 33, submitted the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California for the record......................... 22 Letter to the Honable William P. Barr, Attorney General submitted by the Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Ohio for the record............................................ 48 APPENDIX Statement from Donte Westmoreland submitted by the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California for the record.. 62 Statement submitted by the Honorable Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Texas for the record... 64 Article ``How Biden helped create the student debt problem he now promises to fix,'' The Guardian, submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record. 73 Article ``How Joe Biden helped inflame the student loan crisis: Geoffrey Peterson,'' Ohio Local News, submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record..................................................... 78 Article ``Joe Biden's Role in Creating the Student Debt Crisis Stretches Back to the 1970s,'' The Intercept, submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record..................................................... 85 Article ``What is a Women's Issue? Bankruptcy, Commercial Law, and Other Gender-Neutral Topics,'' Harvard Women's Law Journal, Vol. 25, Spring 2002, submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record.............. 87 QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD Questions for Director Michael Carvajal from the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California for the record.. 128 Questions for Director Michael Carvajal from the Honorable Val Demings, Vice-Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record. 134 Questions for Donald W. Washington from the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California for the record........... 134 OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS AND THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE Wednesday, December 2, 2020 House of Representatives Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Committee on the Judiciary Washington, DC The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:12 a.m., in Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Karen Bass [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. Present: Representatives Bass, Jackson Lee, McBath, Deutch, Jeffries, Cicilline, Dean, Mucarsel-Powell, Jordan, Chabot, Gohmert, Lesko, and Cline. Staff Present: Madeline Strasser, Chief Clerk; Joe Graupen- sperger, Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime; Milagros Cisneros, Detailee, Subcommittee on Crime; Veronica Eligan, Professional Staff Member, Subcommittee on Crime; Chris Hixon, Minority Staff Director; Jason Cervenak, Minority Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime; Ken David, Minority Counsel; and Kiley Bidelman, Minority Clerk. Ms. Bass. Good morning. The Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Subcommittee at any time. I welcome everyone to today's hearing on oversight of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service. Before we begin, I would like to remind Members that we have established an email address and distribution list dedicated to circulating exhibits, motions, or other written materials that Members might want to offer as part of our hearing today. If you would like to submit materials, please send them to the email address that has been previously distributed to your offices, and we will circulate the materials to Members and staff as quickly as we can. I would ask all Members, both those in person and those appearing remotely, to mute your microphones when you are not speaking. This will help prevent feedback and other technical issues. You may unmute yourself anytime you seek recognition. I will now recognize myself for an opening statement. We welcome everyone to this morning's hearing, entitled ``Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service.'' Welcome, also, to those who are joining us virtually for this extremely important hearing. The last time this Subcommittee held a hearing bringing together the Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service was in the spring of 2017, and, in October of last year, Dr. Kathleen Hawk Sawyer discussed the implementation of the FIRST STEP Act. This included Antoinette Bacon from the Department of Justice regarding the roll-out of the risk and needs assessment tool known as PATTERN. Today, with the onset of COVID-19, we must address bigger challenges. COVID-19 is a worldwide pandemic that is escalating in the United States, and of course this includes our prisons and jails, which have become hotbeds for the virus. As of this past weekend, the BOP reported that over 23,000 prisoners have tested positive for the virus. That is out of 125,000 inmates in BOP. By our count, at least 161 people have died from COVID while in custody. Many of these infections and these deaths might have been preventable. Early in the pandemic, anticipating the severity of what was to come, Chairman Nadler and I wrote several letters to the Attorney General and also to you, Director Carvajal, asking you to take aggressive measures to protect the many thousands of individuals in your custody. We knew that men and women in tightly confined spaces were uniquely vulnerable to this virus, and we are instituting measures for nursing homes across the country. Correctional facilities were not properly providing for social distancing-- and how can they?--testing, quarantining, or even providing those in custody with masks. In late March, Congress passed the CARES Act, giving the Attorney General and the BOP expansive authority to decarcerate those most vulnerable to COVID-19, but this authority has been underutilized. The BOP website may very well say that it has placed over 18,000 people on home confinement during these 9 months of the pandemic--we do wonder whether they were tested before they were released, however--but how many of those people would have been released to home confinement under normal circumstances? In other words, were extra people released because of COVID, which is what the authority was suggesting. How many people has BOP released under the direct authority of the CARES Act is the point? We have asked these questions, others have asked these questions, but we have not been given any satisfactory answers. Less than a month after BOP received the authority to release individuals to home confinement and the first of our letters were sent to you, I visited Terminal Island in San Pedro, California. I met with the warden, correction officers, and those serving their sentences. I received messages from constituents, family Members, advocates, and the prisoners themselves that they were all concerned about the risk of exposure to COVID-19 in the facility. I do want to commend the warden and the staff for their openness, but, frankly, I am concerned that they don't have the support they need. Now, they didn't raise this concern to me, however, but I am raising the concern. My concern is for the staff. It was clear that the inmates are tested but the staff, who come and go every day, were not tested. At other institutions, we have heard stories of prisoners alleging that individuals were being grouped together to develop herd immunity. Another was concerned that he was being bunked with someone who had clear symptoms of COVID-19. Yet another was concerned he was not receiving adequate medical care. BOP officers themselves did not have access to adequate on-site testing. The incarcerated men from this particular institute did not have the right PPE and other needed resources. We continue to hear from our constituents, distraught family Members, those on the inside, and their lawyers. They tell tales about what is going on, tales of rolling lockdowns, of sick calls that get ignored, of prisoners who haven't seen or spoken with their loved ones in months. As facility after facility experiences outbreaks, it gives further credence to their concerns. Particularly troubling is a report from the Council on Criminal Justice, which found that incarceration facilities represented 19 out of the 20 clusters of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the U.S. as of August. The council highlighted that this is of particular concern because the U.S., of course, has the largest incarcerated population in the world, with approximately 2 million people behind bars. More than 1.3 million individuals are in State or Federal prisons, and the remainder are in county jails. So, today, people in custody are five times more likely to contract COVID-19 than the general population. Even with insufficient testing, there are reports that 252,000 people have contracted COVID-19 while in Federal, State, and local custody. Over 1,400 of them have died. You may have heard about the preventable death of Andrea Circle Bear. Ms. Circle Bear, a pregnant mother of five, contracted COVID while in BOP's care. She gave birth unconscious and on a ventilator. Ms. Circle Bear didn't survive and never met her child. This tragedy occurred in April. Less than 4 months later, nearly half of the 1,300 prisoners at the same facility in Texas would test positive for COVID-19. This facility would become the largest outbreak of COVID-19 in a Federal facility in the country. Director Carvajal, these prisoners and their families rightfully feel abandoned, and they are scared. You are here today hopefully to provide us with answers on how you plan to address these and many other concerns and also what resources you are lacking. What assistance can we provide to you? As for the U.S. Marshals Service, Director Washington, we continue to hear similar testimonials. The vast majority of the individuals under Marshals' care and custody are pretrial detainees, who are innocent until proven guilty. I understand that you don't have direct control over the facilities with which you have contracts, but I would like to understand what oversight you are conducting over these facilities and, frankly, for many, question whether you should consider renewing the contracts, depending on how things are being handled. We understand from news reports that well over 6,500 detainees in the U.S. Marshal custody have tested positive for the coronavirus and that the latest death toll among Federal pretrial detainees is 20. I underscore that we have heard this from news reports for a reason, because, unlike the BOP, it is our understanding that the Marshals Service does not publicly report any of this information. When Chairman Nadler and I wrote to you in May, we requested that you immediately begin to provide this information on the U.S. Marshals' website. We eventually received a response in October but with no commitment to report that information online. To this day, the information about infection rates and deaths in U.S. Marshals' custody is a virtual mystery to the public. In addition, we have heard multiple reports that, even though the official BOP policy was to halt prisoner transfers among facilities, the Marshals Service has nevertheless continued to transfer prisoners from facility to facility. In a nationwide OSHA complaint, the union representing correction officers in the Bureau of Prisons has alleged that the U.S. Marshals do not properly test prisoners before they transport them, spreading the virus from facilities with high rates of infection to facilities with no infections. Yesterday, I received information from a report produced by the BOP. On October 29, BOP reported 1,800 inmates and 888 staff tested positive for COVID-19. By November 30, there were 4,000 inmates and 1,400 staff who tested positive. That is a 162-percent increase in inmates and a 60-percent increase in staff in just 30 days. This is a pretty stark increase and seems to be correlated to the resumption of transfers and social visiting. I have spoken with children who were terrified that their parent will die of COVID while in custody, husbands and wives who were seeking our assistance to gain the release of their sick spouses, mothers and fathers who were pleading on behalf of their children. As COVID-19 spikes for the general population, we know this translates to more cases in correctional facilities. Today, I am thinking of the death of Andrea Circle Bear and that of Marie Neba. Ms. Neba was sick with stage IV cancer and pleading to be released at home. Instead, she would die from COVID-19 in custody. I really want to understand, especially with inmates who are very elderly or have terminal illnesses or multiple risk factors, why they can't be released. So, it is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Washington and Director Carvajal, welcome, and thank you both for your service to our country. The Federal Bureau of Prisons is tasked with protecting society by confining offenders in the controlled environments of prisons and community-based facilities. BOP's duty is not merely to provide housing, food, and security for Federal inmates but also to help them become eventually law-abiding citizens. Every American has an interest in BOP's mission because the vast majority of Federal inmates, well above 90 percent, will someday, in fact, be released. BOP's job is not an easy task and has only become more complicated due to the COVID-19 virus. In response to COVID-19, BOP undertook a number of steps to safeguard the health and safety of staff and the public. They prioritized inmates for home confinement who did not pose a significant risk to the public, restricted the number of visitors, and limited the movement of inmates among their detention facilities. These are reasonable measures. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to go much further. They have tried to use the COVID-19 pandemic as a reason to let more criminals back on our streets. They even wrote to the Attorney General, Attorney General Barr, urging him to, quote, use every tool at his disposal to release as many prisoners as possible, regardless of whether they had completed their process and what the plan for each inmate to actually have reached what the experts would call rehabilitation. They even passed legislation in the House that would pay States to release inmates in State prisons and local jails. Think about that. Democrats want to use your tax dollars to incentivize States to put more criminals back on the streets. The consequence of these actions has deadly real-world results, as we have unfortunately seen. A Colorado inmate released pursuant to an executive order signed by the Governor related to COVID-19 was arrested in a fatal Denver shooting less than a month after his release. In Florida, a 26-year-old man charged with second-degree murder in connection with a fatal shooting in March, he was released from custody by the sheriff the previous month to contain the spread of COVID-19. Just a few miles from here, in Alexandria, Virginia, a man who was in custody for breaking into a woman's apartment and attacking her in 2019, due to COVID-19 concerns, this man was released by a local judge over the objection of the prosecutors in April. Three months later, he shot and killed the very woman he attacked the year before. In the spite of these and numerous other crimes that have been committed by inmates released early, Democrats are calling for more inmates to be released, regardless of their crime or prison sentence. To be clear, Democrats on the Committee want to open the jails. Don't forget, they also want to defund the police. They want to turn a public health crisis into a public safety crisis. These are not responsible policies, and I hope our witnesses today will explain why they are not. Like the Bureau of Prisons, the United States Marshals Service has faced challenges stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. As our Nation's oldest Federal law enforcement agency, the Marshals Service's duties are vast: Protecting the Federal judiciary, apprehending Federal fugitives, managing and selling seized criminal assets, housing and transporting Federal prisoners, and, of course, operating the Witness Security Program. This past summer, we saw the husband and son of a Federal judge in New Jersey become the victims of murder after they were ambushed feet from the front door of their home. I look forward to exploring with our witnesses today ways we can help to keep our judges safe. As we discuss the BOP and the Marshals Service, we cannot forget the men and women around the country who put their lives on the line to keep us safe. I also want to tell Director Washington and Director Carvajal to please pass on our appreciation to your officers and employees. They have a tough job. Especially in the recent months, with all the violence around the country, they should know that they have our support. Finally, President Trump has been a leader in criminal justice reform through the Second Chance Act and his wise use of the Presidential pardon power. President Trump also been a champion for law enforcement around the country. This hearing would not be complete without discussing and appreciating the job the President has done leading in these important areas. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. Bass. Thank you. It is now my pleasure to introduce today's panel. Michael Carvajal is Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. He began his career with the Bureau of Prisons in 1992 as a correctional officer in Texas. The Attorney General appointed him as the Bureau's 11th Director on February 25, 2020. As Director, he oversees the operation of 122 Bureau of Prisons facilities, 6 regional officers, 2 staff training centers, 12 contract facilities, 22 residential re-entry management offices, with oversight and management of approximately 37,000 staff and 156,000 prisoners. The Honorable Donald Washington was confirmed by the Senate and sworn in as the 11th Director of the U.S. Marshals Service on March 29, 2019. He directs a force of more than 5,000 operational and administrative employees spanning 94 districts, 218 sub-offices, and 4 foreign field offices. He is a graduate the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and South Texas College of Law in Houston, Texas. We welcome our witnesses and thank them for participating in today's hearing. Please note that your written statement will be entered into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, I ask that you summarize your testimony in 5 minutes. To help you stay within that time, there is a timing light on your table. When the light switches from green to yellow, you will have 1 minute to conclude your testimony. When the light turns red, it signals that your 5 minutes have expired. Before proceeding with testimony, I hereby remind each witness that all your written and oral statements made to the Subcommittee in connection with this hearing are subject to penalties of perjury pursuant to 18 U.S.C., which may result in the imposition of a fine or imprisonment up to 5 years or both. Mr. Carvajal, please begin. TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL CARVAJAL Mr. Carvajal. Good morning, Chair Bass, Ranking Member Jordan, and Members of the subcommittee. It is my privilege to speak today on behalf of the Bureau of Prisons' over 37,000 corrections professionals who work day-in and day-out to support our critical law enforcement mission. I am committed to ensuring these dedicated men and women are guided by the values of respect, integrity, courage, and correctional excellence. The Bureau receives a great deal of scrutiny with respect to our mission, and much of this is based on misinformation or misunderstanding of what we do to keep America safe. I appreciate this opportunity to discuss what the Bureau does to maintain safety and security while providing inmates the programming they need to return to our communities and their families. I have spent the majority of my professional life in career service to this agency. After serving in the United States Army, I joined the Bureau as a correctional officer, moving up through the ranks as a captain, warden, regional director, assistant director, and now director. I care deeply about our work and the personal sacrifices that the Bureau's law enforcement officers make. The Bureau currently confines 154,000 inmates in our 122 Federal prisons nationwide as well as 11 private prisons and nearly 200 community-based facilities. Almost 80 percent of those inmates are serving terms for drugs, weapons, or sex offenses, with 41 percent of those being medium- and high- security offenders. The safe management of those offenders is challenging, but we continue to maintain low levels of serious assaults while ensuring that inmates engage in programs that address their re-entry needs. The FIRST STEP Act provided further incentives for inmates to participate in re-entry opportunities, and we successfully met the very aggressive implementation deadlines that it included. Essentially, the FIRST STEP Act required assessment of recidivism risk and programming needs for all inmates in our custody. After the Department of Justice developed and released their risk assessment tool, we immediately began scoring all inmates with the new tool. Effective January 22, all inmates in our custody were scored, to include new commitments, who were scored within 30 days of their arrival. As the COVID-19 pandemic has harshly impacted our country, it has also had a tremendous impact on the lives of our staff and the inmates. Under normal circumstances, life in prison is challenging, and even more so coupled with COVID-19. Our pandemic response has often been mischaracterized in public forums, which is unfortunate, since we have worked closely with the Centers for Disease Control to develop the best COVID-19 plan for correctional environments. We have