[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                   OVERSIGHT OF THE BUREAU OF PRISONS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

       SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE

                                 OF THE

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION
                               __________

                       TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2023
                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-51
                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
         
         
                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]         


               Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                        JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair

DARRELL ISSA, California             JERROLD NADLER, New York, Ranking 
KEN BUCK, Colorado                       Member
MATT GAETZ, Florida                  ZOE LOFGREN, California
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona                  SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
TOM McCLINTOCK, California           STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin               HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., 
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky                  Georgia
CHIP ROY, Texas                      ADAM SCHIFF, California
DAN BISHOP, North Carolina           ERIC SWALWELL, California
VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana             TED LIEU, California
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin          PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon                  J. LUIS CORREA, California
BEN CLINE, Virginia                  MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
LANCE GOODEN, Texas                  JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey            LUCY McBATH, Georgia
TROY NEHLS, Texas                    MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
BARRY MOORE, Alabama                 VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
KEVIN KILEY, California              DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
HARRIET HAGEMAN, Wyoming             CORI BUSH, Missouri
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas               GLENN IVEY, Maryland
LAUREL LEE, Florida                  BECCA BALINT, Vermont
WESLEY HUNT, Texas
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina
Vacant
                                 ------                                

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND FEDERAL
                        GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE

                       ANDY BIGGS, Arizona, Chair

MATT GAETZ, Florida                  SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas, Ranking 
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin                   Member
TROY NEHLS, Texas                    LUCY McBATH, Georgia
BARRY MOORE, Alabama                 MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
KEVIN KILEY, California              CORI BUSH, Missouri
LAUREL LEE, Florida                  STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., 
                                         Georgia

               CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
          AMY RUTKIN, Minority Staff Director & Chief of Staff

                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                       Tuesday, November 7, 2023

                                                                   Page

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

The Honorable Andy Biggs, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime and 
  Federal Government Surveillance from the State of Arizona......     1
The Honorable Lucy McBath, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime 
  and Federal Government Surveillance from the State of Georgia..     3

                                WITNESS

Colette S. Peters, Director, Bureau of Prisons
  Oral Testimony.................................................     5
  Prepared Testimony.............................................     8

          LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

All materials submitted for the record by the Subcommittee on 
  Crime and Federal Government Surveillance are listed below.....    37

Statement from the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, Ranking Member 
  of the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government 
  Surveillance from the State of Texas, submitted by the 
  Honorable Lucy McBath, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime 
  and Federal Government Surveillance from the State of Georgia, 
  for the record
Statement from Debra Perlin, Policy Director for Citizens for 
  Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), submitted by 
  the Honorable Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., a Member of the 
  Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance from 
  the State of Georgia, for the record

                 QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD

Questions for Colette S. Peters, Director, Bureau of Prisons, 
  submitted by the Honorable Troy Nehls, a Member of the 
  Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance from 
  the State of Texas; and the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking 
  Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of New 
  York, for the record
    No response at the time of publication