welcomed external stakeholders into our facilities for audits and reviews as well as conducted unannounced inspections of the vast majority of our institutions to ensure COVID-19 procedural compliance. These internal reviews are ongoing. Early on, we developed quarantine and isolation procedures for inmates and mandated social distancing and use of face coverings. Our procedures have proven effective, as this is evidenced by the steep decline in our inmate hospitalizations, inmates on ventilators, and deaths. As test supplies became available, we put in place test-in/test-out procedures for internal inmate movement to minimize the spread of the virus. Since March, we have transferred more than 18,000 inmates at risk for COVID-19 to home confinement to help keep them safe. Many have asserted that the Bureau is spreading COVID-19 within our communities. However, contact tracing often revealed that the virus entered our prisons from the community. Although delayed, our institutions generally mirror the community transmission rates. Therefore, it is vital that we all work together, the Bureau and the public, to combat this threat. I am honored to speak on behalf of the Bureau staff nationwide who are working the front lines tirelessly to mitigate the spread of this virus as well as carrying on our very important mission. This is challenging, but it is vital to the safety and security of the public, our staff, and the inmates entrusted to our care. Chair Bass, Ranking Member Jordan, and Members of the subcommittee, this concludes my statement. [The statement of Mr. Carvajal follows:] STATEMENT OF OF MICHAEL CARVAJAL Good morning, Chairwoman Bass and Members of the Subcommittee. You have asked me to come before you today to discuss the Bureau of Prisons' (Bureau's) mission and operations. It is a privilege to speak today on behalf of the Bureau's over 37,000 staff--corrections professionals who support the agency's critical law enforcement mission. I am committed to ensuring that Bureau staff are guided by the values of respect, integrity, courage, and correctional excellence, and that we carry out our mission with the highest competencies as we serve our stakeholders: Inmates, the public, and not to be forgotten, the crime victims whose voices are often unheard. I was honored to be selected to lead the Bureau and to work alongside the finest corrections professionals in the world. I have spent 28 years in the Bureau, starting as a Correctional Officer, moving up through the ranks of Correctional Services to become a Warden, Regional Director, Assistant Director, and now Director. I was appointed to serve as the Bureau's eleventh Director on February 25, 2020, approximately four weeks before the Bureau's first inmate COVID-19 positive case. It is impossible to fully discuss the Bureau's current mission and operations without recognizing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the diligent work of the Bureau's professionals in response. In these past months, I have seen the Bureau's professionals work tirelessly and with dedication toward their mission to protect the health and safety of inmates, fellow staff, and the public. I am keenly aware of the personal sacrifices these law enforcement officers make in fulfilling our important public safety mission. The great work they do every day goes largely unseen by the general public. Yet this inherently dangerous work helps keep our communities safe. Our Mission--A History of Public Safety and Re-entry The Bureau confines over 154,000 inmates in 122 federal prisons, 11 private prisons, and nearly 200 community-based facilities nationwide. Incarceration is a valuable crime- reduction strategy and an important law enforcement tool that holds individuals responsible for their actions and deters others from committing similar crimes. But equally important, it provides a means for individuals to address their criminogenic risks (such as gang involvement and substance use). As the Subcommittee recognizes, it is imperative that we effectively reintegrate individuals back into the community following release from prison to reduce the likelihood of future criminal behavior and associated victimization. To that end, the mission of the Bureau is to confine offenders in prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost- efficient, and secure, and to assist inmates in becoming productive, law-abiding citizens when they return to our communities. The Bureau has had great success with respect to both parts of our mission: We have low rates of inmate on staff and inmate on inmate assaults, disturbances, and escapes, and our recidivism rate is lower than that found in most studies of State prisons using comparable definitions and methodologies.\1\ These results are a testament to the hard work of our dedicated professional staff who support public safety and promote re-entry. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ An estimated 68% of prisoners released from 30 State prisons were arrested within 3 years. Source: BJS, Office of Justice Programs ``2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9-Year Follow-up Period (2005- 2014)'' May 2019. The BOP's 2018 Second Chance Act study (of inmates released FY 2011-13) shows that approximately 45% were re-arrested or had their supervision revoked over a three-year period; see also U.S. Sentencing Commission, Recidivism Among Federal Offenders: A Comprehensive Overview, 16 (Mar. 2016), https://www.ussc.gov/sites/ default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2016/ recidivism_overview.pdf (finding that 33.7% of federal offenders recidivated within three years of release (Table 2)). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our Population During the first five decades of the Bureau's existence, the number and type of inmates we housed remained fairly stable. Beginning in the 1980s, however, federal law enforcement efforts and legislative changes led to a significant increase in the federal prison population; the Bureau's inmate population doubled in the 1980s and doubled again in the 1990s. Between 1980 and 2013, the population grew by approximately 800%, topping out at nearly 220,000. This increase was a significant challenge, and our staff responded accordingly and continued to serve the public by maintaining safety, security, and providing re-entry programming to our inmates. Over the past few years, the inmate population has decreased significantly, such that today our crowding and staffing levels are more manageable. Particularly in the wake of COVID-19, this recent decrease has given us important latitude to respond to the pandemic. Our Programs--Re-entry Begins on Day One Re-entry programing is a critical component of public safety; individuals are much less likely to return to a life of crime and victimization if they leave prison with an education, job training, treatment for mental illness and/or substance use when needed, and a general understanding of what it means to be a productive, law-abiding citizen. Inmates also need an opportunity to develop employable skills. It is imperative we work in conjunction with our criminal justice partners and community stakeholders to do everything possible to ensure the nearly 44,000 inmates who are released back into our communities each year do not reoffend. Inmate programs in federal prisons include work, occupational and vocational training, education (including literacy), substance abuse disorder treatment, psychological services and counseling, observance of faith and religion, and other programs that impart essential life skills. These programs are a critical part of the Bureau's mission to keep our communities safe by improving an inmate's mental health and/or providing employable skills and addressing critical criminogenic needs. The Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP), vocational and occupational training, education, and Federal Prison Industries (FPI) have been shown to reduce recidivism. In previous research studies, RDAP participants were 16 percent less likely to recidivate and 15 percent less likely to have a relapse in their substance use disorder within three years after release. Inmates who participate in vocational or occupational training were 33 percent less likely to recidivate, and inmates who participate in education programs were 16 percent less likely to recidivate Our Goal--Effective Transition to the Community The Bureau relies on Residential Re-entry Centers (RRCs; also known as halfway houses), and home confinement to assist inmates reintegrate into their communities prior to completing their prison terms. Typically, approximately 75% of inmates annually transfer to an RRC or home confinement prior to their release. RRCs provide inmates with a structured, supervised environment, and assistance in finding employment and housing; completing necessary programming (e.g., community-based treatment services); participating in counseling; and strengthening ties to family and friends. COVID-19 Pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic that is impacting our entire country, and indeed the world, has had a significant impact on our operations. The Bureau's response to and management of COVID has received a great deal of Congressional, media, and stakeholder interest and scrutiny. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss in person all that the Bureau has done, and continues to do, to reduce risks and mitigate the impacts of the pandemic, and to keep our staff, inmates, and communities safe. The Bureau has a sound pandemic plan in place and a well- established history of managing and responding to various types of communicable disease outbreaks. We used this pandemic plan as a springboard for our COVID response planning beginning in January, when our medical leadership began consulting with relevant experts, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the U.S. Public Health Service, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the Office of the Vice President. We leveraged and implemented guidance from these experts and used it to develop protocols for screening inmates and staff with potential COVID exposure risk factors. We have continued this strong collaboration throughout the pandemic and have invited the CDC and public health officials into our facilities to evaluate our work. They have praised our planning and implementation in the wake of a vexing virus. To be transparent about our plans, operations, and statistics, the Bureau has published one of the most detailed and thorough COVID pandemic resource areas in the Federal Government on our public website at www.bop.gov/coronavirus. As a further commitment to transparency, the Bureau updates the statistics on this site daily. Institution Operations On March 13, 2020, in response to an increasing number of people with COVID-19 positive infections in various communities, the Bureau implemented a decisive and comprehensive action plan to protect the health of the inmates in our custody, the staff, and the public, to the greatest extent possible, consistent with sound medical and corrections principles. This plan included significantly limiting movement in and out of our federal prisons. Almost all internal inmate-- or Bureau-controlled--movement was suspended. There was some very limited inmate movement that was required, including movements for forensic studies, writs, Interstate Agreements on Detainers, necessary medical and mental health treatment, and transfer to RRCs or home confinement. Some new admissions to the Bureau from the United States Marshals Service (USMS) continued, as legally required. While we received criticism for that limited but continued movement, it is critical to note that the criminal justice system has not stopped processing criminal cases during the pandemic. Individuals in the community continue to commit crimes, arrests continue to be made, federal courts continue to adjudicate and sentence offenders, and thus detainees and sentenced inmates continue to enter our system. We are obligated to take these individuals from the courts and cannot control who the courts place into our system. Working closely with the Department of Justice (Department) and the USMS, we attempted to slow the entrance of some of these new admissions until additional testing capability was acquired. With the March 13, 2020 guidance, we implemented social distancing procedures, to the greatest extent appropriate within the prison environment. As is widely noted, prisons are not designed for social distancing. Nonetheless, we modified our operations to the extent we could minimize co-mingling and group gatherings. We suspended social visiting, tours, and the admission of volunteers to decrease the flow of individuals from the community into the prison, particularly at the height of the pandemic. Understanding the importance of visitation to the inmate population, we significantly increased telephone minutes for the inmates from 300 to 500 minutes on March 13, 2020, and later, on April 8, 2020, in accordance with the CARES Act, we made telephone calls free for the inmate population. We also made video-visiting, also available at our female facilities, free of charge. The impact of this program has been great--telephone minutes use increased by nearly 50% the next day. This program is expected to continue over the course of the Presidentially-declared emergency. On March 26, 2020, over eight months ago and early in the pandemic, we implemented enhanced daily monitoring, to include the cessation of movement for any inmate who screened positive for COVID-19, and established quarantine and medical isolation procedures for inmates. On March 31, 2020, enhanced modified operations were introduced to further limit movement within the institution such as eating meals in their rooms or cells, or in small groups within housing units, and limiting programmatic offerings to individualized or small group activities. Despite movement limitations, all critical services have continued, and Chaplains and Psychologists visit inmates in their housing areas when inmates cannot leave that space. In early April, to maintain the safety of inmates leaving our facilities and the public, we instituted requirements for all inmates releasing from the Bureau or transferring to a Residential Re-entry Center (RRC) or Home Confinement to be placed on 14-day quarantine prior to their anticipated release or transfer. The Bureau recognized early on that COVID testing for the inmate population was critical, but as was the case for the country as a whole, testing supplies were initially very limited. Working closely with the Department, the Bureau was able to obtain testing resources for all our prisons and established a national contract with outside laboratories for COVID testing. With that availability, we have instituted a test-in/test-out and 14-day quarantine protocol for any necessary inmate movement. Further, regardless of our diligent COVID-19 planning and protocol, emergencies have and will continue to arise that require us to adapt changes to our procedures. For example, in the midst of the diligent work Bureau staff were undertaking nationwide to counter the pandemic, on April 13, 2020, Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) Estill, South Carolina, was struck by a tornado causing extensive damage to both the medium- and minimum-security institutions. Over the ensuing four days, we were able to move 842 inmates safely and securely, relocating them to a prison in Pennsylvania that had available capacity. Subsequently, three facilities sustained significant damage from Hurricane Laura. The Bureau has plans in place to deal with situations such as these, and despite the complexities that the COVID-19 pandemic adds to the implementation of those plans, these experiences reflect just how well-trained and prepared our staff and leadership are to handle whatever the next challenge may be. Home Confinement As the pandemic grew more widespread, the Bureau began aggressively screening the inmate population for inmates who were appropriate for transfer to an RRC or Home Confinement for service of the remainder of their sentences. Additionally, the Bureau authorized the use of inmate furloughs to move qualified offenders out of the facilities, to reduce populations, and to increase ability for inmates to socially distance. On March 26, 2020 and April 3, 2020, Attorney General Barr issued memoranda to the Bureau directing us to maximize the use of Home Confinement for vulnerable inmates, particularly at institutions that were markedly affected by COVID-19. The CARES Act, signed into law on March 27, 2020, further expanded our ability to place inmates on Home Confinement by lifting the statutory limitations contained in title 18 USC 3624(c)(2) during the course of the pandemic. I am pleased to report that since March 26, 2020, BOP has transferred 18,112 inmates to Home Confinement, and there are an additional 175 who are scheduled to transfer to Home Confinement in the coming weeks. These assessments remain ongoing and will continue for the duration of the pandemic. It should go without saying that, while we are always dedicated to the protection of our inmates' health and safety, public safety must also be considered when evaluating community placements, and, as the Attorney General's guidance emphasized, it is not appropriate for inmates who present a risk to the public, because of their criminal acts or other factors, to be transferred to home confinement. Nor can we transfer inmates, who do not have safe housing for themselves or housing with appropriate safeguards, to home confinement. As home confinement is still, after all, a form of incarceration for persons convicted of crimes who are still serving a federal sentence, these public safety factors must be considered, and these decisions are made using sound correctional judgement and our many years of experience overseeing such transfers. First Step Act Despite the challenges COVID brings, the Bureau continues to provide robust and effective programming, and it is diligently implementing the First Step Act (FSA). Assessment of Inmates' Risk to Recidivate As of January 15, 2020, which is the FSA statutory deadline, all sentenced inmates had received individual risk scores and identified need areas. Also in January, the approved catalog of more than 70 Evidence-based Recidivism Reducing Programs (EBRR) and Productive Activities (PA) was published on our public website. These EBRRs and PAs are recommended to inmates, to address their specific needs. When an inmate successfully completes a recommended program in an identified need area, he or she may be able to earn FSA time credit or other incentives. FSA Programming The Bureau has a variety of programs, the most robust of which are Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) interventions for mental health and substance use disorders, anger management, and criminal thinking elimination. Literacy and occupational training programs are also widely available, and re-entry- focused programs, such as parenting, are offered at all sites. Because the agency has such a large menu of programs covering all need areas, the Bureau has put forth considerable effort to ensure adequate capacity in our existing programs and has been able to give access to more inmates by hiring staff into the positions authorized by Congress under FSA. We have also worked toward program fidelity, standardizing service delivery so that every program comports with the evidence that supports its use. We identified gaps in services for women and were able to enhance our offerings. We also recently contracted for women's college programming. Although we have many strong programs, external vendors or program developers may submit established programs for initial review by an independent research organization engaged by the Bureau; this review analyzes and determines if the program satisfies the requirements of the FSA, and that determination is later reviewed by the Bureau. We also develop programs internally. As one of the largest employers of doctoral level psychologists--as well as an employer of chaplains, teachers, and medical professionals--the agency is well- suited to identify gaps in programming and create services grounded in evidence that fit federal population parameters. Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) The Bureau's MAT program was established in 2018 and expanded as a result of the FSA. By May 2019, the Bureau was screening all inmates nearing transfer to community placement for MAT, in an effort to treat addiction and reduce the risk of overdose deaths among releasing offenders. Treatment options for newly-committed inmates, who entered Bureau custody with existing MAT treatment plans, were expanded to include all three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medications for MAT, using a combination of community providers and appropriately trained Bureau providers. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), provides the regulation and oversight of substance use disorder treatment. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and SAMHSA work together to provide the licensing and accreditation of Opioid Treatment Programs. The Bureau currently has one opioid treatment program at MCC New York and is working with the DEA and SAMSHA to stand up three more at Federal Medical Center (FMC) Butner, North Carolina; FMC Springfield, Illinois; and FMC Carswell, Texas. These will enable the Bureau to internalize even more MAT services and expand our ability to treat all inmates in our custody who demonstrate a clinical need for MAT. The Bureau continues to work towards establishing an internal infrastructure for all MAT-related services and medications, with primary focus on consulting with external subject matter experts, training staff in all divisions, implementing clinical guidance for treatment standardization, and monitoring/tracking/reporting MAT utilization. FSA Second Chance Act Provisions The FSA also contains enhancements to the Second Chance Reauthorization Act of 2018, which, among other changes, reauthorized and modified a pilot program that allows the Bureau to place certain elderly and terminally ill inmates on home confinement, to serve the remainder of their sentences. The program was fully implemented in April 2019. To-date, approximately 534 inmates have been placed into home confinement pursuant to this five-year pilot program. FSA Criminal Justice Provisions The FSA includes a series of other criminal justice-related provisions. These provisions include a statutory prohibition on the use of restraints on pregnant inmates; a change to the way good conduct time credit is calculated (directing that inmates earn 54 days of good time credit for each year of imposed sentence, rather than for each year of time served); a requirement for the Bureau to provide a way for employees to safely store firearms on Bureau grounds; a requirement for the Bureau to try to place inmates within 500 driving miles of their primary residences; a prohibition against the use of solitary confinement for juvenile delinquents in federal custody; and an expanded requirement that the Bureau aid inmates with obtaining identification before they are released. In each of these areas, the Bureau either was already in compliance with the mandate when the FSA was enacted or has since updated its policy or procedures to come into compliance with the new provisions. Conclusion I am honored to speak on behalf of the Bureau, its staff in our 122 institutions, and our administrative offices nationwide. Our mission is extremely challenging, but critical to the safety and security of the public, our staff, and the inmates we house. I thank the staff who, like first responders everywhere, are working long hours to prevent or mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in our facilities. The Bureau can be proud of this hard work, but we understand there is still more to do. Chairwoman Bass and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my formal statement. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Mr. Washington? TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DONALD W. WASHINGTON Mr. Washington. Good morning, Chair Bass, Ranking Member Jordan, distinguished Members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the United States Marshals Service. As my statement for the record reflects, the Marshals Service has an array of critical law enforcement missions, all of which we have continued to accomplish despite the challenges presented this year. My complete statement is available to you all, so I just want to briefly highlight two current areas of operation that reflect our diversity and importance as a law enforcement entity. First, not many people realize that, in addition to our core missions of apprehending fugitives, transporting, and housing prisoners, protecting the judicial process, and running the Federal Witness Security program, we are also responsible for the Strategic National Stockpile security operations program. Enhanced after 9/11, the national stockpile fills an important need to have pharmaceuticals and other medical materials available for quick dissemination to the American people in times of national need, such as a manmade or natural disaster or a pandemic. The Marshals provide a variety of security controls for the stockpile, including storage and transportation of medical materials. I am very pleased to report that our deputies are already working hand-in-hand with Operation Warp Speed to provide security for COVID-19 vaccines from the facilities where they are manufactured to distribution sites. We have teams of highly trained Marshals Service deputies who are executing this mission, and this demonstrates yet another way this agency provides for the safety and security of our Nation's citizens. The second area I want to highlight relates to critically missing children. While we are recognized as the preeminent agency for locating and apprehending fugitives, we have found an equally important application for our people-finding skills. In 2015, Members of this Subcommittee gave the Marshals Service an added statutory authority as part of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act. This authority enhanced our ability to use our resources to assist Federal, State, and local law enforcement entities with the recovery of missing, endangered, and abducted children. Previously, we could only help find critically missing children when there was a connection to a fugitive or a sex offender investigation. Under this new authority, we established a Missing Child Unit in 2016, and, ever since, we have been partnering with our Federal, State, and local authorities to recover missing children, many of whom are older runaways who are at a very high risk of child sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual abuse, and physical abuse. Since August alone, this agency's Missing Child Unit has conducted six operations in districts around the country aimed at locating and recovering local missing children. The results speak for themselves. In these 6 operations, we recovered or located 181 children, 22 of which were known victims of sex trafficking. Now, beneath those numbers are real people. A few weeks ago, the foster parents of a child we recovered in New Orleans sent me this email. It reads: ``Dear Director Washington, thank you for saving our foster son. When 13-year-old Malik was abducted in New Orleans in mid-October, we were put in touch with your Missing Children Unit team here. Their coordinated efforts, calm energy, vigilant search tactics, and quick communication provided both relief and results. They stayed in touch with us at every turn, giving us hope when we had little. We cannot thank you enough for the great work your team down here does. If we can impress upon you anything, it is that this program should continue to be funded and provided resources. Without these efforts, we fear where our son may be today. Thank you again for the commitment you have instilled in your NOLA team. We are forever grateful. Best, Chelsea and Eric Nelson.'' Committee Members, these two mission areas I have highlighted demonstrates this agency's diverse missions and commitment to public safety. I thank you for the opportunity to be here today, and I look forward to answering your questions or any questions that you might have. Thank you. [The statement of Mr. Washington follows:] STATEMENT OF HONORABLE DONALD W. WASHINGTON Good morning Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Sensenbrenner, and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. I am honored to appear before you today to discuss the missions of the United States Marshals Service (USMS). I would like to start by thanking you for your strong support of the USMS and providing us the resources that allow us to reduce violent crime and protect, defend, and enforce the American justice system. Overview In 2019, the USMS celebrated its 230th anniversary. For over two centuries, the USMS has held a unique role in the American judicial system. Since 1789, when George Washington appointed the first 13 Marshals, we serve as the enforcement arm of the federal courts and are involved in virtually every federal law enforcement initiative. From the Nation's inception, through our 19th century westward expansion, our role in the iconic 20th century civil rights struggles, and into the present, USMS has proudly contributed to the Rule of law. Even for an organization as storied as ours, 2020 has been a year with unique challenges. Like every American institution, the USMS has adjusted to the realities imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying economic disruption, while still conducting our critical law enforcement missions. As a federal law enforcement organization, we have a keen interest in the policing issues raised by the death of George Floyd and other highly publicized cases this summer. The USMS has been affected by the violent unrest in some American cities that put the federal judiciary directly at risk. Finally, on July 19, a deranged gunman attacked the family of federal judge Esther Salas at her home, killing her 20-year-old son and severely injuring her husband. This tragic incident brings to the forefront our sacred duty to protect the federal judiciary from threats to the Rule of law and raises important issues about the availability of technology that criminals and disturbed individuals use to target protected individuals like judges. Despite these challenges, the USMS continues to accomplish our varied and critical missions. I am proud of the way our workforce of approximately 5,500 Marshals, Deputy Marshals, and administrative employees has risen to meet this year's adversity. Courthouse operations have been reconfigured because of COVID-19, often under short deadlines. Enforcement operations are precisely focused on arresting the most violent criminals who need to be off the streets in order to make our communities safer, pandemic or not. We have reconfigured our prisoner operations to ensure the safety of the prisoners, our staff, and the court family. Deputies have been shifted from one part of the country to another to help defend federal property. Many of our employees are teleworking from home, juggling work, family, and their own concerns about safety. Others are out on the streets of our nation, risking themselves and their health in order to find and apprehend violent fugitives, wherever they may be. I am incredibly proud of our workforce and hope you are as well. A recent example of our dedication is Operation Not Forgotten, where our Missing Child Unit worked with numerous other agencies to locate 26 missing and endangered children in Georgia and arrested nine criminals in the process. Using our renowned skills to locate wanted fugitives, we used relatively new authorities granted to us by Congress in 2015 to find these children, who were considered to be some of the most at-risk and challenging recovery cases in the area, based on indications of high-risk factors such as victimization of child sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual abuse, physical abuse, and medical or mental health conditions. One child was recovered in the company of a convicted child molester, who was promptly arrested and is now incarcerated. Without the continued support of this committee, successes like these would not be possible. As the Director of the USMS, my priorities are to ensure the safety of USMS employees and protectees; reduce violent crime; and increase the professional development of our workforce. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 President's budget request supports a robust addition to our workforce, specifically 363 positions, including 280 deputies, which are all carefully justified. The number one concern I hear from deputies, from the judiciary, and from the various Marshals and leaders who report to me is that we do not have enough people to execute the missions that we have been assigned. With your support, funding of these positions will improve the USMS's capabilities to meet our mission responsibilities in the years to come. I appreciate the chance to speak with you today about the many missions of the USMS, which include protecting the federal judiciary, apprehending fugitives, housing and transporting federal prisoners, managing and selling seized assets acquired by criminals through illegal activities, operating the Witness Security Program, and ensuring that convicted sex offenders are complying with their obligations. Many of our missions are accomplished working side by side with other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, a force multiplier that we believe is a hallmark of effective federal law enforcement. COVID-19 From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the USMS has taken proactive measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 amongst prisoners in its custody and began monitoring its detention population for COVID-19, formulating COVID-19 related guidance, and providing COVID-19 related resources addressing the USMS's prisoner detention mission. The USMS does not own or operate any detention facilities. While some USMS detainees are housed in Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and private detention facilities, the majority of those in USMS custody are housed in facilities operated by State or local government facilities where we have an established intergovernmental agreement to house federal prisoners. All decisions concerning infectious disease treatment, including decisions to isolate and quarantine prisoners, are made by medical and correctional staff working at each facility. Nevertheless, we have worked from the beginning of the pandemic to minimize the risk of COVID-19 to prisoners and staff, and have adjusted our processes from the beginning of the pandemic to account for our growing understanding of the disease and its transmission. For example, we have authorized COVID-19 testing at any facility where the USMS houses prisoners; and we are now testing many prisoners who are leaving our custody before they move to the BOP to serve their sentences. We also have widely distributed personal protective equipment (PPE) to our operational workforce who are arresting and interacting with prisoners, and we also provide PPE to prisoners in our custody upon their arrest. The USMS currently houses prisoners in nearly 800 facilities located throughout the country, which reflects our legal requirements to house prisoners in proximity to their legal proceedings. Depending upon the needs of each judicial district, we might use some facilities to house just a few prisoners while others routinely house more than 1,000. In more than two-thirds of the facilities with USMS prisoners, we house fewer than 50 prisoners, representing a fraction of their total population. Judicial Security Protecting federal judicial officials, which include judges, attorneys, and jurors, is a primary mission for USMS. Each year, Deputy U.S. Marshals investigate thousands of communications that are vetted into hundreds of significant threats against judges, prosecutors, and other Members of the court family. Our investigations have been complicated by the exponential growth of social media communications in recent years, and we see an increasing need to monitor public social media so that we have a better chance of detecting disturbed people who may be contemplating crimes against protected officials. Senior inspectors and deputies, as well as contract court security officers, provide security and screen visitors at more than 700 judicial facilities across the country. Because of COVID-19, we have instituted safety precautions in courthouses across the nation, including masking requirements, use of video conferencing for some judicial appearances, and increased screenings and protections for in-person prisoner appearances. In addition to providing security to judicial proceedings, Deputy U.S. Marshals also provide protective security details for certain governmental officials when required. The USMS also oversees the security aspect of courthouse construction projects, from design to completion. These protective measures, although not always visible to the general public, are critical to ensuring the security and stability of our federal judicial system. Fugitive Operations The USMS is the Federal Government's primary agency for fugitive investigations and apprehensions. Deputy U.S. Marshals arrest or clear more than 30,000 federal fugitives each year, and Marshals-led fugitive task forces, made up of federal, state, and local law enforcement partner agencies, arrest or clear more than 70,000 State and local fugitives every year. Many of these fugitives are the ``worst of the worst'': Violent repeat offenders whose capture immediately makes local communities safer. The USMS leads 56 district fugitive task forces and operates eight regional fugitive task forces dedicated to locating and arresting wanted felons. We are the primary agency tasked with arresting foreign criminal fugitives believed to be hiding in the U.S., as well as working with law enforcement partners and governments worldwide to track, arrest, and extradite fugitives hiding in foreign countries. This year we began piloting the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in some of our fugitive apprehension operations, marking a carefully implemented, years-long development effort consistent with DOJ policy. We are excited about the ability of UAS to provide cost effective overwatch capabilities to our fugitive task forces that reduce risks to law enforcement personnel. The USMS is the lead federal law enforcement agency responsible for investigating sex offender registration violations. Following passage of the Adam Walsh Act in 2006, the Marshals Service has partnered with law enforcement personnel from thousands of State and local agencies to coordinate and conduct sex offender compliance/enforcement operations throughout the country. In FY 2020, USMS conducted 2,759 non-compliant sex offender investigations and assisted with 52,738 compliance checks of known registered sex offenders. Prisoner Operations The USMS is responsible for the custody of more than 200,000 federal detainees each year, beginning at the time of arrest by a federal agency (or remand by a judge) until acquittal, commitment to a designated Federal BOP institution, or otherwise ordered release from our custody. The USMS ensures the safe, secure, and humane care of prisoners in its custody. We currently provide housing, medical care, and transportation for an average daily population of about 63,000 federal prisoners located throughout the United States and its territories and escort prisoners to and from their court appearances. Our prisoner operations have been significantly affected by the sudden COVID-19 pandemic this year. Many court appearances have been substantially curtailed in certain parts of the country, depending on the severity of the disease outbreak there. The USMS does not own or operate detention facilities but partners with State and local governments to house approximately 70 percent of our prisoners. Additionally, the agency houses approximately 16 percent of its prisoner population in private detention facilities under direct contract and approximately 14 percent in Federal BOP facilities. In regular times, the detention of federal prisoners presents diverse and complex challenges, including: (1) Locating detention space near federal courthouses; (2) coordinating with federal, state, and local authorities regarding the execution of writs, court orders, and the transfer of prisoners; (3) separating multiple co-defendant prisoners from each other to ensure their safety and security and the effective operation of the judicial system; and (4) managing prisoners with contagious diseases and chronic illnesses. These factors have all been complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Jails and detention facilities are a particularly challenging environment for communicable diseases like COVID-19, and we have been taking appropriate and prudent measures to protect prisoners, staff, and the community while executing the lawful orders set by the federal judiciary. USMS is actively mitigating the COVID-19 threat for all new detainees. After arrest, all new intakes are screened for COVID-19 symptoms at the sally port prior to entering the courthouse facility. Prisoners are also screened when leaving the facility. Screening includes verbal COVID-19 screening questions, as well as temperature checks. Detainees are given facemasks upon arrest and must wear masks within the courthouse and during transportation. Inmate restraints are cleaned between uses. We are following guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on handling prisoners; this guidance has changed several times since the outbreak, and we will continue to evolve our prisoner operations as CDC guidance changes. We also have surveyed the approximately 800 State and local facilities actively housing USMS prisoners to determine if they are following CDC guidelines for managing COVID-19 in correctional and detention facilities. We observed that the vast majority are following most of CDC's guidelines. Prisoner Transportation The USMS Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System (JPATS) transports prisoners between judicial districts and correctional institutions in the U.S., including Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. During normal times, JPATS handles more than 1,000 movements per business day on average, or about a quarter million movements a year. Since the arrival of COVID- 19, prisoner movements have been sharply reduced as a safety measure. Between March 2020 and July 2020, there has been a 70 percent decrease in JPATS movements when compared to the same timeframe last year. JPATS uses all CDC recommended protocols including full personal protective equipment (PPE) for crews and face coverings for prisoners. JPATS has also implemented increased equipment and aircraft cleaning as well as crew/ prisoner social distancing on flights. Asset Forfeiture The Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program is a key component of the Federal Government's law enforcement efforts to combat major criminal activity by disrupting and dismantling illegal enterprises, depriving criminals of the proceeds of illegal activity, deterring crime, and restoring property to victims. The USMS plays a critical role in identifying