 
                   OVERSIGHT OF THE BUREAU OF PRISONS

                              ----------                              


                       Tuesday, November 7, 2023

                        House of Representatives

       Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance

                       Committee on the Judiciary

                             Washington, DC

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in 
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Hon. Andy Biggs 
[Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Biggs, Gaetz, Nehls, Moore, Kiley, 
Lee, Fry, McBath, Bush, and Johnson of Georgia.
    Mr. Biggs. The Subcommittee will come to order.
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a 
recess at any time.
    We welcome everyone to today's hearing on the Federal 
Bureau of Prisons.
    I ask our friend from Florida, Ms. Lee, if she'll lead us 
in the pledge of allegiance.
    All. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States 
of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one 
Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for 
all.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Ms. Lee.
    Without objection, the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Ivey, 
will be able to participate in today's hearing for the purpose 
of questioning the witness if a Member yields him time for that 
purpose.
    I see no objection.
    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
    Again, I thank the Members for coming. I thank Director 
Peters for coming today, and the audience, we appreciate you 
being here.
    This hearing is ``Oversight of the Bureau of Prisons.'' The 
Federal Bureau of Prisons is a component of the Department of 
Justice. BOP's admission is to protect society by confining 
offenders in the controlled environments of prisons and 
community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost 
efficient, and appropriately secure. BOP provides work and 
other self-improvement opportunities to assist offenders in 
becoming law-abiding citizens.
    At a time of rising crime, this is a critically important 
function. BOP operates 122 institutions in locations throughout 
the Nation. These institutions are operated at five different 
security levels to confine offenders in an appropriate manner. 
As of last week, BOP is responsible for the custody and care of 
more than 158,000 inmates and employees, more than 34,000 
individuals.
    Nearly five years ago, President Trump signed into law the 
First Step Act of 2018. That act sought to reduce the size of 
the Federal prison population and reduce recidivism while still 
maintaining public safety. The Act's three main goals were, (1) 
correctional reform, (2) sentencing reform, and (3) 
reauthorization of the Second Chance Act of 2007.
    BOP is charged with much of the implementation of the First 
Step Act. As I mentioned earlier, we're experiencing a 
nationwide spike in crime, and it is vital that BOP gets this 
implementation right. The First Step Act required DOJ to 
develop a system for BOP to use to assess the risk of 
recidivism of Federal prisoners, and to assign prisoners to 
evidence-based recidivism reduction programs. These programs 
include literacy programs, occupational, educational programs, 
trade skill programs, and substance use disorder programs.
    Inmates who complete the recidivism reduction program can 
earn additional time credits which allows them to be placed in 
home confinement or an RRC earlier than they would have been. 
This is why I said BOP needs to make sure they get it right.
    We cannot allow criminals to leave our prisons early unless 
we can ensure that they will not reoffend. This Subcommittee 
has examined the implementation of the First Step Act on a 
bipartisan basis since its passage, and we'll continue that 
conversation today. However, there's a larger underlying issue 
that has persistently plagued the successful operation of BOP, 
including the implementation of the First Step Act.
    BOP consistently grapples with challenges of low staffing 
and high attrition rates, intensifying the risk in an already 
hazardous profession. As I mentioned, BOP employs approximately 
35,000 personnel across various prisons and facilities 
throughout the U.S. That's a five-percent decline from the 
37,000 employed in 2020. Yet, the prison inmate population has 
not declined. In fact, it has increased by 3,000.
    As of last month, more than 20 percent of the 20,446 
Congressionally authorized corrections officer positions remain 
vacant. More than two years ago, the GAO published a study 
identifying several underlying causes for these staffing 
challenges. The GAO analysis highlighted that BOP had not been 
proficient in accurately assessing or providing documentation 
to support its staffing deficits. GAO identified that BOP 
resorted to amplifying the overtime hours of its personnel to 
mitigate staffing shortages. As a result, accumulative overtime 
hours surged by 102 percent between 2015-2019. This escalation 
and compulsory overtime imposed significant stress on the BOP 
workforce, which eroded workplace morale and instigated the 
departure of seasoned corrections officers. Consequently, these 
actions amplified the safety vulnerabilities for the remaining 
personnel and inadvertently extended the wait times for inmates 
to access basic services.
    I know that Director Peters is acutely aware of this 
persistent problem, and I look forward to hearing from her 
today on the steps that BOP is taking to address the staffing 
shortage and other issues at the Bureau.
    I appreciate you being here, Director. I look forward to 
hearing from you.
    I'll yield back.
    Mr. Biggs. Ms. Jackson Lee, the Ranking Member, is absent 
today, and Ms. McBath is stepping in her place. I recognize her 
as the Ranking Member for an opening statement.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you, Chair.
    Regretfully, as you've expressed, Ranking Member Jackson 
Lee is unable to attend today's hearing. However, she tells me 
that she had a good productive meeting with Director Peters 
yesterday and pledges her continued support of BOP and its 
mission.
    In her first year with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 
Director Peters has taken noteworthy steps to improve the 
culture and management of the agency and increase 
accountability and transparency. She has rooted out employee 
misconduct, ending the abuse and neglect of inmates, addressing 
the staffing deficits at BOP facilities, and improving 
implementation of the First Step Act.
    As I have said before,

        Incarcerated Americans should not fear death when they enter 
        our Federal Prison System, and correctional officers should not 
        fear for their safety at work.