and evaluating assets that represent the proceeds of crime as well as efficiently managing and selling assets seized and forfeited by DOJ. Proceeds generated from asset sales are used to operate the program, compensate victims, and support various law enforcement and community initiatives. We manage a wide array of assets, including real estate, commercial businesses, cash, financial instruments, vehicles, jewelry, art, antiques, collectibles, vessels, and aircraft. Witness Security The USMS operates the federal Witness Security Program (WITSEC), which is sometimes referred to colloquially as the ``Witness Protection Program.'' WITSEC provides for the security, safety, and health of government witnesses and their authorized family Members, whose lives are in danger as a result of their cooperation with the U.S. government. The program has successfully protected an estimated 19,000 participants--including innocent victim-witnesses and cooperating defendants and their dependent family Members--from intimidation and retribution since it began in 1971. No participant following program guidelines has ever been harmed while under the active protection of the USMS. The program is a vital and effective tool in the U.S. government's battles against organized crime, drug trafficking, terrorism, and other major criminal enterprises. WITSEC personnel are the leading authorities and foremost experts on witness security matters, providing guidance and training to many government officials throughout the world. Tactical Operations The USMS performs tactical operations for sensitive missions involving homeland security, national emergencies, and domestic crises. The Special Operations Group (SOG) is a rapidly-deployable, highly-trained force of tactically-trained deputies whose Members are deployed in high-risk and sensitive law-enforcement situations, national emergencies, civil disorders, and natural disasters. SOG is comprised of 80-100 volunteer Deputy U.S. Marshals who complete rigorous training in specialties such as high-risk entry, explosive breaching, weapons employment, rural operations, evasive driving, less- than-lethal weapons, waterborne operations, and tactical medical support. SOG deploys specialized people and equipment in support of domestic operations such as 15 Most Wanted investigations, fugitive task force support, and high-threat judicial proceedings such as terrorist and drug kingpin trials. Officer Safety The USMS's fugitive apprehension mission is among the most dangerous in federal law enforcement, and officer safety is our top priority. Born of hard lessons learned, we developed Officer Safety Training that includes a 40-hour High Risk Fugitive Apprehension Course, which focuses on the real dangers of the fugitive mission. This course focuses on topics including: Deputy Trauma Medicine, Use of Force, Building Entries, Firearms Training, Vehicle Stops, and Leadership. We also ensure that all personnel receive officer safety training on a continuous basis, including a program to ensure every district has a highly trained Tactical Training Officer able to provide officer safety training on a continuous basis. Finally, we developed a program in recent years for the cyclical replacement of body armor, which ensures that all body armor is replaced on a 5 year cycle to take advantage of advances in protective technologies. Conclusion Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Sensenbrenner, and Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of the United States Marshals Service, thank you for your ongoing support of the Agency's programs. I am committed to ensuring that we are efficient stewards of the resources you have entrusted to us. I look forward to working with you to ensure we meet our obligations to the Department of Justice, the federal judiciary, and the American people. Ms. Bass. Again, let me thank both witnesses for being here today and for your service. I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter two documents into the record, one from The Sentencing Project and the other one from the American Federation of Government Employees. [The information follows:] KAREN BASS FOR THE RECORD ======================================================================= [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Ms. Bass. Thank you. We will now proceed under the 5-minute Rule with questions, and I will begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes. The Justice Department's inspector general has reported that the Federal Correctional Complex in Oakdale, Louisiana, failed to isolate or quarantine prisoners who were exposed or who tested positive to COVID-19. The report found that some inmates who had tested positive were left in their housing units for up to 6 days without being isolated. In the BOP's COVID-19 Pandemic Response Plan, the BOP requires that a person who tests positive for COVID-19 be immediately placed under medical isolation. So, I would like to ask Mr. Carvajal, what is your response to this? Why are COVID-positive prisoners not immediately isolated from the general population in all Federal facilities? Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Chair Bass. They are. We do have procedures. They are good procedures when they are followed. In a nutshell, we had some leadership issues there. We sent an outside team in. Attorney General Barr actually sent a couple of his staff over. We sent a review team. Our regional director had some concerns about the procedures not being enforced or followed. In essence, without getting into details, I removed the leadership. The warden was removed from his position. Ms. Bass. Okay. Good. I appreciate that. So, in your facilities, are inmates and staff provided with masks, gloves, and the ability to practice good hygiene? Mr. Carvajal. Chair Bass, that is absolutely correct; they are. We do have the same challenge that everyone else, I believe, in the country, in the world does, is that people have a personal accountability here also. We must enforce the rules, but people have to make a conscious effort to follow the rules and procedures. They are in place for a reason, and we have been in lockstep with CDC guidance from day one. It is well-published. There are links. I have done informational messages. We have COVID review compliance teams, unannounced. Prior to me being the Director, an announced visit in a Federal correctional institution was unheard of. We have reviewed almost 100 percent of our facilities. That doesn't include outside stakeholders coming in. So, it is a matter of enforcement, and it is a matter of people following the rules, both inmates and staff. Ms. Bass. Okay. I want to ask you about staff being provided access to testing. I mentioned my visit to Terminal Island, and I did appreciate they were very open. They did not raise the issue, but I am. So, it made no sense at all to me--it was wonderful that the inmates were tested and tested regularly. The inmates are there. The staff come and go every day and the staff had no access to testing. So, has this been remedied in not just that facility but throughout? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, it has, Chair Bass. I do recall your visit over there. I don't remember the particular date or the time. I will tell you that, early on, as with the rest of the world and the country, testing resources were unavailable. Ms. Bass. Right. Mr. Carvajal. They were hard to get-- [Audio interruption.] Ms. Bass. --is not picking up your voice. There you go. Mr. Carvajal. Yes, ma'am. It was on. Ms. Bass. Great. Mr. Carvajal. Okay. Testing resources, as they have become available, we have gained access to them. If I remember correctly, in California, we partnered with the local community public health care, we partnered with other entities. The union has helped us at times gain resources. Bow I am happy to say that we have a contract, a high-volume testing contract. I would also like to mention, Chair Bass, that we can offer the testing, and in many places, we have offered availability to 100-percent testing, people don't want to take it. We can't make them-- Ms. Bass. ``People'' meaning who? Mr. Carvajal. ``People'' as in staff. It is voluntary. Ms. Bass. They don't want to take it? Mr. Carvajal. It is voluntary. I will give you an example. At Forrest City, we-- Ms. Bass. Actually, I am going to run out of time, so thank you. Mr. Carvajal. Yes, ma'am. Let me ask Mr. Washington: We have heard accounts of people in Marshals' custody being moved across State and county lines and placed into local jails with no information on their transfer paperwork about whether they have been tested for COVID or not. Could you respond to that? Mr. Washington. Yeah, Chair Bass, I have not heard that particular complaint. I can say that the good men and women of the United States Marshals Service are very interested in making sure that our inmates are healthy and safe and that-- Ms. Bass. Are they tested before they are transferred, and are the people, the staff? Mr. Washington. Yes. We are testing in--for example, all our inmates that go off to the BOP facilities are being tested, or at least a large portion of them are. We have authorized funding for all State institutions in which our prisoners are housed. Ms. Bass. Are you aware of the breakouts that have taken place from prisoners being transferred? Now, I don't know, maybe you have rectified it, but-- Mr. Washington. Yes, ma'am. I have, of course, seen the media reports and things of that sort. We also know when there is an issue inside of a particular-- Ms. Bass. Are the media reports accurate? Mr. Washington. Generally, so-so. Ms. Bass. Okay. Thank you. My time has expired. Representative Chabot? Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding this hearing today. I want to thank Director Washington and Director Carvajal for appearing this morning. Thank you both for your service to our country and to your respective agencies. This year has been particularly difficult for everyone, everywhere, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We have all had to stay home, socially distance, and otherwise-- Ms. Bass. Oh. Steve, your mike. Mr. Chabot. Sorry. Otherwise follow CDC guidelines to help reduce the spread of this deadly virus. Similarly, you have had three challenges. You are tasked to protect both your staff and the spreading populations that you serve and make sure that they don't contract, both your employees as well as the inmates, this deadly virus. Now, in the Ranking Member's opening statement, Mr. Jordan mentioned that Democratic leadership in this Committee sent a letter to the Attorney General, Mr. Barr--I am sure that you were aware of this--urging you to use every tool at your disposal to release as many prisoners as possible. Now, that would be completely irresponsible, as I think most people would agree, and would put the public directly at risk. Now, Director, how do you take into consideration the seriousness of the inmate's crime, for example, and the risk of recidivism before sending someone into home confinement, for example? What do you look at when you are making those types of determinations? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, there are several criteria. The ones in particular that would refer to what you are talking about, the seriousness of crime, is there are four criteria that were listed that we follow that we don't deviate from: The primary offense cannot be a violence, a sex offense, terrorism, or they can't have a detainer. There are numerous other criteria--I can certainly list them if you would like--that are somewhat discretionary. We absolutely take into consideration public safety. In fact, the Attorney General's guidance to me in two separate memoranda stated that, to maximize the use of this authority but that we absolutely have a responsibility not to release and overburden the community. So, we take into consideration public health and public safety. I assure you that anyone that is eligible under that criteria have been reviewed and, if appropriate, transferred to community custody, just as we were directed. Mr. Chabot. Thank you. What tools does the Bureau use to monitor inmates after they are released into home confinement? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, under normal circumstances, I think everyone needs to understand that home confinement, in and of itself, is a transitional program. It is set up for inmates at the end of their sentence, 6 months, or 10 percent of their sentence, to transition into the community. The CARES Act has us looking at inmates who otherwise may not even meet that criteria. So, you are talking about long- term placement in the community. We didn't have the resources; we expanded it. Ninty-four percent of the inmates on home confinement are monitored through contracts. Everybody needs to understand that those contract staff that monitor these inmates, they use GPS, electronic monitoring, things like that. These are not law enforcement personnel. We don't have the staff to monitor them. We contract out. Ninty-four percent of them are monitored by contract staff. We do contracts, but they are not law enforcement. They simply keep track of and check on these people. The other 6 percent are monitored by the United States Probation Office and the Federal Location Monitoring. Mr. Chabot. Thank you. Finally, I have about a minute left, so let me touch on something else. I have been a longtime supporter and advocate for prison industries. When we have these folks confined for a period of time, the vast majority of them are going to get out at some point. We would prefer the lowest recidivism as possible. We don't want them to go out and commit more crimes. We know many will, unfortunately, but those that have been involved in getting a skill or something they can put to work in the private sector at some point probably have a better chance of not going out and committing more crime. So how has COVID and the restrictions impacted the prison industries program? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, it absolutely has impacted prison industries. We know that 24 percent less likely to recidivate if they worked in prison industries, 14 percent more likely to have a job when they get out if they worked in Federal prison industries. It is actually our number-one evidence-based recidivism-reducing program. It has been impacted, like all other organizations. We are down about 2,000 workers. We generally employ about 10,000 inmates in Federal prison industries. There is always a waiting list. We are done to about 8,000. UNICOR was projected to have $27 million earnings last year, because our factories were doing well under the FIRST STEP Act. We closed the year with a $3 million deficit. So, we have to get that back on track so that we continue to give people the opportunity to get those jobs out there. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Mr. Chabot. Thank you. Ms. Bass. Thank you very much. Representative Jackson Lee? Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you for yielding. Good morning. Thank you to the Director for your service to the country, and to the head of the U.S. Marshals as well. My time is very short. I will try to shorten my questions. I will go directly to you, U.S. Marshals. The chairwoman asked a question that I would like to follow up, and that is that those that you are able to secure--and let me also acknowledge your work with finding children and congratulate your men and women in that service--come from many different facilities. There has never been a question of--or a source of information about the COVID-19 protocols or the status of these individuals coming from facilities that do not follow the Bureau of Prisons protocol in testing. Do you have the data of all the people you have in custody and whether or not they have been tested whether or not their facilities are following COVID-19 facility protocols, and also whether or not you have had any to die from COVID-19 in your custody? If you could just quickly answer those questions, I need to move to the Director, please. Mr. Washington. Thank you, Congresswoman Jackson Lee. Yes, we have some data. The difficulty we have, of course, is that we have some 800 facilities, because, as Chair Bass indicated, of the 2 million prisoners in the United States, we have 63,000 spread out over 800 facilities. So, it has been somewhat of a difficult exercise to make sure that we have consistent, accurate data. The data that we have been able to accumulate is not uniformly reported, and it is not reported at the same time. We do have some data, in terms of the numbers that have tested positive and deaths and those that are on ventilators and in hospitals and things of that sort. Ms. Jackson Lee. So, let me make this request. I think it has been made by Members of Congress before, House and Senate. My official request is that you find the capacity for collecting that data and submitting it to this committee, particularly--as much as you can garner--particularly those hospitalized and any that have died. Whatever authority you have to the facilities--because we pay those facilities--to send notice to them that you want them to provide testing protocols or others, to those that you have--that are under your Federal custody, meaning that you are getting from them. I would like to hopefully have you look into that, please, Mr. Washington, and see how much data you can provide us with. Mr. Washington. I will look into it, Representative. Ms. Jackson Lee. Those individuals may go back into society--family Members, et cetera. That is what we are trying to stop, is that extensive community spread. Thank you very much for your service. Mr. Washington. Thank you. Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me ask--Director, thank you again. As you well know, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on October 27 regarding the handling of COVID-19 at the Federal facility at Butner, North Carolina. The complaint alleges that BOP has not reconfigured housing units to allow for social distancing. During a hearing, Director, in the Senate Judiciary Committee, you committed to new efforts by the Bureau to create alternate living. Let me ask you, what progress you have made in dealing with social distancing? Let me also ask you, whether or not you have continued the waiver of the copayment for incarcerated persons that makes it very difficult for them? Then my other question is to raise the question of why we are allowing the mindset for individuals who are on the front lines to deny or reject testing. That means--I know there are unions inside. I want to respect--and I am not sure whether they are representing individuals. I would like to question them. I am a strong supporter of their work ethic. I don't think you can come here and say to us that they don't want to get tested. I am going to be asking people to get vaccinated, and I know that is going to be a challenge. They don't want to get tested? I think you need to come up with--I would like to hear your response of how you can more effectively deal with making sure that all your staff are effectively tested, which I think is extremely important. If you would share, in the short amount of time, your best answers. Thank you. Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman. Yes, we are still waiving the copay for COVID-related illness. We have expanded the use--because our population is lower, two things we have done in those areas that were challenging: The prisons aren't made for social distancing, as you are well aware. They are completely the opposite, so we did have challenges. With the reduction in our population, we have been able to spread people out. We actually put target population levels on our most vulnerable facilities so they are at about 50-percent capacity. We also used some of the COVID funding to purchase tents and things of that nature. We have temporary housing--we borrowed tents from the military at one point until we were able to get some--to distance people out and provide alternative living areas. We have made use of every available space we can to convert for housing so that we can get that in place. Again, prisons aren't necessarily built for that. The last portion of your question, about staff testing, I can't mandate somebody to take a test, Congresswoman. If I could, I would be doing it already. Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, my time is up, but let me indicate that your individuals who are on the front line, maybe we need to help you with that. I understand civil liberties, civil rights, the Constitution. You are talking about individuals coming in contact with incarcerated persons, who can't walk away, can't get out. That means they are endangering themselves, their families at home. Can you just answer the question of the numbers of your men and women who may have lost their life to COVID-19? Do you have a number on that? Mr. Carvajal. When you say my men and women, are you referring to inmates or staff? Ms. Jackson Lee. Staff. Mr. Carvajal. One-hundred-and-forty-five inmates and three staff--two staff that were confirmed, one that was listed posthumously as being COVID-positive but the cause of death was not listed as that. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. Ms. Bass. Representative Gohmert? Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Chair. Thank you both, to our witnesses, for being here. Mr. Carvajal, I know this is a difficult time, but I am-- back when I was a judge and when I was paying attention to felony facilities, Federal and State, we had a problem called AIDS. I am glad to see the majority's interest now. I was shocked how little regard people had in Congress with regard to AIDS spreading through Federal prisons. So, it looks like there is more of an appropriate interest now, even though that was much more of a deadly disease. Do you have any idea what the percentage, the mortality rate, is of those who are positive with COVID-19 within the prison system? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, that is somewhat of a difficult question to ask, because we have so many moving pieces, releases, and everything. Even my medical experts are challenged with that. Here is what I will tell you. The way we look at this is that we have a lot of positive cases, as does everyone. The majority of those cases early on were asymptomatic. That is why the testing is so important and the mass testing, is we have been able to identify presymptomatic or asymptomatic cases and use that to help us mitigate the spread of this virus. So, we have been able to flatten that curve, as everyone likes to say. Although our deaths were a higher rate early on, we haven't had as many on ventilators, which is a key. It averages about six to eight here lately, even with the last spike. More importantly, at one point, we had over 145, 150 inmates in a hospital at one time. That stays at about 18 to 20, depending on these spikes. Less people are dying now from this disease. Even though our numbers show high positive rates, at least 50 percent, at this point right now, are asymptomatic, and they aren't actively sick. I know they are sick with the virus. That is why we want to isolate them and quarantine them. We are able to do that better with testing. Mr. Gohmert. I would encourage your physicians, when you talk about people being put on ventilators--Dr. Bartlett from Midland has done some great research in the use of steroid nebulizers to protect the alveoli from becoming mush. Because once that happens, even when you put them on ventilators, it doesn't seem to be helpful. Do you know approximately what percentage of the prison population are in the United States illegally? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, off my head, I remember the number is about 15 percent non-U.S. citizens. I don't know the exact number that were illegal entry, but I do know that we have approximately 15 percent non-U.S. citizens. Mr. Gohmert. Wasn't it higher than that at one time? Mr. Carvajal. I believe so, Congressman. Mr. Gohmert. I understood that that percentage have been reduced because of the COVID crackdown on the border. Have you seen that yourself? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't want to misspeak. I would have to ask somebody for that data. I don't have-- Mr. Gohmert. Would you mind getting that and-- Mr. Carvajal. Yes, I will. Mr. Gohmert. Thank you. Now, from my experience during the days as a judge, it seemed that 70-plus percent of those incarcerated had either an alcohol or drug problem, alcoholics, or drug addicts. Do you have any idea what percentage you are looking at in our Federal prison system? Mr. Carvajal. Again, Congressman, I don't know the exact percentages. I will tell you that we do have lots of programming tailored towards alcohol and drug problems and offenses, treatment programs. A lot of our programs are geared towards that. I don't know the exact percentage. Mr. Gohmert. Have those programs been impacted by COVID, their ability to have the regular meetings? Mr. Carvajal. Absolutely. We have been impacted by COVID just like everyone else. We did--early on, obviously, we suspended programming at some point. We have since resumed. We are probably at--it varies, depending on the infection at the facility, but I would like to say we are at 50, 60, 70 percent programming back to normal. We have found creative ways, just as the school systems have, to resume programming. Mr. Gohmert. All right. We have military inmates confined in Federal facilities using a program called Federal Transfer. Has that been impacted by COVID? Ms. Bass. A quick answer because you are out of time. Mr. Gohmert. Yeah. Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't know particularly about the military, again, our entire system has been impacted. Mr. Gohmert. All right. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Bass. Representative McBath? Mrs. McBath. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you gentlemen for shedding some light on these very important issues this morning. As we continue to grapple with COVID-19, case after case has shown us just how difficult it is to contain this virus. Everyone must do their part to protect one another. We have seen that a single unsafe environment or event has ripple effects through our communities. Employers especially have a responsibility to be provide safety measures for their workers, because if they don't, lives are definitely on the line. No one knows this more than the family of Robin Grubbs. Robin was an Army veteran and a caseworker at a BOP facility in Atlanta. I represent Georgia. In March, she was promoted to a new role, where she would be helping those who had completed their sentences to return to their families and to their communities, and she would be helping them get a brand-new start. Despite her promotion, Robin never got to start her new job or move to a new office in another building. Instead, she was kept for an additional month in her old role, in her old office, located in an area that BOP started using to house those who were infected or exposed to COVID-19. According to coworkers, Robin tried to buy her own masks while she still waited for her office move and for BOP to provide her sufficient PPE. Robin's parents knew that she was at risk. They themselves had recently dropped off a care package with cough suppressants, medicine, and hand sanitizer to her. Sadly, Robin was found dead in her home. She posthumously tested positive for COVID-19, and her father says that he was told the toxicology report did not reveal any alternative causes of her death other than COVID-19. According to a news report in April, and I quote, a BOP spokesperson said that her official cause of death has not yet been determined, as her autopsy is not yet complete, end quote. Since then, according to later reporting, a spokesperson for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said an autopsy was not performed on Robin because she tested positive for COVID-19, which was listed as the probable cause of death. As of today, BOP does not list any COVID-19 staff deaths at the facility where Robin worked. In short, BOP has not acknowledged that Robin Grubbs likely died of COVID-19. Director Carvajal, does BOP disagree with the determination that COVID-19 was Robin's possible cause of death? If so, what evidence does it rely on to make that decision? Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, what happened to Robin Grubbs, as with anyone who dies, for that matter, is sad. I don't know that we have ever disagreed with anything. I don't know where you are getting your information. I am not a medical expert, nor do I write the autopsy reports, and we are simply saying what we are given. That last piece of information you said, from the Georgia bureau, I don't have that information. We have never disputed or debated; we just simply call it like we see it. The paperwork we were given did not determine a cause of death. We are not disputing it. I would not do that. Robin Grubbs was one of our staff. Mrs. McBath. Okay. Well, thank for that answer. Also, too, the Bureau of Prisons' website--we have just had a chance to look at--doesn't actually show her death. It shows the death of two staff Members. So, are you planning on updating the website to identify the fact that Robin did actually die and so there was a prison--there was an inmate death? Mr. Carvajal. You are correct, Congresswoman; our website lists two. Again, I don't know all the specifics or the legalities or whatever region that is, but I will tell you that no one in the Bureau of Prisons is disputing whatever the doctor says that that young lady passed away from. Our website--we get criticized regardless of if we put it out there. I will have you know that staff criticized us for acknowledging her death at all early on. We were actually scrutinized because we wanted to tell people about this. There has been nobody trying to hide anything here. Regardless of what we put on that website; somebody is not going to like the information. We are not disputing--it is a sad situation, and it bothers me that I am even talking about this. Robin Grubbs was one of my staff. Mrs. McBath. Sir, thank you so much. So, despite what anyone thinks, would you be willing to update the website to make sure that you are identifying that an inmate actually died within the care of the Bureau of Prisons? Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, again, I will speak to whatever reason that that website is not updated. I follow the advice of people. There are reasons we do that. I will get back with you, I assure you, and I will address that issue of our staff member passing away. Mrs. McBath. Okay. Thank you very much, and I appreciate any updates that you can provide the Committee going forward. I would like to give the balance of my time to Chair Bass. Ms. Bass. I think you are out of time. Let me say quickly that no one on either side of the aisle is calling for the indiscriminate release of prisoners. Who we are concerned about are prisoners that might be medically compromised, including prisoners with terminal illnesses--why would they be confined now? Prisoners who are elderly; illnesses that put them at risk for COVID, respiratory or heart conditions; and people who are in pretrial detention who are not a risk to the public safety. The other issue is that the majority of the inmates come from communities that are already disproportionately impacted. So, we want to make sure that they are tested and medically cleared before they are released. This protects the inmates, the prison staff, and the general public. Representative Cline? Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank our witnesses for being here today. This has certainly been a challenging year for our Nation, and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been felt by every American and institution. Much like everything else in today's world, our criminal justice system has had to adapt to ensure justice is served no matter the circumstances we are facing. As Members of this committee, we must continue to seek improvements to our justice system and guarantee that victims of crime and their families are never robbed of justice. At the same time, we must ensure that there is fairness and transparency throughout our criminal justice system. I have appreciated hearing from our witnesses today and getting their insight on how the pandemic has affected their agencies and what must be done to ensure that our justice system continues to operate safely and in the best interest of the American public. Director Washington, I want to first commend the U.S. Marshals Service for their tremendous work in rescuing 33 children during an operation last month in Virginia that included parts of my district. Protecting our Nation's children from predators has been a top priority for me. Can you expand on your earlier remarks about how the pandemic has impacted Marshals' work in pursuing predators and rescuing children who are being exploited and trafficked? Mr. Washington. Yes. Thank you for that question, Congressman Cline. First, let me thank you for House Resolution 5706 and the Danger Pay for U.S. Marshals Act. That is very meaningful for my agency. It is something that we need. The pandemic has taken its toll all over the country, as you well know. Inside of our agency, we have had to adjust, like anyone else has done. In terms of the number of fugitives, as an example, in any given year, the United States Marshals Service will arrest 100,000 of the Nation's worst criminals in any given year. That number is going to be about 80,000 this year, as an example. So, we will see the impact in terms of workload and things of that sort, but it has also impacted just the way we look and feel about each other. For example, we took note, of course, as everyone in the country did, of the death of George Floyd and what happened there. We have had the opportunity to have discussions about racial inequality and use of force and things of that sort. That is the good side of it. On the other side of it, workload has been tremendously impacted. Although we have people who are at home, we have deputies that must go to court every day, and that has caused a tremendous strain on those deputies and their families. In terms of courts, you know, we continue to ensure that the Rule of law functions as it should in this country. I will be honest with you; we need staff. I think you probably have heard that before. We have asked for 280 additional deputy United States marshal positions in the fiscal year 2021 budget. That is not something that we take lightly, when we make those kinds of requests. It is vital for us to do whatever we can to increase those kinds of resources so we can get back to do even more fugitive operations and even more child rescues. Mr. Cline. Let me follow up on that. Regarding recruiting, the U.S. Marshals carry out operations not only here in the U.S. but overseas in dangerous locations. However, unlike your DOJ counterparts at the FBI and DEA, the U.S. Marshals Service is not eligible for danger pay, as you mentioned. This is a serious problem, and I appreciate your recognition of the legislation that has been introduced on a bipartisan basis by Members of this committee. Can you talk about the impact on recruitment? If these men and women are serving overseas in dangerous conditions, putting themselves in harm's way, shouldn't they also be able to receive danger pay? How does that lack of danger pay impact your ability to recruit the best and brightest? Mr. Washington. Yes. The pandemic has shone a light on that issue. Let me back up just a little bit. So, as you indicated, the FBI and the DEA have those authorities to pay danger pay to their agents. We do not to our deputy U.S. marshals, who do exceedingly, extraordinarily dangerous work--in countries like Mexico, where we are going after a drug trafficker and trying to bring them back to the United States, where we are actually working with authorities inside the country at levels that I don't think the other agencies do. In fact, we have relationships in those countries that give us a little bit of a leg up. We have not only agents, but deputy U.S. marshals and their families as well. So, this year, as an example, we had to, of course, remove people from those four foreign field offices because of the pandemic, and then we had to send them back. So, we are sending them back into harm's way. They can look across the table in Mexico City, as an example, and sit there next to a DEA agent or an FBI agent and recognize that, even though they may be the same grade level, they are not getting the same kind of compensation for work that is equally as dangerous, if not more dangerous, than what those other agents are doing. So, it is just something that we need to kind of level out and make sure that our officers are fairly treated. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Mr. Cline. Thank you. Ms. Bass. Representative Deutch? Mr. Deutch. Thanks very much, Madam Chair. Director Carvajal, Director Washington, thank you for your service to our country. Prisoners confined in BOP facilities have two options to seek additional protection from the pandemic. We have talked about this; we have talked about seeking a remainder of their sentence in home confinement or compassionate release. Home confinement is a determination made solely by the BOP. Director Carvajal, you have talked about the consideration of public safety, something that all of us acknowledge needs to be the primary driver here. Then we get to the criteria that are used to determine whether a person is eligible to serve their remainder in their home confinement. The question I have for you, just for some context: On May 13, the former chair of President Trump's campaign, Paul Manafort, was transferred to home confinement due to COVID-19 fears. He had served far less than half of his 7-year sentence. On May 20, President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, qualified for home confinement. He was released from BOP custody. Both Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen were released due to concerns of the pandemic in prisons. These are valid concerns. Since May of this year, only about 1.8 percent of prisoners in the BOP have been moved to complete their sentence in home confinement. Most have been denied a transfer. So, my question, Director Carvajal, for you is: How many prisoners have been approved by the Bureau of Prisons for transfer to home confinement? Do you have that number? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I believe, if I am understanding your question correctly, it is 18,000--over 18,000 that we have placed in home confinement since the passage of the CARES Act. Mr. Deutch. How did--if you know, how did Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen qualify to be transferred to home confinement? Do you know the analysis that was used in those cases? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, what I can tell you is, anyone that has been placed on home confinement, regardless of who they are, have met the criteria outlined by the CARES Act and, specifically, the criteria written by the Attorney General. He issued two separate memorandums to me with guidance on there. I don't personally review these. There is a reason I don't get involved. They are done at the local level. When there is anything discretionary to be reviewed outside of the criteria, it rises to a Committee at the headquarters level that is higher-level subject-matter experts. Everything is either--they either meet the criteria or they don't. There is some discretion on some of that criteria-- Mr. Deutch. Well, let me just follow up for a second. I appreciate that. I am not sure that I understand what the higher-level analysis or the expertise is required, but let me just talk about two other cases, not Paul Manafort or Michael Cohen. In a letter requesting compassionate release from Marie Neba, who was confined at the Federal Medical Center Carswell, there was a description to the judge that she had not received medication for treating her breast cancer since March 5 of this year. She described how the lockdown at the facility due to the COVID-19 pandemic had caused medical care at the facility to deteriorate. Her condition worsened. She was concerned about the spread of COVID-19. She was not released and ultimately passed away from COVID. In a letter requesting compassionate release, W. Young Bird, who was confined at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, described to the judge how there were 30 cases of COVID in 3 different facilities. The facility was on lockdown, and Mr. Young Bird was housed in a 24-hour medical care unit. Actively sought help from the warden and the judge to protect himself from the spreading virus. Ultimately, in that case, unfortunately, he passed as well. Do you know, Director Carvajal, how many prisoners over the age of 65 and medically vulnerable have been transferred to home confinement? Is that all the 18,000 that you referenced? Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't have those exact numbers. I will have to follow up with you. I will tell you, there is a difference between the compassionate release process--you are talking about releasing someone, essentially undoing, or reducing a sentence imposed by a criminal court. Mr. Deutch. No, I understand. Mr. Carvajal. The home confinement process is different. Mr. Deutch. Director Carvajal, I understand. I do understand the difference well. What I don't understand is the seeming disparity in treatment that permitted two individuals who may have had underlying conditions but were released to home confinement with two individuals who clearly had underlying challenges and wound up dying of COVID-19. A Federal judge ordered the Bureau of Prisons to review medically vulnerable prisoners at Elkton in Ohio, asked for a list of prisoners age 65 and those who were medically vulnerable, and the Bureau responded to a judge that there were 837, but only 5 would be transferred to home confinement. All I ask, Director Carvajal, is that we go back and analyze fully the steps that we can take to provide the same protections for these inmates, who are not violent, as the protections that were provided to these two individuals who happened, coincidentally, to have close relationships with the President of the United States. I yield back. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Representative Lesko? Mrs. Lesko. Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I want to say thank you to both of you for your service to our country, and also to your employees. They have a difficult job, very dangerous job. I appreciate them, and I believe the majority of Americans appreciate their hard work. I am going to read a letter dated March 30, 2020, and it was a letter from Chairman Nadler and Chair Bass to Attorney General Barr. It is on page 4, and I am going to go into page 5. It reads, ``Your memorandum,'' meaning Attorney General Barr's memorandum, ``specifies that priority should be given to inmates in low- and minimum-security facilities and that serious offenses should weigh more heavily against consideration for home detention.'' I think that is reasonable. ``These limitations unfortunately beg the question of what you do with individuals who are at high risk for contracting COVID-19 who are not in low- or minimum-security facilities, who have been convicted of serious offenses, or have high PATTERN risk scores. We urge you to consider that even individuals in these categories should be assessed for release because they may be elderly or particularly vulnerable. ``Pregnant prisoners in all circumstances should be released to home confinement forthwith. ``We further urge you to assess the risk of contracting COVID-19 of every individual in BOP custody regardless of the type of institution in which they are housed, the seriousness of their offense, or the potential recidivism risk they may present.'' Well, I think that we can take reasonable measures, commonsense measures of people that are low risk to the society. I am concerned, I have to say, Madam Chairman and others, I am very concerned if we are just encouraging the prisons to release even people convicted of serious offenses. Let me tell you why. This isn't a person that was in Federal prison, but this is an example. This was a rape--this man was indicted in rape of a woman last year and was released in April because of the coronavirus and is accused of then fatally shooting his accuser. I mean, this is the picture of the man. You know, to me, of course we must take reasonable measures to protect not only the inmates but, of course, your employees. I certainly do not think that the majority of Americans, including myself, whether they are Republican, independent, or Democrats, want dangerous criminals released into our communities. So, I just want to tell you that. Also, with the 1 minute and 47 seconds left, do either one of you have anything that you would like to add that you haven't had the opportunity to talk about? Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman. I just want to say that anyone that was eligible under the criteria we were issued at the direction of the CARES Act, that met that criteria and was safe, met public safety factors, has been released from our custody. We take this very seriously. We want to keep people safe regardless. Most people that aren't released, it is because they have committed a crime of violence or a sex offense or they have a detainer or an Act of terrorism. I think that it goes back to what you were saying that we have a responsibility. A court processed them; a judge found them to come to our custody. We take seriously who we are going to release back. Again, I would like to remind everyone that we are transferring people to home confinement. They are still in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons. Compassionate release is an actual reduction in sentence or release of that sentence that was imposed by a court. Thank you. Mrs. Lesko. Thank you. I yield back. Ms. Bass. Representative Jeffries? Mrs. Lesko. Unless the Marshals had something to say? Ms. Bass. Oh. Well, we are done. You are out of time. Mrs. Lesko. Okay. I thank you. Mr. Jeffries. Thank you, Madam Chair, for yielding and for your tremendous leadership in convening this hearing. I thank our two witnesses for their service to the country. Director Carvajal, COVID-19 is a serious disease; is that correct? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, Congressman, it is. Mr. Jeffries. A potentially fatal disease in some instances. Is that right? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir. Mr. Jeffries. I think there are about 24,000 individuals in BOP custody who have tested positive for the virus. Is that right? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir. Mr. Jeffries. Approximately 145 Federal inmates have died as a result of COVID-19. Is that true? Mr. Carvajal. That is correct. Mr. Jeffries. Those individuals who died were in the Bureau of Prisons' custody. Is that right? Mr. Carvajal. The 145? Correct. Mr. Jeffries. At a hearing before the Senate in June, you stated that, quote, ``prisons, by design, are not made for social distancing. They are, on the opposite, made to contain people in one area.'' Is that correct, in terms of that being your testimony? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir, it is. Mr. Jeffries. I think you reiterated earlier today that prisons are not built for social distancing. Is that true? Mr. Carvajal. That is correct. Mr. Jeffries. The public health experts have indicated that social distancing is an important tool to be used in combating this serious and deadly COVID-19 virus. Is that right? Mr. Carvajal. That is correct. Mr. Jeffries. So, I think, given the circumstances that the inmates and employees of the Bureau of Prisons find themselves in, as you have testified, it seems like the presumption at the Bureau of Prisons should be to utilize the tools available to it to allow inmates relief from this potentially deadly virus. Is that fair to say? Mr. Carvajal. It is, Congressman, and that is what we are doing. Mr. Jeffries. So, part of my concern is that the tools that have been made available to you include both the emergency provisions and powers provided under the CARES Act as well as the compassionate release provision that was a part of the FIRST STEP Act. Is that right? Mr. Carvajal. Correct. Mr. Jeffries. In terms of the compassionate release provision, I guess during the COVID-19 pandemic the Federal courts have granted nearly 2,000 motions for compassionate release. Is that true? Mr. Carvajal. That sounds about right. Mr. Jeffries. Now, the Bureau of Prisons can also initiate a motion for compassionate release. Is that correct? Mr. Carvajal. Correct. Mr. Jeffries. Part of my concern is that, I guess during the first 3 months of the pandemic, the Bureau of Prisons approved approximately 0.1 percent of compassionate release requests. Is that right? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir. Again, I don't know the exact numbers, but it was a low number. Mr. Jeffries. In other words, 10,929 requests out of 10,940 requests were rejected. Does that sound right? Mr. Carvajal. Again, Congressman, I don't have the exact numbers. Mr. Jeffries. So, you just testified earlier that we should utilize the tools available to us, that have been made available to you on a bipartisan basis in both the CARES Act and the FIRST STEP Act, to alleviate the pain, suffering, and death connected to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the numbers don't suggest that you are actually doing that. Can you explain why there has been such low utilization as it relates to compassionate release? Mr. Carvajal. Yes, I can, Congressman. First, as I stated earlier, you are talking about reducing a sentence or reversing a sentence imposed by a judge in a court. That is not a process that should be rushed. We take into consideration public safety. We review everyone for home confinement because it is a quicker process to get them out. An inmate has the right and the ability to go straight to the courts. I also want to remind everyone that the Bureau of Prisons doesn't make the final determination of whether or not someone is approved for compassionate release. All we are doing is simply recommending to the judge. So, there is a 30-day window, and then the inmate can go directly to a court. That is why the courts have released more. It is a lengthy process. There is a lot of vetting and verifying to go into that. So, it is a very thorough process. Mr. Jeffries. Thank you for that. I think the issue is that you have had at least two dozen individuals who have died in prison waiting for a compassionate release request to even be reviewed, if not signed off on, by the Bureau of Prisons. That seems, to me, inconsistent with the presumption that we should be doing all that we can to alleviate the pain and suffering and death connected to COVID- 19 in the tight quarters of the Federal penitentiary. The last observation I will make, as my time has expired, is that you have mentioned consistently this notion that we have individuals who may have engaged in serious crimes and pose public safety risks. The example that we have been talking about, Marie Neba, is someone who was in prison on a nonviolent offense of Medicare fraud. In too many of these instances, it is the same situation. That is a shame, because a prison sentence should not be a death sentence. I yield back. Ms. Bass. Representative Jordan? Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair. Director Washington, has violent crime increased this year in major urban areas? Mr. Washington. The data indicates it has increased. Mr. Jordan. Aggravated assaults up 14 percent, homicide rates up 53 percent in major urban areas. In that environment, should big cities be defunding their police? New York City has defunded their police a billion dollars; Los Angeles, $150 million reduction in police force and in police budget; Austin, Texas, $150 million; San Francisco, $120 million; Philadelphia, $33 million; Baltimore, $23 million; Portland, Oregon, $16 million. Does that make sense to you, Director Washington? Mr. Washington. Not to me, as the head of a law enforcement agency that is charged with handling violent crime. In fact, in many of those cities, of course, we have deployed deputy U.S. marshals-- Mr. Jordan. Yep. Mr. Washington. --to participate on various task forces to address the increase in violent crime. Mr. Jordan. In that overall environment, the increase in violent crime, cities defunding their police departments, should we be releasing more criminals early back into those neighborhoods? Mr. Washington. I don't think we should, Congressman. Mr. Jordan. That is exactly what Democrats want to do. It is not just--as the chairwoman said earlier, it is not just those, Director Carvajal, that you go through and make sure that they are not going to be a harm to the community. That is not what they said in their letter. As Congresswoman Lesko just pointed out, when they sent a letter to Attorney General Barr back in March, they said, assess all prisoners for release regardless of the type of institution in which they are housed--here is the key part-- regardless of the seriousness of their offense or the potential recidivism risk that they pose to the community. So, they wanted everyone to get released, in an environment where we already have a 53-percent increase in homicide rates, a 14-percent increase in aggravated assaults, and big-city mayors and big-city city councils, all run by Democrats, are defunding the police department. That is exactly what they wanted to do. Do you think that makes sense, Director Washington? Mr. Washington. Well, again, Congressman, from my agency's perspective, we have been very busy addressing violent crime in the United States. As you well know, we have initiated an Operation LeGend as a result of the death of young LeGend Taliferro in Kansas City, Missouri. A 4-year-old, in bed, gets shot and killed is not a thing that we want to happen in the United States. So, what we have done, of course, is participate in various cities around the country. Operation LeGend continues; I just received the data yesterday on the 20th week of Operation LeGend. For example, in Chicago, we have arrested 1,000 folks who fit the categories of either homicide, sexual assault, robbery, and things of that sort. Mr. Jordan. Yeah. I actually wanted to--I forgot one thing. It is worse than I just described. They not only want to release criminals back into communities where there is already an elevated State of violent crime, where the police are being defunded. They not only want to release people early, regardless of the seriousness of their offense. They want the taxpayers to pay for it. I forgot about that. They introduced legislation that said, we want to pay States to do what I just described. Such a deal for the taxpayer. I mean, this is the part--no wonder they are--think about the small-business owner in Portland, for example. You have a small-business owner in Portland who has paid all their local taxes, only to have their business in downtown Portland be destroyed this summer when the mob took over the streets. Now Democrats are saying, oh, now we want to use your Federal tax dollars to put more criminals on the streets. Does that make any sense to you at all, Director Washington? Mr. Washington. Well, Your Honor--``Your Honor''-- Congressman, I am not, of course, a politician. I just run a Federal law enforcement agency. From a law enforcement perspective, that doesn't make sense. Mr. Jordan. Doesn't make sense. Oh, there is one other step I--it gets better. There is one other thing. We just learned that 15 percent of the inmates in our Bureau of Prisons are illegal immigrants. Is that right, Director Carvajal? Mr. Carvajal. Non-U.S. citizens. Mr. Jordan. Non-U.S. citizens. The Democrats want them released as well. Regardless of the seriousness of their offense, they want taxpayer money to be used to pay the States to release illegal immigrants, regardless of their offense, back into communities where we have seen a 53-percent increase in violent crime and where those same cities are defunding their police. That might be the craziest thing I have ever heard, but that is exactly their policy. Frankly, Madam Chair, I would ask for unanimous consent to enter the letter you sent, along with Chairman Nadler, to the Attorney General which spells out what I just described. [The information follows:] MR. JORDAN FOR THE RECORD ======================================================================= [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Jordan. With that, I will yield back. Ms. Bass. Representative Dean? For the record, the letter says ``assessed,'' not ``released,'' I don't know of anyone on either side of the aisle who calls for defunding the police, and I love the way the Ranking Member talks about my city. Representative Dean? Mr. Jordan. Well, Madam Chair, the-- Ms. Dean. Madam Chair-- Mr. Jordan. --again, ``regardless of the type of institution in which they are housed, the seriousness of their offense, or the potential recidivism risk that they may present.'' I didn't write that. You did. I didn't--that is not a Republican language. That is you and Chair Nadler. So, if you are now saying ``the seriousness of their offense'' is not in the letter, that you want to strike that out, that is one thing, but that is not what you wrote on March 30, 2020. Ms. Bass. We can debate the letter, but I would pose-- Mr. Jordan. No, that is not debating the letter. That is what is in the letter. Ms. Bass. I would pose that you are mischaracterizing it, and I will call on Representative Dean. Mr. Jordan. I am reading your words. Ms. Bass. Representative Dean. Ms. Dean. I thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to say, I thought this was a serious body here to talk about governing and protecting public health and protecting public safety, and not a campaign commercial. I thought the campaign was over. Sadly, we are seeing mischaracterization of other Members' works very, very grotesquely. So, number one, I thank you both for the work that you do. I thank you for the teams that you have assembled and the extraordinary staff who puts their own lives and health at risk. What I would like to know more about is, during COVID, for example, compliance with mask-wearing among staff and among inmates. You able to get full compliance for simple mask- wearing? Because you are challenged with confinement and close spaces. Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman. It is a tough--just like with anything, it is enforcement and accountability and expectations. We expect people to wear it, we expect from the leadership that it be enforced, and we expect from everyone that they have personal accountability to follow the rules. We incorporated unannounced inspections. We welcome outside inspections. If there is any doubt, just this week, I sent someone to verify, because I had people complaining--I heard these complaints. They were concerning. We sent an unannounced team to an institution just for that reason. Ms. Dean. That is great, because you are in the business of supervising and overseeing. So, I would think you would have the tools in place to deal with, sadly, this pandemic and the need for these important measures. I, too, want to ask about the use of compassionate release. I want to make clear that, when you testified that some 18,112 inmates were returned to home confinement, that is not compassionate release. From the records that we have seen, that I read about, only 11 people of nearly 11,000 folks in the first 3 months who had applied for compassionate release had received that. So, I want to be really clear. When we talk about 18,000 people going to home confinement, they were going there anyway under the protocols as things were happening; they weren't as a result of COVID release. Am I correct? Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, passage of the CARES Act and COVID caused us to place a high number of people who would not ordinarily have been considered, at least at this point in time, for home confinement. You are correct; the compassionate release numbers are lower. As I explained earlier, that is a lengthy process. Under our policy and by the guidelines of the statute, an inmate has to be showing extraordinary and compelling circumstances. That is not something we do in a day or two. Ms. Dean. I heard that answer. I appreciate that and the balancing of the urgency of COVID against the assessment of whether a person is appropriate for compassionate release. Some of those criteria were met in the cases that had been identified, and yet those folks were not released. Of the 18,000 who went to home confinement, can you break down that number for us? How many were headed to home confinement anyway? How many are because of your reassessment from COVID? Mr. Carvajal. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me. They change-- Ms. Dean. Would you be able to provide that? Mr. Carvajal. I will tell you, as of right now--there is approximately 8,000 on home confinement currently, right now. About 50 or 60 percent of those are CARES Act, specific to the CARES Act, that would not have ordinarily been in home confinement at this point. I am not saying they weren't ever going to be eligible. Ms. Dean. I am worried about my time. Sorry to try to keep it tight. What I would like to ask you is if you would provide the chairwoman and the Ranking Member detailed data about those who have been released for compassionate care--I am hoping there is well more than 11 that we have learned about; that seems incredibly sad--and also the breakdown of the 18,000 and now 8,000 who are in home confinement. I appreciate all of that. I am going to have no time. Darn it. I apologize. Ms. Bass. You can continue. Ms. Dean. I thank you. What I would like to ask about and shift to is something I have been very concerned about, which is the use of shackling of pregnant women while in confinement. Can both of you speak to the use of shackles on pregnant women in your agencies? Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Director. We don't do it. We have procedures in place. We amended our policy. It has happened one time since the passage of the FIRST STEP Act. It was documented. It was a mistake, for all practical purposes. The female was identified as being pregnant in the same day; the person didn't have time to enter it. We have good procedures in place to identify, respecting their rights. It was for less than 5 minutes. Aside from that, if it gets done, it gets reported all the way up to our medical director, our women, and special programs administrator; there is a review conducted. We use alternative means. We do not restrain pregnant or postpartum females in our agency. Ms. Dean. Thank you. Mr. Washington. I believe that is the same answer for the United States Marshals Service. Because we have the pretrial folks, folks under prosecution. We also have the statute that required that to be stopped. So we use alternative means. Ms. Dean. Well, I would quote others who have said that that is barbaric, and I appreciate that that has been banned. Thank you very much. Thank you for your consideration. Ms. Bass. Sure. Before I move to our last speaker, Mr. Washington, if you could confirm that in data, especially during transportation, okay? If you could confirm it. You said you believed it wasn't the case, so I just wanted to know if you could confirm it, especially during transportation. Mr. Washington. Yes, Madam Chair. Ms. Bass. Thank you. Our final member is Representative Mucarsel-Powell. Let me just say, Representative Cline had to leave to go back to his office, but he wanted to express to you, as do I, our joy in working with you over the last couple of years and the leadership that you have displayed here in Congress. We just want you to know how much you will be missed, and we hope we see you again in the future. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you so much, Chair Bass. To all my colleagues in the committee, it has been the greatest honor to serve with all of you, even in the most contentious times, and I truly will carry these experiences with me. I hope that we will all meet soon again, after I am done with serving here in the House of Representatives. Thank you so much, Chair. Thank you to the witnesses for appearing this morning. It is such an important public health issue. I wanted to just start at setting the record straight and responding to some of the points that the Ranking Member has made. He continues to accuse Democrats of failing to keep our communities safe. That is the farthest thing from the truth. It is actually Republicans and Members like him who are trampling on the Rule of law and trying to overturn the will of the people. Just yesterday, one of the President's attorneys called for Chris Krebs to be taken out and shot--Chris Krebs, the security official who Trump fired because he wouldn't go along with the lies from the Administration, because he said that there was absolutely no evidence of fraud. It is the Democrats who are fighting to save lives during this pandemic. It is the Democrats who are constantly trying to keep our communities safe and to save the lives of those who are incarcerated, because we realize that there is respect and dignity to every human life. Now, Director Carvajal, I sent you a letter with Representative Demings back in April. In my district, we have one of the prison bureaus, FCI Miami. It is a low-security facility that holds about 900 inmates and employs several hundred staff. A hundred-and-thirty-nine inmates at FCI Miami have tested positive for COVID-19, and, unfortunately, we have lost 1 life there at that facility. So, I would just urge you that you would make voluntary testing available to staff immediately. It is very difficult for them to travel long distances to get those tests. It is not just for the safety of the inmates and the staff; it is also for the safety of our community here in Miami. Now, I wanted to turn quickly to another issue, and that is the deployment of the BOP teams to respond to the protests over the murder of George Floyd. In June, we received reports that showed that tactical BOP teams were sent to Washington, DC, and Miami. The riot team sent to Miami sat in a hotel for a few days and left after the protests in Miami because they were nothing but peaceful. There were no Federal buildings at risk. We didn't see any sort of violence. Director Carvajal, why were tactical BOP teams sent to Miami? If you can shortly, quickly answer that question. Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, they were there only a few hours. We actually redirected them back to DC. Yes, they were deployed. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Who made that decision, and what was the rationale for that? Mr. Carvajal. As you know, Congresswoman, we are a component of the Department of Justice. The Attorney General and the Department of Justice requested assistance in the law enforcement mission. They called us. I made the decision after consulting with my leadership team to make sure that we could send the number of personnel, and we did. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Are these teams trained in civilian crowd control? Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, they are trained in crowd control. It is actually what we do. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. So, I am assuming that the special operations response teams received training on appropriate non-inmate crowd control since June? Mr. Carvajal. We have a contingency plan and training in place to train for civil disturbances. That is non-prison-type disturbances. We train our personnel and our tactical teams in just that. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. Thank you. Director Washington, since June 2020, how many times have BOP agents or employees been deputized as U.S. marshals? Mr. Washington. Since June of 2020? I don't recall any BOP agents being deputized as U.S. marshals. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. Mr. Washington. Is that the case? Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Go ahead, Director Carvajal. Mr. Carvajal. If I may assist there, our personnel who were deployed are deputized by United States Marshals. It was done on site before they ever took to the patrolling. That was done because, by statute, our arrest authority is limited in the BOP, and anytime we are deployed--we often deploy; it just doesn't get media attention. We respond to most every major national disaster out there. Our staff are always deputized before they go out on patrol. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Let me ask you something that I saw. Some of the BOP personnel were concealing their identities by removing their nametags and other identifying badges. Who directed them to do this, and what was the purpose of that? Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, I would like to correct the record. I appreciate you asking me that question. No one was instructed to remove anything. I got asked that question during a virtual press conference, and I answered it very bluntly. I failed to properly mark our people because we deployed in such a quick manner--we don't usually worry about that. Having an institution marker on you doesn't mean nothing in a major city if you don't know where that prison is located. We did correct that immediately. Within 2 days, we appropriately marked all our staff. There is a standardized marking for them now. Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Well, I thank you for that, Director Carvajal, because we actually did see that Federal agents were unidentified, and it poses a risk to the safety, to the overall safety, of our community. So, I do hope that you hold those that did that and did not follow the appropriate procedures accountable. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back. Ms. Bass. Thank you very much. Before we adjourn, I just want to say, one, I want to thank you again, both of our witnesses, for coming today. Let me thank you for taking the time to come and let me also thank you for your work. In addition to raising concerns we want to know how we can best help you. We would have liked to have done a second panel. If we had done a second panel, I would have invited Donte Westmoreland, who was sentenced to 7 years in Kansas. It was a first-time marijuana charge. Ironically, if he had been from California, what he had done would not have even been a crime. In fact, he could have opened his own business. I want to say that public safety is safety from violence but also safety from COVID in terms of the general community. My concern is both for the inmates but also the staff. The staff are dying as well, not just the inmates. So, reducing the prison population safely protects the health and safety of inmates and the general community. That we will continue to call--as it says in the memo, ``We further urge you to assess the risk of contracting COVID-19 of every individual in BOP custody.'' With that, this concludes today's hearing, and we adjourn. [Whereupon, at 10:49 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] APPENDIX ======================================================================= STATEMENT OF DONTE WESTMORELAND Dear Chairwomen Bass, Ranking member Jordan, and Members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, My name is Donte Westmoreland. Six weeks ago, I was sitting in a cell at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Kansas, serving nearly an 8 year sentence for allegedly selling (1 pound) of marijuana. I received this very lengthy sentence even though I had a no criminal history score. Fortunately, after serving nearly 4 years of my sentence, it came to light that prosecutors had concealed exculpatory evidence and my conviction was overturned. I grew up in Stockton, California where I was raised by my grandmother. My mother had many challenges of her own which put me in position to be the sole supporter for our family. It was difficult maintaining a household financially I had my two younger brothers and my grandmother was receiving public assistance at the time. I focused mostly on being a caregiver for my grandmother, I was an athlete in high school and graduated in 2013. My dream was to keep moving forward with my education, but I knew that was unlikely given the circumstances of my situation. My grandmother encouraged me to visit colleges she would say, ``There is more to life than just taking care of me, experience life you only have one.'' I knew deep down that was not possible, but it encouraged me to visit universities across the states, including Kansas. This was interrupted by my arrest on March 8, 2016. I chose to take this case to jury trial because I felt I was not guilty of the crime in addition I was forced to go to trial with sick unprepared counsel. Right before my trial, my grandmother, the woman that raised me, suffered extreme distress. She ended up passing away during the trial and my 10 and 11 year old brothers were placed in the foster care system, where they remain today. On May 22,2017 I was sentenced to serve nearly an 8 year prison term which was ironically my youngest brothers birthday. There have been a few moments that really brought everything home for me. One came while I was watching TV in prison and saw a news story saying that Missouri, the State right next to me, had legalized medical cannabis and was issuing licenses for cultivators and retailers and talked about billions of dollars of wealth that was going to be generated by the legal industry. But there I was sitting in prison for allegedly doing the same thing. What was criminal in Kansas was considered entrepreneurial in the bordering State of Missouri. Another moment I can never forget came when I learned that COVID had infected other prisoners and guards in the prison I was incarcerated in. I did all I possibly could to protect myself, but that's difficult when you have no control over the people who are housed with you, and you have no control over the air you breath and limited access to personal protective gear. It's really terrifying, just waiting and hoping you don't get it. In the end, despite my best efforts I became infected with the virus. At the moment I felt as if I was sentenced to death, behind a first time marijuana offense. I recovered, but five prisoners and two guards that were in the same facility died from Covid. I knew some of them personally--here today, gone tomorrow. I honestly did not know what my future held at that point. My charges are still pending. It is still possible that I could be returned to prison to serve out my nearly 8 year sentence, if prosecutors in Kansas choose to put me on trial again, but I've been encouraged lately. I've been encouraged that the citizens of all five states that had cannabis reform initiatives on the ballot decided to approve those measures, including in conservative states like North Dakota and Mississippi. I have also been encouraged by the Biden Administration announcement that they intend to make federal cannabis reform a priority. I'm really encouraged to have been invited to submit this written testimony to the House Judiciary sub-committee on crime. My story is not unique. Today 40,000 people are serving prison sentences for non-violent cannabis convictions, even though cannabis has been completely legalized in ten states and made legal for medical purposes in a large majority of states. These prisoners are disproportionately people of color, who are four times more likely to be arrested on cannabis charges than are White people. Sometimes they were traveling from a State where their possession of cannabis would have been legal or just a minor offense but had the bad luck of being pulled over in one of the states that still has not passed reform legislation, as was the case with my arrest. Today, I am trying to rebuild my life and avoid being sent back to prison in Kansas. I cannot get time back, but I can make the most of the time I have now. I very much hope that this sub-committee and congress will take whatever steps are necessary to make sure that in the future nobody else has the kind of experience that I had. Thank you for the opportunity to share my story. I appreciate it very much. [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD ======================================================================= QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED BY DIRECTOR MICHAEL CARVAJAL SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR KAREN BASS (1) Vaccinations On November 23rd, the Associated Press reported that the BOP has instructed wardens and other Bureau of Prisons staff Members to prepare to receive a COVID-19 vaccine within a number of weeks. Though the American Medical Association recently passed a resolution stating that both prison staff and incarcerated people ought to be among the first to receive the vaccine, reports indicate that the BOP only intends to use their initial supply for vaccinating staff. Questions (a) How much of the vaccine does the BOP need to provide coverage to all those in your custody and for all personnel working in your facilities? (b) Do you have reason to believe that you will not be receiving a sufficient amount of the vaccine? If you received an adequate amount of the vaccine how would you prioritize who initially receives the vaccine? (c) Is it true that BOP intends to only vaccinate staff, in the first instance? If so, what is the reasoning behind this? What is BOP's timeline for providing the vaccine for those in custody? (d) Is there a BOP policy on distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine? If so, please provide a copy. (e) Who has been consulted in developing this policy? (f) When will the BOP share this policy publicly and post the information on its website? (2) Prisoner Transport As we understand it, the Bureau of Prisons has a limited moratorium on prisoner transport. It has been reported that, from the outset of the pandemic, BOP has continued to accept inmates from local and private facilities, via the U.S. Marshals Service, without first requiring a negative COVID-19 test. The BOP's own internal guidance was not mandated on outside entities, to include the U.S. Marshals, whose continued transfer of COVID-19-positive inmates, and in some instances, visibly and seriously ill inmates, arguably resulted in the proliferation of COVID-19. Indeed, over the months of the pandemic, the virus has ``spiked'' at different BOP facilities and several facilities have become hot spots for COVID-19 (e.g., Terminal Island, Oakdale, Elkton, Butner, Fort Dix, etc.). Yet, as of November 23, 2020, BOP has apparently lifted even the limited prisoner transport moratorium it had in place. Social visits, as we understand, have also resumed. Questions (a) Our country is in the midst of the worst spike in cases since the beginning of the pandemic. People are dying from COVID-19 at extraordinary rates. We know that COVID-19 can spread into and in correctional institutions when prisoners are transferred from one location to another. Why, at this time, has BOP lifted the moratorium on prisoner transfers? (b) Regarding social visits, why have these resumed? Is BOP conducting any kind of contact tracing in relation to social visits? (c) How do you justify the policy of simply accepting whatever persons the Marshals bring to BOP, without regard for whether they are infected and would, therefore, spread the virus into a BOP facility? (3) BOP COVID-19 Protocols The Justice Department's inspector general has reported that the Federal Correctional Complex in Oakdale, Louisiana, failed to isolate or quarantine prisoners who were exposed to or who tested positive for COVID-19. The report found that ``some inmates who had tested positive were left in their housing units for up to 6 days without being isolated.'' In the BOP's COVID-19 Pandemic Response Plan, released on September 8, 2020, the BOP requires that a person who tests positive for COVID-19 be immediately placed under medical isolation. Questions (a) At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, you stated that prisoners who test positive for COVID-19 are isolated, but we keep hearing that they are not--and COVID-19 keeps spiking in BOP facilities across the country. What specific steps were taken and are still being taken, in every BOP institution, to address the Inspector General's findings? (b) More generally, what resources are being provided to individual facilities to ensure that incarcerated people are able to practice good hygiene? (c) Is the BOP taking steps to ensure compliance with mask and social distancing requirements in its facilities? What steps are those? (d) At this point in time, what is the status of the supply of personal protective equipment for staff and prisoners? Could Congress be doing more to ensure you have what you need? (4) Testing It has been reported that as of November 3, the Bureau of Prisons had tested roughly 56% of its population and, in addition, that the BOP only tests those who show symptoms of COVID-19. In early October, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Cory Booker, and Representative Nanette Barragan introduced legislation to improve the BOP's response to COVID-19. This legislation calls for weekly surveillance testing, expanded contact tracing in prisons, and expanded data collection. This type of legislation is necessary because there is cause for concern that the BOP is not taking adequate steps to locate individuals who are positive for COVID-19, or to conduct appropriate contact tracing to limit further spread. Questions (a) Is this the type of intervention from Congress that would be helpful to you? (b) What is the BOP's testing strategy? How many prisoners have been tested as of this date (c) Has this testing strategy been made public? (d) Were public health officials consulted in the development of this strategy? Who was consulted? (e) Does the BOP have procedures in place for contact tracing in the event an incarcerated person or staff member begins showing symptoms of COVID-19 or tests positive for COVID-19? If not, why not? If so, what are these procedures? Where are these procedures made public? Were public health officials consulted in the development of this strategy? (f) Can you guarantee that every prisoner released from a BOP facility has been tested before being released or transferred from the facility? What is the procedure if a prisoner tests positive before being released or transferred? At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you stated that BOP corrections officers were, in some instances, reluctant or refusing to be tested for COVID-19. (g) How pervasive is this reluctance to be tested? (h) What can Congress do to assist BOP in obtaining both availability of testing for staff, as well as compliance with testing by staff? (5) Compassionate Release The Department of Justice has instructed federal prosecutors responding to a motion for compassionate release to take the position that being at risk of death or serious illness from COVID-19, due to Centers for Disease Control- identified risk factors, is ``an extraordinary and compelling reason'' within the meaning of the statute. BOP could also take this position and either request the release of prisoners with serious risk factors or approve their requests for release. During the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd you made clear that the compassionate release process is more complicated than merely home confinement because it essentially results in the actual reduction of a person's sentence. We understand that; although we also understand that it is ultimately the court that decides whether or not to reduce the sentence. During the hearing, you acknowledged that federal courts have granted approximately 2,000 motions for compassionate release. The vast majority of these have been to protect prisoners vulnerable to COVID-19. By contrast, federal courts granted 166 reduction in sentence motions between January 2019, when the First Step Act was enacted, and the end of February 2020. Based on information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the Marshall Project has reported that, during the first three months of the pandemic, BOP approved 11 of the 10,940 compassionate release requests it received. That represents 0.1 percent of requests received. The data did not indicate whether any of those approvals were based on a heightened vulnerability to severe illness from a COVID-19 infection. Questions (a) Beyond the first three months of the pandemic, has the rate of approval continued to be 0.1%? In other words, is the BOP Office of General Counsel still approving only approximately 0.1% of compassionate release requests? (b) Has BOP approved any compassionate release requests based on a heightened vulnerability to severe illness from a COVID-19 infection? (c) How many requests for sentence reduction motions have wardens or BOP denied during the COVID-19 emergency period? Out of how many requests? (d) How many motions for sentence reduction has the Bureau of Prisons filed on behalf of prisoners in its custody since the beginning of the COVID-19 emergency period? (e) Why hasn't BOP filed more reduction in sentence motions for prisoners? (f) Does BOP have any plans to increase the use of compassionate release? If so, what are these plans, and, if not, why not? (g) Has the Bureau informed all prisoners it deems possible candidates for compassionate release of their right to request relief? (6) Home Confinement On March 27, 2020, Congress came together to unanimously pass the CARES Act, which authorized the Attorney General to expand dramatically the use of home confinement to protect vulnerable individuals from COVID-19. Attorney General William Barr made the finding that triggered this expansion on April 3, ordering BOP to expedite its use of home confinement. But, later, a judge found, after hearing the testimony of the Warden of FMC Devens, that BOP has adopted a policy that is ``utterly inconsistent'' with the Attorney General's directive to maximize home confinement. The Department of Justice's Inspector General, too, has found that BOP has failed to fully use its early-release authorities to transfer vulnerable individuals to safety at hard-hit facilities like Lompoc Federal Correctional Complex (FCC) and Oakdale FCC. When you appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, you testified that BOP was ``prioritizing'' home confinement over compassionate release. Congress is interested in understanding what you mean by this. Yet BOP has not answered calls by Members of Congress--including several on this Committee--to produce detailed data about releases to home confinement. During