Our Federal prisons must serve not as just institutions solely 
for confinement and punishment, but also for rehabilitation and 
preparation for successful reentry into society.
    We as Members of Congress have a duty to the inmates that 
are housed in our BOP's facilities, the communities that they 
will eventually return to, and the nearly 40,000 employees in 
122 BOP institutions across the country. That is why I joined 
with Representative Kelly Armstrong, along with Senators Dick 
Durbin, Jon Ossoff, and Mike Braun, to introduce the Federal 
Prison Oversight Act, following a ten-month investigation into 
corruption, abuse, and misconduct that U.S. penitentiary 
Atlanta, where I represent Georgia, and within the entirety of 
the BOP.
    Across the country there are numerous cases involving 
misconduct by BOP employees, ranging from theft of government 
property, obstruction of justice, and sexually abusing 
prisoners. These cases do not provide a full picture of 
employee misconduct at BOP. According to the agency's annual 
Office of Internal Affairs Report, investigators opened 14,361 
cases in the most recent three-year period involving alleged 
misconduct by a staggering 17,907 employees.
    In the most recent fiscal year, when misconduct allegations 
were lodged against almost one of every five BOP employees, the 
charge was deemed sustained nearly 30 percent of the time. The 
majority received nothing more than a written reprimand or 
suspension. In about one of every 25 cases, no action was taken 
at all.
    While it is important to identify and hold bad apples 
responsible, it is doubly important to put in place measures 
that will deter future employee misconduct and discourage 
coverups.
    We know that the problems facing BOP have existed for quite 
some time, and we also recognize that change will not happen 
overnight. There are dangerous conditions which still exist 
today that threaten the safety of inmates and staff that 
requires our immediate attention.
    Just two months ago, a whistleblower claimed that staff at 
FCI Hazelton are covering up serious misconduct that includes 
releasing the wrong inmates, physically and verbally abusing 
inmates, using racial slurs, attempting to cover up inmate 
escapes, and misusing restricted housing. Such behavior is 
unacceptable and cannot continue.
    By adding an additional independent layer of oversight, the 
bipartisan Federal Prison Oversight Act would strengthen our 
Federal Prison System, bolster public safety, and provide a 
mechanism for incarcerated individuals and their loved ones to 
protect their civil and human rights.
    Last year and prior to Director Peters' appointment, 
Ranking Member Sheila Jackson Lee visited several facilities in 
Beaumont, Texas, following an incident that triggered a 
national lockdown of BOP's institutions. There she found staff 
who said that they were overworked and underpaid. The staff at 
Hazelton agree. They reported chronic understaffing, resulting 
in massive amounts of mandated overtime, as well as reliance on 
medical staff and counselors to fill in as correctional 
officers. Staff at USPI Atlanta and FCI Jesup experiencing 
similar staffing issues, report that fatigue, exhaustion, and 
low morale have reduced staff productivity and led to more sick 
leave, retirements, resignations, and staff leaving to other 
agencies for better pay.
    Since Ranking Member Jackson Lee's visit, Director Peters 
has deployed various strategies to recruit and retain staff by 
securing and providing retention incentive bonuses at certain 
facilities and changing the marketing messaging. I am 
encouraged by a conversation that I had with her just recently 
where she explained that the BOP's turnover rate has decreased 
by 20 percent. Staffing is at 70 percent for correctional 
officers. The agency is at 90 percent overall staffing, and 198 
out of 200 positions for reentry coordinators have been filled.
    In addition to staffing challenges, an increasing number of 
facilities and supporting infrastructure have reached or 
exceeded their useful life, such as USP Atlanta, which is one 
of the oldest BOP facilities in the country. So far, Director 
Peters and her team have identified a $2 billion deficit around 
the facilities that prioritizes only those repairs and 
improvements that address risks to life and safety.
    To be clear, Director Peters has made great progress during 
her short term at BOP, and she should be applauded for that. 
Not only has she taken steps to better care for BOP staff, but 
she has also prioritized humanizing conditions for prison 
population.
    In our recent conversation, Director Peters shared that BOP 
is collaborating with the National Institute of Justice to 
improve the use of restrictive housing while BOP staffers are 
surveying various States to determine best practices, which 
should please many of us. I am sure that like me, Ranking 
Member Jackson Lee would want to know when we can see a change 
in BOP's use of restrictive housing since recent statistics 
show that BOP is utilizing this practice more now than in the 
previous decade.
    There is still so much work to be done at BOP, an agency 
that is a critical component of the overall safety of the 
country. The agency has a responsibility to focus on each of 
the critical issues it faces to carry out the ideals of justice 
and accountability, while promoting successful rehabilitation 
and maintaining the custody and control of incarcerated 
prisoners and persons in a humane and safe manner.
    In sum, BOP must fully carry out every aspect of its 
mission, and Congress must ensure BOP has the tools and funding 
that it needs to do so.
    Thank you for being here today, Director Peters. I look 
forward to our discussion, and to ask Mr. Chair for unanimous 
consent to enter into--the statement of Ranking Member Jackson 
Lee into the record.
    Mr. Biggs. Without objection.
    Mrs. McBath. Thank you.
    Mr. Biggs. The gentlelady yields back.
    Without objection, all other opening statements will be 
included in the record.
    I will now introduce today's witness, Ms. Colette S. 
Peters. Ms. Peters is the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
Prisons. She was sworn in by the Attorney General on August 2, 
2022. She oversees 122 Bureau of Prison facilities, six 
regional offices, two staff training centers, and 22 
residential reentry management offices.
    We welcome our witness today and thank her for appearing.
    Now, we'll begin by swearing you in, Director, if you would 
please rise and rise your right hand.
    Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury the 
testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best 
of your knowledge and information and belief, so help you God?
    Ms. Peters. I do.
    Mr. Biggs. Let the record reflect that the witness has 
answered in the affirmative.
    Again, I want you to know your written testimony has been 
entered into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, we will 
ask you to limit your opening remarks to five minutes. You'll 
see a yellow light, then a red light. Then after that I'll kind 
of wave at you and maybe tap on the thing to just remind you to 
wrap up, but we're looking forward to hearing from you.
    With that, Ms. Peters, you are recognized for your five-
minute opening statement.

                 STATEMENT OF COLETTE S. PETERS

    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Chair 
Biggs--Ranking Member Jackson Lee is not here--thank you 
Congresswoman McBath and the Members of the Committee. I am 
honored to appear before you today to discuss the important and 
impactful work happening at the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
    Since I was sworn in last August, I have visited more than 
25 of our institutions, and these are my best days. It is a 
privilege to meet our corrections professionals while walking 
the halls of our institutions. They truly are my inspiration, 
and I am grateful for their dedication.
    It is with their important work in mind that we engaged in 
strategic planning and modernized our mission, our vision, and 
core values. We are now guided by the principles of normalcy 
and humanity and core values that emphasize accountability, 
integrity, respect, compassion, and correctional excellence. We 
engaged in proactive outreach to Member of Congress, members of 
the media, advocacy organizations, and justice-involved 
individuals, while maintaining a very collaborative 
relationship with our national union. This strategic vision, 
along with clear expectations, has put us on a course to 
success.
    The vast majority of our employees are hardworking, ethical 
corrections professionals who expect that those who are engaged 
in misconduct be held accountable. We added substantial 
resources in this last year to our Office of Internal Affairs. 
We collaborated with our law enforcement partners to 
investigate criminal misconduct and held individuals 
accountable up to and including termination and prosecution. I 
have communicated clear expectations that misconduct and 
retaliation will not be tolerated.
    I also want to address restrictive housing, because despite 
our efforts over the last few years to drive these numbers 
down, we have seen them increase. While I am glad to report 
that we have seen them start to decrease over the last couple 
of months, we have much more work to do. We know restrictive 
housing is not an effective deterrent and it can increase an 
individual's future criminality. So, we created a short- and 
long-term plan.
    First, we formed a work group comprising of our members of 
our executive team who have traveled across the country to 
review best practices from other correctional systems around 
the country and around the globe.
    Long term, we entered into a historic partnership with the 
National Institute of Justice, and they are going to bring an 
external organization of experts in to provide recommendations.
    The success of reforms like these will rely on the work of 
our correctional professionals, and we need more of them, so we 
have been working diligently on our recruitment and retention 
crisis. Since the beginning of this year, we have seen a 60 
percent increase in new hires and a 20 percent decrease in 
individuals leaving our organization.
    When I was sworn in last year, we had an 86 percent fill 
rate, and to date we have filled 90 percent. Yet, we are still 
not where we need to be, and until we solve this problem, we 
must continue to be concerned about employee wellness and our 
need to rely on augmentation and overtime.
    Another major issue for our employees is our maintenance 
and repair backlog. Healthy facility structures are critical to 
our operations. Yet, we have a $2 billion maintenance and 
repair backlog, which only accounts for the most serious 
categories, those safety and life categories. We are 
contracting, again, with an external organization to come in 
and assess our overall problem.
    Now, inside these structures we are the de facto mental 
health hospital, the largest provider of alcohol and drug 
treatment. We have nearly 160,000 patients, many of whom come 
to us with very complex issues and chronic disease. With these 
complexities we must ensure that we operate holistically as a 
healthcare organization, and we have contracted with an 
external entity to provide recommendations on correctional 
health best practices and in implementing those principles in 
normalcy and humanity.
    We remain committed to the First Step Act implementation. 
Roughly 104,000 individuals are participating today in over 110 
evidence-based programs and productive activities. More than 
25,000 have been released through the application of earned 
time credits.
    As I have said many times, I believe in accountability, 
oversight, and transparency. I know we cannot do this work 
alone.
    So, Mr. Chair and Members of the Subcommittee, I am honored 
to speak with you on behalf of our dedicated employees across 
the country.
    This concludes my opening statement, and I look forward to 
your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Peters follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Director. We appreciate that.
    Now, I recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Gaetz.
    Mr. Gaetz. I was very heartened by your discussion of site 
visits to our prisons to get a firsthand understanding of 
what's going on there. Sometimes Members of Congress have had 
challenges doing that. Could you give us some advice, if we 
wanted to glean those benefits and get that firsthand 
experience, what's the best way for us to go about that with 
your team?
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congressman. So, if you have your 
team reach out to our Office of Legislative Affairs, we will be 
happy to make that arrangement.
    Mr. Gaetz. Thank you so much.
    Does the Bureau of Prisons retaliate against people based 
on Constitutionally protected speech?
    Ms. Peters. I have been very clear that retaliation will 
not be stood for on my watch.
    Mr. Gaetz. You're confident that's being observed 
throughout the Bureau?
    Ms. Peters. I'm confident that message has been delivered, 
and if anyone engages in retaliation, we will hold them 
accountable.
    Mr. Gaetz. Are you familiar with the matter of John Strand?
    Ms. Peters. That name is not familiar to me, no.
    Mr. Gaetz. So, Mr. Strand was a witness at a hearing that 
we had regarding some of the civil rights concerns of people 
who'd interacted with the Department of Justice in the January 
6th matters. He was convicted, sentenced, and is at FCI Miami. 
I'd received word that he had been placed into enhanced 
confinement and into higher acuity, securing as a consequence 
of information that others had put out on his Twitter feed.
    So, is that something--does that ring a bell to you?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, I wouldn't be able to speak to an 
individual's circumstances regarding their behavior inside our 
institutions. What I can assure you is that if an individual is 
placed in our special housing unit, it would be for conduct 
that happened inside the institution.
    Mr. Gaetz. What's a special housing unit?
    Ms. Peters. A special housing unit is one of our 
restrictive housing placements that could include disciplinary 
segregation, protective custody, and would house individuals 
that either were at harm to themselves or others or had 
actually engaged in misbehavior inside our institutions.
    Mr. Gaetz. What I'm worried about is that Mr. Strand gave 
us testimony about some of his concerns. As you know, people 
give us testimony, we sort through what's right and wrong and 
should be acted on and shouldn't be acted on. It's not gospel, 
it's just testimony.
    Then, thereafter, people were posting on some of his social 
media platforms his concerns about the treatment he'd received 
at the Bureau. Then, I sent a letter to you concerned about 
that. Because like you, I don't want anyone retaliated against 
for Constitutionally protected speech. Thereafter, I got a 
letter back from the aforementioned Office of Legislative 
Affairs in your office and they say, in part, Mr. Strand was 
moved to a secure housing unit with increased supervision and 
frequent employee contact on September 26, 2023, pending 
completion of an investigation.
    So, I guess my question is, when someone--is that akin to 
what we would normally think about as solitary confinement, 
those words, ``secure housing unit with increased supervision 
and frequent employee contact''?