the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you stated that 18,000 prisoners have been released to home confinement since the start of the pandemic, but could not give specific numbers on the ones that have been released specifically under the authority of the CARES Act. Question (a) When will BOP produce data about the exact number of transfers into home confinement pursuant to CARES Act authority, rather than other authorities that existed prior to the CARES Act? (This question was asked by at least three Members of Congress at the hearing.) (7) BOP Pandemic Response at Carswell Prison for Women FMC Carswell, the hospital prison for women in Fort Worth Texas, has reported over 500 cases of COVID and six deaths. Half of those in the medical facility and 38 percent of those in the compound have tested positive. During the first three months of the pandemic, 349 women, about a quarter of the prison's inmates, asked for compassionate release. The warden denied or failed to respond to 346 of them, including a request from Marie Neba, a woman with stage 4 cancer serving a 75-year term for Medicare fraud. The government opposed her subsequent motion for compassionate release. Even when she was on her deathbed after contracting COVID-19, the warden refused to grant her compassionate release so she could die without being in handcuffs. At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, you stated that ``most people'' who are not released ``aren't released . . . because they have committed a crime of violence or sex offense or they have a detainer or an Act of terrorism.'' Questions (a) With regards to the Carswell prison, please provide specific data to show that most of those who have not been released have not been released because they have committed a crime of violence, a sex offense, an Act of terrorism, or have a detainer. (b) What justification is there for denying virtually every woman in a hospital prison compassionate release? What was the justification for denying Marie Neba? (8) Employee Issues In recent weeks, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice has issued multiple negative reports about the Bureau of Prisons' handling of the COVID-19 crisis, revealing substantial mishandling of the crisis coupled with national grievances from the National Prison Council. Questions (a) What steps have you taken to improve collaboration with the national union to address the continued threat of COVID-19 in our federal prisons and their surrounding communities? (b) Is there anything Congress can do to assist you with issues involving BOP employees? (c) Specifically, what additional resources do you need to address their concerns? What are your main issues when addressing the national union? (9) Use of Restraints on Pregnant Women At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you testified that only one pregnant woman in BOP custody has been restrained since passage of the First Step Act, and only for a short period of time. Question (a) Can you confirm that restraints were not used on Andrea Circle Bear at any point while she was in BOP custody? (10) Social Distancing On October 27, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Prisons over its handling of COVID-19 at the federal facility in Butner, NC. Among other things, the complaint alleges that the BOP has not reconfigured housing units to allow for social distancing. During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in early June, Director Carvajal committed to new efforts by the Bureau to create ``alternate living [spaces]'' in recognition that the current layout of correctional settings is ``not made for social distancing.'' Questions (a) Please identify what percentage of BOP facilities have been subject to such adjustments, especially in light of COVID- 19's current and expected acceleration this winter? (b) How is the BOP ensuring and enforcing social distancing if housing has not been adjusted? (c) How is the Bureau ensuring continued access to religious worship and services for prisoners that complies with CDC safety guidelines? (11) Transparency in Demographic Information As of November 25, there were 4,159 identified COVID-19 cases in Bureau of Prisons custody, 19,563 recoveries, and 145 deaths among incarcerated persons, and 1,339 current cases, 1,824 recovered, and 2 deaths among staff Members that have been reported. Alarmingly, even this limited data reveals a large number of coronavirus cases among incarcerated people and correctional staff, yet the data does not indicate the demographic information--such as age, sex, gender, race, disability, or sexual orientation--of staff or incarcerated people under BOP custody. According to data from the COVID Tracking Project, Black people nationwide are dying at over two times the rate of White people (113 deaths per 100,000 compared to 55 deaths per 100,000). To date, Black people account for 19% of COVID-19 deaths where race is known. In light of these types of concerns, many Members of Congress have requested that BOP collect and report demographic data. Questions (a) Is BOP recording any demographic information for positive/negative cases, recoveries, hospitalizations, and deaths? If so, what demographic data is being recorded? (b) Given that demographic data is necessary to learn whether any demographic groups are experiencing greater impact from the virus (and whether there are any disparities in terms of treatment or outcomes), can the data BOP has been collecting pertaining to COVID-19 be disaggregated to permit reporting about demographic information? (c) Going forward, will BOP commit to collecting and reporting demographic data? (12) Quarantine and Solitary Confinement Across federal facilities, rolling lockdowns and quarantines have restricted movement and increased solitary confinement. Reportedly, these have had the unintended consequence of deterring prisoners from reporting symptoms for fear of being placed in isolation or locked down. Public health officials have recommended de-densification efforts, as well as the use of medical isolation as uniquely distinct from punitive solitary confinement. Yet, reportedly, punitive isolation continues to be used in BOP in response to the pandemic. A June 2020 report found a 500% increase in solitary confinement in federal and State jails in response to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Questions (a) Please provide the BOP's policy for quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Have individuals who tested positive while in the process of being released been allowed to self- quarantine at home? (b) Will you pledge to immediately stop the practice of using solitary confinement as a substitute for medical isolation? If so, how does BOP plan to institute the use of medical isolation in place of punitive solitary confinement? (13) First Step Act Implementation As you know, the First Step Act, mandated the development and implementation of robust recidivism reduction programming in the Bureau of Prisons. Our communities--not to mention correctional staff--cannot afford an entire 2021 where the majority of federal prisoners go without constructive programming. According to the Council of State Governments, over 20 states already use electronically secure tablets to provide educational and rehabilitative programming for prisoners. Questions (a) How are rehabilitative programming and productive activities taking place during this period of modified operations in BOP? (b) What is the Bureau's strategy for continued recidivism- reducing programs in the likely event of a ``third wave'' of COVID-19 this winter or future acute outbreak? (c) Is BOP able to use electronically secure tablets for programming, as over 20 states around the country already do? During this pandemic, it is critical for federal prisoners to continue to receive support and accountability from family Members, loved ones, and faith leaders. A March 2020 BJS report using 2018 data found that 15 out of 122 federal facilities had ``video conferencing available to prisoners to communicate with individuals outside of the criminal-justice process.'' (d) Today, in December, 2020, how many facilities now have that capacity? One key goal of the bipartisan First Step Act was to facilitate greater BOP partnerships with outside third-party institutions able and willing to provide evidence-based programming and productive activities. (e) Has the BOP made efforts to communicate or advertise the opportunity for third party program providers to apply? (f) If so, how many program applications from external program providers are submitted, approved, or rejected at this time? In its explanatory statement for FY21 Commerce-Justice- Science appropriations, the Senate Appropriations Committee expressed the concern that the BOP's request for First Step Act implementation ``covers existing programming, including educational and counseling programming, which existed at BOP long before the FSA.'' (g) Is this an accurate description of the Bureau of Prison's budget request? (h) How will BOP clearly distinguish between investments and programming that preceded and followed the First Step Act so that the public and lawmakers can clearly track the Bureau's progress? (14) Deployment of BOP and USMS Personnel During Protests A June 2020 report by the Office of the Inspector General called into question Special Operations Response Team (SORT) training and specifically identified a number of dangerous elements of regular SORT training. As you indicated during the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, BOP agents or employees can be--and were this past summer--deputized as U.S. Marshals. Questions (a) Since June 2020, how many times have BOP agents or employees been deputized as U.S. Marshals? When and for what purpose? (b) Regarding the June 2020 deputization of BOP personnel as U.S. Marshals, how many complaints has the BOP received concerning use of force or behavior contrary to regulations? What is the status of those investigations? (15) Issues Raised in Recent OIG Reports The Office of the Inspector General identified that the BOP, among other DOJ agencies, has implemented procedures to comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act's requirements to document and report deaths of individuals in custody. Questions (a) What specific procedures has the USMS implemented to comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act? The Office of the Inspector General found that the BOP lacked procedures in place to ensure that vendors provided food that meets USDA and FDA standards. (b) What specific steps, if any, has the BOP taken to ensure it serves safe, edible food? (16) Questions Pertaining to Pandemic Response at Ft. Dix FCI (a) Recently a moratorium on inmate transfers to Ft. Dix FCI was lifted, despite a continued rise in positive COVID-19 cases at the facility. Since the moratorium was lifted on November 24, 2020 multiple buses have arrived at the facility carrying inmates that tested positive for COVID-19 upon arrival. What is the BOP's rationale behind continuing to move COVID-19 positive inmates to a facility with an outbreak of the virus? (b) Recently the publicly available number of active COVID- 19 cases on the BOP's COVID-19 dashboard dropped by nearly 200 overnight for Ft. Dix FCI. Can you please explain the reasoning behind the decision to confirm that these inmates are no longer carriers of the virus and do not pose a threat to spread COVID- 19 to other inmates and correctional officers? Were all of these inmates tested to ensure they were negative for COVID-19? (c) Multiple reports in the media have indicated a severe lack of quality medical care for COVID-19 positive inmates at FCI Ft. Dix. What is the BOP's procedure for caring for symptomatic COVID-19 patients? What is the procedure for BOP medical staff if an inmate's condition rapidly deteriorates? (17) Questions Submitted on Behalf of Congressman Eric Swalwell, Member of the House Judiciary Committee These questions pertain to Michael Cohen, who, until May of 2020, was imprisoned at FCI Otisville. (a) Which BOP officials reviewed Mr. Cohen's conditions of release? Who ultimately approved the conditions of release, to include prohibitions on his ability to write or publish materials? (b) Did BOP officials receive any communications from the Department of Justice or White House concerning Mr. Cohen's conditions of release? If so, please produce those documents and communications in their entirety. (c) Which BOP or U.S. Marshals monitored Mr. Cohen while he was released from federal correctional custody? Who in the Department of Justice reviewed the reports of Mr. Cohen's compliance? To whom were reports of his compliance forwarded? (d) Upon his release, what, if any, communications did the Department of Justice or the White House have with BOP officials concerning Mr. Cohen's behavior or compliance with the conditions of his release? (e) Did BOP officials receive any communications from the President's personal counsel concerning Mr. Cohen's conditions or terms of release. If so, please produce those documents and communications in their entirety. (f) Which BOP officials reviewed and who ultimately approved the transfer of Mr. Cohen from furlough and home confinement to jail? QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED MICHAEL CARVAJAL FROM REP. VAL DEMINGS 1. On August 26th, I met with representatives from FCC Coleman and Bureau of Regional Director Jeff Keller. During that meeting we discussed the deployment of BOP created ``strike teams'' to inspect and audit certain BOP facilities regarding their use and compliance with BOP COVID-19 protocols and provide recommendations to rectify issues identified a. LWith regards to the work of the ``strike teams,'' which facilities were inspected? b. LWhat specifically were the teams directed to audit and inspect? c. LWhat were the results of these audits and inspections? d. LDid any policy recommendations result from the audits and inspections? e. LWill you commit to providing this Committee with the results of the audits and inspections, including any policy infractions, resulting discipline, and recommendations? 2. With the critical budgetary concerns and shortages, what was the rationale for purchasing UV body scanners for some of its facilities, in lieu of more effective COVID-mitigation measures? 3. What steps has BOP taken to mitigate staffing shortages and issues that are COVID-related? Is BOP still widely using ``augmentation'' to respond to staffing issues? QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD DONALD W. WASHINGTON FROM CHAIR KAREN BASS (1) Transparency and COVID-19 Protocols The U.S. Marshals Service has custody of over 61,000 individuals awaiting trial, sentencing, or transfer into the Bureau of Prisons, about 70% of whom were held in over 850 different state, local, or tribal facilities under the terms of intergovernmental agreements. Despite repeated requests from this Committee and other Congresspeople, and in contrast to the BOP, there is no public source that reports the number of COVID-19 cases among those in USMS custody, nor have you published a COVID-19 response protocol. Basically, the only information the public has about what is happening in USMS custody in relation to COVID-19 is contained in occasional statements given to the press. Most recently, your agency reported that 6,676 individuals in its custody had tested positive for COVID-19 and that 20 had died. During the hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the House Judiciary Committee you indicated that this information is sometimes difficult for the USMS to obtain, but, during the hearing, you were requested to provide it nonetheless. Questions (a) What is the current data regarding the number of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths, for both detainees and staff? (b) Will you commit to begin immediately publishing on the USMS website basic COVID-19 data (as the Bureau of Prisons does) and as has been repeatedly requested by Members of this Committee and others in Congress? (c) Does the USMS have a COVID-19 protocol that it requires contract facilities to follow? How are you auditing compliance with that protocol? If no protocol exists, what audit procedures has the USMS adopted to ensure safe and humane conditions during this crisis? Will you commit to publishing those audits immediately? (2) Movement of Prisoners and Transfers Over the past months, there have been numerous reports that the U.S. Marshal Service's failures to adequately test or screen individuals for COVID-19 have led to the spread of the disease across the country. In August, the Office of the Inspector General reported that ``USMS's decentralized system . . . creates potential safety issues as detainees are transferred between facilities and to and from federal courthouses and U.S. Attorney's offices.'' Questions (a) What steps, if any, is the USMS taking now to remedy these failures and in response to the OIG's report? (b) Will you commit to publishing data about transfers and testing protocols? We have heard accounts of people in Marshals custody being moved across State and county lines and placed into local jails with no information on their transfer paperwork about whether they have been tested for or have COVID-19. In light of this information, there is a legitimate concern that individuals in your agency's custody are contributing to community spread of the coronavirus, when placed in contract facilities around the country. Some local courts and jail administrators have worked hard to protect people in jails and the community from the pandemic by decreasing the jail population, providing adequate PPE, and other measures. Question (c) Can you guarantee that Marshals policy and practice during the pandemic has not been at cross-purposes with these local efforts or led to community spread of the coronavirus? (3) Access to Counsel The pandemic has sharply curtailed pretrial access to counsel, given that in many instances attorneys cannot meet with their clients in person and given that many facilities are in virtual lockdown. Attorneys with clients in USMS custody are no exception. There are ample examples of the challenges experienced by pretrial detainees from the lack of access to counsel, including being able to get needed medical attention during this pandemic. Questions (a) Has the USMS issued directives to its contracting facilities about how they must facilitate access to counsel during the COVID-19 pandemic? (b) Has the USMS undertaken any national efforts to support the expansion of video conferencing for legal visits in local (public or private), state, and tribal facilities? If so, will you commit to publish those communications, or to produce them to this Committee? (4) Demographic Data Collection According to data from the COVID Tracking Project, Black people nationwide are dying at over two times the rate of White people (113 deaths per 100,000 compared to 55 deaths per 100,000). To date, Black people account for 19% of COVID-19 deaths where race is known. The U.S. Marshals Service does not make racial demographic data--pertaining to cases, recoveries, and deaths--available to the public. Questions (a) Is the USMS recording any demographic information for positive/negative cases, recoveries, hospitalizations, and deaths? If so, what demographic data is recorded? If data is being recorded, why has that data not been made publicly available? (b) Can you promise to make any demographic data you have been collecting publicly available as soon as possible? (5) Use of Restraints on Pregnant Women In 2008, the Bureau of Prisons ended the practice of routinely shackling pregnant women and the First Step Act of 2018 outlawed the practice except in very limited circumstances. Both the American Correctional Association and the National Commission on Correctional Healthcare have adopted standards opposing the use of shackles; however, these standards are only guidelines and are voluntary. At the end of the December 2, 2020 BOP/USMS hearing, your staff indicated that you would be reporting to the Committee the number of times restraints were used on pregnant women in USMS custody. I have reviewed your December 28, 2020 annual report to Congress pertaining to USMS compliance with section 301 of the First Step Act of 2018. Questions (a) Please provide information about the number of times restraints have been used on pregnant women in USMS custody, for as far back as you have been collecting such data. Please provide details pertaining to each instance that restraints were used and the rationale for their use. (b) Your December 28 report provides USMS data pertaining to the use of restraints on pregnant women, from October 1, 2019 through September 20, 2020. Please provide the same data since September 21, 2020. (c) The case of Andrea Circle Bear (a.k.a., Andrea High Bear) was mentioned during the December 2 hearing. Ms. Circle Bear was eight months pregnant, gave birth while on a ventilator, in BOP custody, and ultimately died from COVID-19. Can you confirm that restraints were affirmatively not used on Ms. Circle Bear when the U.S. Marshals transported her from South Dakota to FMC-Carswell, in Texas? (d) More generally, what is the USMS's policy regarding the use of restraints on pregnant women? What is your specific policy pertaining to the use of restraints while transporting pregnant women? (6) Issue Raised in Recent OIG Reports The Office of the Inspector General identified that the BOP, among other DOJ agencies, has implemented procedures to comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act's requirements to document and report deaths of individuals in custody. Question (a) What specific procedures has the USMS implemented to comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act? [all]