    Ms. Peters. We would use the word ``restrictive'' housing.
    Mr. Gaetz. OK. So, what's this then? Because this guy's is 
a nonviolent--he was never violent toward anyone, so I'm just 
wondering why the assets that we fund for the highest acuity 
violent people would be used for this purpose.
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, we use that special housing unit 
for individuals that engage in any sort of misconduct inside 
our institutions. I don't know what he was found to be guilty 
of by our hearings administrative process that would warrant 
his need to go into restrictive housing. I assure you we have 
administrative processes that people have to go through before 
those placements actually occur.
    Mr. Gaetz. Yes. I get that you can't know the conditions of 
every single prisoner throughout the Bureau. This is one I've 
ripened and sent to you because I am worried that throughout 
our Department of Justice and what we've endured, that there 
are some people who are being used as pawns, and they're being 
mistreated to send a message to other people.
    I'm grateful that you've said here that is not your 
doctrine, you don't want to see that happen. You also haven't 
been able to share with us in entire confidence that this isn't 
happening in some cases. I'm worried that it's happening here.
    Have you heard of the matter of Owen Shroyer?
    Ms. Peters. No, that name is not familiar to me.
    Mr. Gaetz. Very similar fact pattern. Somebody who had 
spoken out, was prominent in the public, was convicted as a 
consequence of activities on January 6th, and now feels as 
though there's specific Bureau of Prison retaliation.
    I don't think any group of people should be retaliated 
against, so I look forward to taking you up on the offer to 
perhaps go and do some site visits and see how people are being 
treated and get that information directly. So, I hope I get 
prompt cooperation from OLA.
    I thank the Chair, and I yield back.
    Ms. Lee. [Presiding.] Thank you, Mr. Gaetz.
    The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from Georgia, Ms. 
McBath for five minutes.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Director Peters, I have introduced the Federal Prison 
Oversight Act, which I'm sure you are aware of, to increase 
accountability and transparency across our prison system. To 
ensure that the safety of our prisoners is a top priority, we 
need to have an efficient method of identifying the high-risk 
facilities that require more guidance and more attention.
    Director Peters, what system or metric system does the BOP 
offer to be able to identify these kinds of facilities?
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think that we have 
a variety of oversight that helps us identify the high-risk 
facilities, including oversight from the Government 
Accountability Office, the Office of the Inspector General, and 
also our program review division who conducts audits of our 
institutions, including unannounced site visits and audits. We 
rely on that data, including our regional offices that go in 
and perform independent reviews, interviewing the adults in 
custody, interviewing our employees, and creating an assessment 
of each one of our institutions so that we can address problems 
early on, rather than waiting down the road.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you. In our meeting last week, we 
discussed the national recidivism rate. I was pleased to learn 
that BOP has achieved a staffing level of reentry coordinators 
to 99 percent--I commend you on that--with 100 percent expected 
very soon.
    What steps should we as Members of Congress take to support 
those reentry programs and to reduce recidivism on rates 
further than where they are now?
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think resources are 
always the issue. I think our ability to contract with our 
residential reentry centers is really a golden nugget at the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons because they are in the communities 
that these individuals are coming back to, they know what 
resources are there, and they are able to drove those 
wraparound resources as it relates to programming, treatment, 
education, employment so that they become productive tax-paying 
citizens once they enter our community.
    Ms. McBath. Last Congress, Ranking Member Jackson Lee, who 
is not with us today, convened two hearings on the oversight of 
BOP with a focus on the need to implement the First Step Act. 
She wanted to implement that fully and very, very thoughtfully.
    Since then, Director Peters has created policies that have 
actually corrected BOP's implementation of FSA, First Step Act. 
Yet, inmates continue to complain about the lack of classes. I 
understand that there is still no reliable calculator, yet to 
determine the number of FSA credits that a prisoner can 
actually earn during their time in prison, and a shortage of 
halfway house placements.
    Director Peters, can you just tell us how you intend on 
solving this problem?
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman. So, we are very proud 
of our First Step Act implementation. We have over 104,000 
people participating in programs today in over 110 evidence-
based programs and productive activities. Yet, we can do 
better. As we now have pivoted out of the pandemic, being able 
to pull people into classrooms was difficult during that time 
period. Now, as I visit our institutions and talk to our 
employees and our wardens, they're thrilled to talk about the 
ideas they have around expanding our programs and expanding 
space inside our institutions. That's been really difficult, so 
they are getting really creative about that as well.
    I think your expansion of Pell grants and access to those 
in our care and custody is going to be magnificent for this 
population and their ability to engage in that higher-level 
education after receiving their GED. So, I think we are on the 
right track.
    Again, you talked about overtime and augmentation, so 
recruitment and retention. Solving that problem is going to 
solve a lot of other underlying problems at the Bureau, 
including our ability to continue that programming so that 
we're not pulling those people that lead those programming--or 
those teachers from their posts as teachers on the units to be 
correctional officers.
    Ms. McBath. I have one last question for you. Would you 
object to an additional layer of oversight at BOP?
    Ms. Peters. I always welcome oversight. I'm going to say 
that again and again. The only thing I would ask is that when 
you consider additional oversight and legislation, that we then 
receive the appropriate resources so that I'm not left flat-
footed with additional requests and additional oversight or 
additional requests for information and then we don't have the 
staff and resources to respond in a timely and efficient 
manner.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Congresswoman McBath.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. 
Nehls.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Director Peters, thank you for being here. As you know, in 
2018, President Donald J. Trump rightfully rolled back Obama-
era policies related to its Transgender Offender Manual. 
President Trump's policy simply removed a sentence that 
instructed BOP officials to consider transgender inmates' 
gender identity when making decisions regarding prison housing. 
President Trump mandated BOP officials use biological sex, now 
biological sex, as the initial determination for placement 
decisions.
    I believe this was commonsense. I think America would 
agree. Ladies should be held with ladies, and I think men 
should be held with men. In a string of policy reversals over 
the past three years, President Biden reissued Obama's 
guidelines, given even further to require prison staff to use a 
transgender person's preferred names and pronouns. You agree 
with this?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, we are required to provide medical 
and mental healthcare for all individuals, including those who 
identify as transgender.
    Mr. Nehls. So, that answer then is a yes, pretty much a 
yes?
    Ms. Peters. Yes.
    Mr. Nehls. OK. In your testimony, you stated:

        Recognizing that incarcerated women, including those in the 
        LGBTQ community, require different resources and supports than 
        men, we recognize that we must create environments that respond 
        to the realities of women's lives and address the issues 
        specific to their lived experiences.

So, can you provide the definition of a woman? What is a woman, 
since you believe there's a difference?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, so I think in the supermajority of 
our housing placements at the Federal Bureau of Prisons, we 
place individuals based on their biological sex. All but 11 
individuals at the Federal Bureau of Prisons are placed in 
housing assignments based on their biological sex.
    Mr. Nehls. What does that start then, Director?
    OK. So, I just got convicted of robbing convenience stores. 
All of a sudden, I go to court and they convict me and I'm 
going to prison. Now, instead of saying my name is Troy Nehls, 
I'm now going to say my name is Suzie Nehls and I am a woman, 
right. I just make that claim.
    At what point in time during this spectrum will that allow 
me then to release the bull into the pen of heifers?
    Ms. Peters. So, Congressman, in this scenario, I suspect 
you're talking about producing a false claim and that--
    Mr. Nehls. Or whatever. I mean, how can you deny it?
    Ms. Peters. --identify as a man.
    Mr. Nehls. I believe I'm a woman now.
    Ms. Peters. What would happen then is it would trigger a 
very complex, serious evaluation from degreed medical doctors 
and psychologists who would conduct an evaluation based on your 
gender identity.
    Mr. Nehls. Have we released--to your knowledge, have we 
released anybody that has not gone through the transition into 
the pen of heifers?
    Ms. Peters. Have we released them? Sorry, sir, I'm not 
understanding.
    Mr. Nehls. Yes. If I say I'm a man--I'm a woman now, and I 
haven't had any surgeries up to this point, maybe I'll get them 
while I'm in prison, because I'm assuming we're paying for 
those, right?
    Ms. Peters. We have paid for two gender-affirming 
surgeries.
    Mr. Nehls. Paid two. So, once you start, you're going to 
continue, you ain't changing that, right?
    Ms. Peters. There are five--
    Mr. Nehls. I mean, look at this guy. This is an interesting 
guy, folks. Look at this guy. His name is Peter Langan. He's 
got long hair. Look at this guy. He looks like a bad, bad guy. 
He is a bad guy. He's a Nazi--ex-Nazi terrorist. He's a bad, 
bad hombre. This guy wants to be referred to as Donna.
    Do your employees--do you require them to say--call this 
guy now named--he must be called Donna?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, no. In fact, to produce a name 
change--
    Mr. Nehls. Well, he's suing, he's suing you all because he 
wants to--he's claiming that his Eighth Amendment rights were 
violated for not been provided gender-conforming surgery.
    For the people at home, this man is an ex-Nazi bank robber. 
In June, his lawsuit was settled. I would like to know whether 
this means that inmates now have the Eighth Amendment right to 
sex changes? Are we paying for guys like this who are just 
sick? We send them to prison, we're restricting their freedom, 
and now this guy says he wants to be Donna. I suppose I 
understand why he'd want to be Donna because you want to 
release this guy into the pan of heifers. You're releasing this 
guy into the pan of heifers, is what you're doing. Isn't that 
what a guy would want to do?
    If I'm going to prison for ten years and you're restricting 
my freedom, I guess I would want to go to the prison where the 
ladies are. Wouldn't you suggest--would that be a good idea? If 
you're allowing that to take place through this process by 
talking to these shrinks and these guys, I'm going to convince 
you I'm a woman and I'm going to enjoy five years in prison. As 
a matter of fact, half of them would probably say, don't even 
release me on parole, I'm having too much fun here.
    Ms. Peters. Congressman--
    Mr. Nehls. I'm having too much fun.
    It is disgusting, quite honestly, what we've done to our 
country. Biden--I have three daughters. I have some real 
issues. They're very troubling. You can do better than that.
    I yield.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Nehls.
    The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. 
Johnson, for five minutes.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Director Peters, thank you for your dedication to public 
service and corrections work.
    I suppose that the most likely scenario that presents to 
the Bureau of Prisons when an individual comes into the system 
and is of the LGBTQ status or category, that person oftentimes 
is in the middle of a sex change operation, like the January 
6th insurrection defendant who broke into the Capitol and was 
convicted after a jury trial. Is that correct?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, I wouldn't be able to speak to an 
individual person who's incarcerated--
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Yes, but you're familiar with the 
case, then, I'm talking about, though, right?
    Ms. Peters. I'm not familiar with that specific case.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Oh, OK. Well, there's a woman who 
was a defendant, formerly a--well, let me say she's in 
transition from being a man to a woman, lead a column of 
insurrectionists up the stairs of the Capitol. Clearly, she was 
in the midst of a sex change operation.
    You treat folks with humanity when they present to the 
Bureau of Prisons, despite the fact that over the years, 
Director Peters, actually since the eighties when Ronald Reagan 
came in with a tough on crime, eliminate rehabilitation, focus 
on punishment and low taxes, less government, along with bills 
that--from the Congress that produced more Federal inmates 
because of a dramatic push in new laws.
    So, what we've seen is an explosion of prison inmates--
actually, inmates--actually, the prison population almost 
doubled by 2,000. Isn't that correct?
    Ms. Peters. It has grown dramatically in the last two 
decades, yes.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. It has continued to grow since 
then, while at the same time there have been major cost--or 
major funding reductions for the Bureau of Prisons. Isn't that 
correct?
    Ms. Peters. Well, our budget continues to grow. It is not 
growing in line with the population--
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, as a matter of fact, you've 
got about--according to a Roll Call article I'm looking at 
here, Congress is poised--it's dated September 12, 2023--
Congress is poised to spend less next Fiscal Year on Federal 
prison infrastructure even as a Federal watchdog reported this 
year that the agency is in dire need and has lowballed 
maintenance funding requests for years. According to this 
article, you've got about $2 billion in needs, but yet funding 
from this MAGA Republican Conference in 2023, their draft 
Commerce, Justice, and Science spending bill puts forward a 
mere $273 million. Isn't that correct?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, we have a $2 billion reported 
problem. I will share with the Committee that's an old number. 
We're hoping to get a better assessment on a different number.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. It's far more than $273 million.
    Ms. Peters. It's far more than $2 billion. Over the last 
ten years, the average allocation for maintenance and repairs 
was about $100 million a year.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. So, also, staffing shortages are 
impacted by reduced Federal revenue. Isn't that correct?
    Ms. Peters. Our recruitment and retention issue I think is 
compounded both by the economy right now and the workforce, as 
well as changes in how people view law enforcement positions.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. So, the same Republicans who come 
up here and criticize you and the Bureau of Prisons today are 
the same ones who historically have defunded your operation.
    Let me ask you this, Director Peters, do you believe that 
the Bureau of Prisons could benefit from independent oversight?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, as I've said before, I believe in 
oversight, I welcome oversight. We've made it very clear inside 
the Bureau that when the Government Accountability Office shows 
up for an audit or the Office of the Inspector General comes in 
for an unannounced audit, that we will open our doors and 
welcome them in.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. You think that would be helpful?
    Ms. Peters. Yes, I do. I believe that oversight is helpful. 
The Office of the Inspector General has begun unannounced 
audits and visits now that we are out of the pandemic. I think 
those visits have proved very helpful.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. I yield back.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. 
Moore, for five minutes.
    Mr. Moore. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Director Peters, thank you for being here today.
    As a Christian, I know a lot of times we live under grace 
and we certainly need forgiveness. I don't think there's an 
exemption for prisoners. I think people who are incarcerated 
also need second chances. I'm a proponent of that.
    In Alabama, we have an amazing prison system, and one of 
them specifically is J.F. Ingram, where they actually bring 
incarcerated individuals over to a college next door. They do 
this, certain individuals are picked out and then they train 
them in skills. So, some are certified welders when they come 
out, some are body people, some can do cosmetics, all kinds of 
neat stuff. We've learned that the recidivism rate is so much 
lower coming out of J.F. Ingram right now than any system in 
Alabama. So, I'd encourage you to look at the model there for 
what they do.
    As a business owner, people come to me all the time looking 
for jobs. So, if I've got an individual that walks in that's 
been incarcerated but he actually can lay a bead on a welder, I 
may not start him at the same pay rate that I would somebody 
who has a clean record, so to speak. At the same time, I'll 
start him a little lower maybe, him or her, depending on what--
like Sue Nehls maybe comes in looking for a job.
    The point of the matter is, if they have a skill set, we 
can put them in the workforce. They don't go back to the same 
old same old. They don't go back to the same group of people, 
the same group of people that they were running with prior to 
being incarcerated. So, we found that recidivism rates have 
dropped dramatically.
    So, I'm working on legislation now with--actually, it's 
bipartisan legislation with Member Trone. We're looking at the 
ID; coming out of prison, for somebody to get an ID. This is 
not for anybody who is illegal. They have to be U.S. citizens. 
I have to remind my friends, they have to be U.S. citizens. We 
would certainly appreciate your support.
    Are you aware that we're working to try to get an ID issued 
by the Federal Prison System so when people come out, that if 
they go for a job--and this is not something to vote or 
anything like that--but if they go for a job or if they have to 
get housing sometimes they have to have an ID, we think this is 
one way to help recidivism. I think it's something we need to 
look at.
    Are you aware of that program and what we're doing?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, I am. I've had this conversation 
with Congressman Trone. You'll be pleased to know that we 
piloted an ID program, and it was successful. So, we're now 
rolling it out to all our institutions. So, beginning at the 
top of next year, everyone leaving our custody will leave with 
an ID issued by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
    Where we need your help is for the States accepting them. 
So, right now, we have about 15 or 16 States that say that 
they'll accept them at the Department of Motor Vehicles but 
only 16. So, any help you can give there would be 
tremendously--we'd be filled with gratitude.
    Mr. Moore. To me, this a fiscal conservative issue in a 
sense that if we--what are we paying per prisoner now to house 
them in the Federal prisons annually, for an individual?
    Ms. Peters. On a daily rate, I think that average is about 
$122 a day.
    Mr. Moore. Got you. Got you. So, for every individual that 
we can get into the workforce, into society working and 
producing, I think that's a long-term win for the American 
people, certainly for society and communities. So, we'll be 
working with you on that issue.
    Again, I would encourage you to check into J.F. Ingram. 
What they're doing there is--and listen, I'm as conservative 
and I'm hard on crime as anybody, but I understand grace as 
well. There are people who get into that system. Sometimes they 
just need opportunities. If we can train them and get them with 
a skill set into society, I think we as America will benefit, 
communities will benefit, and certainly society will benefit.
    So, thank you for being here today, and look forward to 
working with you on that legislation.
    With that, Madam Chair, I'll yield back.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina, 
Mr. Fry, for five minutes.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Director, for being here.
    FCI Bennettsville is a medium security Federal correction 
institution, and houses 1,600 inmates in Marlboro County, South 
Carolina, in my district. We heard accounts from officers 
having to work overtime, which has led to extreme burnout and 
low morale. A GAO report found that overtime hours worked at 
the BOP surged by 102 percent during a four-year period.
    What is the BOP doing to correct this?
    Ms. Peters. We've done a lot in the last year, Congressman, 
so I'm happy to talk about it. We doubled down on our 
recruitment efforts. We have a national recruitment office that 
does nothing but recruit for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. 
We've prioritized officers and healthcare workers in that, and 
we've seen progress. We have given retention and recruitment 
bonuses to individuals and that has proven successful. It has 
allowed us to see a small amount of improvement, 60 percent 
increase in those coming to the Bureau and a 20 percent 
decrease in those leaving in the last year, but we're not where 
we need to be yet.
    Mr. Fry. I would imagine that with the forced overtime, it 
is a recruitment issue that you don't have people that are 
applying. What is the cause of that, or what are some of the 
causes of that?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, I would say, as it relates to 
overtime, it's a retention issue as well. As I walk the halls 
of our institutions and talk to our employees, that's what I 
hear, they're exhausted. They were exhausted before the 
pandemic and the pandemic wore them out. Our increased overtime 
did as well.
    It's not just the physical and mental wearing; we're 
wreaking havoc on the family. So, spouses are planning who's 
picking kids up from daycare, who's cooking? We messed that 
schedule up day in and day out because of that required 
overtime.
    So, it's a problem we have to solve for the health and 
well-being of our employees and their families.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.
    Director, I want to turn to a different issue right now. 
I've heard about this at Bennettsville and, really, prisons and 
jails across the country, and it is the issue of contraband, 
namely cell phones.
    The South Carolina Department of Corrections Director, 
Bryan Stirling, recently stated that contraband cell phones in 
prisons are the No. 1 public safety threat that we face in 
South Carolina and in the country. To address this threat, the 
South Carolina Department of Corrections has partnered with 
wireless providers utilizing Managed Access System Evolved, or 
NAC-E, technology to identify and disable those devices. Since 
July, nearly 800 devices have been found in a South Carolina, 
Bishopville, institution. Eight hundred devices found in prison 
of 1,000 inmates is really alarming.
    What is the Bureau of Prisons doing to address to combat 
this issue? Are you open to exploring the use of NAC-E 
technology or something similar that would have a similar 
effect?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, thank you. We do utilize that 
technology. I couldn't agree more with Director Stirling. He 
and I have talked about this on multiple occasions and at 
length. So, we use technology that captures all cellular 
signals, and we also use technology that jams the cellular 
signal. We're piloting both of those.
    The original feedback that we're getting from folks is it's 
better when we detect because then we can investigate and find 
the cell phone and hold people accountable, but the jamming 
technology also works. We also are able to deploy a mobile 
cellular assessment, literally a van that goes out into our 
parking lots and can tell us how many cell phones are pinging 
so that we can hone our investigative resources based on where 
those cell phones are inside the institution.
    Mr. Fry. Those are pilot programs right now?
    Ms. Peters. Those are pilot programs right now.
    Mr. Fry. How many facilities use that pilot program?
    Ms. Peters. Let's see, the ones that capture the cellular 
signals, we're doing it at four facilities. The micro jamming, 
we are deploying at six facilities.
    Mr. Fry. When do you anticipate or what is maybe the goal 
of the BOP in expanding that to be able to use at all 
facilities?
    Ms. Peters. Again, it would require resources from 
Congress, but it would be incredibly beneficial if we could 
have these at all our institutions. We're focusing on our high-
risk, high-classified facilities right now, but these are also 
issues at our secure lows and our camps. So, we would 
appreciate having access to this technology at all 122 
facilities.
    Mr. Fry. What do you think the cost of that would be?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, I don't know what that would be, 
but I can talk to my team and get back to you.
    Mr. Fry. Please do. I'm certainly interested in that.
    I'm going to shift with my last 25 seconds. One of the 
things that I'm looking at is BOP pays a range from GL-5 to GL-
8. Other agencies, like ICE, CBP, they pay at a different rate, 
a much higher rate.
    What factors contribute to BOP's starting salary being 
lower than other agencies? Are you open to raising that base 
pay to help attract and retain individuals at BOP?
    Ms. Peters. Absolutely. So, our officers do not get paid 
enough. We have trouble keeping them. State corrections will 
offer higher salaries than what we pay. Even local sheriffs are 
able to pay more than we're able to pay in certain regions. So, 
we would welcome any changes to that pay structure and any 
support you could give in that, both in the pay structure and 
in the funding.
    We were able to increase this year by about $2,000 the top 
salary of our correctional officers and hope to recruit a 
better, larger lot and retain the ones that we do have.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you, Director.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Fry.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Kiley, for five minutes.
    Mr. Kiley. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you for being here to testify, Director Peters. I've 
always strongly believed that a well-functioning criminal 
justice system needs to have appropriate penalties for 
offenders, while at the same time having evidence-based tools 
for rehabilitation to facilitate the reentry of prisoners into 
society when they are released and to make them productive 
members of society.
    I come from a State, California, where, unfortunately, both 
objectives have not been achieved where we've lowered penalties 
across the board in really reckless ways while also 
undercutting the capacity of our criminal justice system to 
rehabilitate offenders. For example, a law called Prop 47 
effectively legalized drug use and not only has led to the sort 
of horrific scenes that we see in places like San Francisco, 
but it's also decimated the drug courts in our State because 
defenders no longer have any sort of entry point to then be 
forced to go into some sort of drug treatment program, and so 
people are not able to overcome their addictions.
    So, properly understood, I believe that punishment and 
rehabilitation are not sort of contrasting approaches to 
criminal justice, but rather, they go hand-in-hand and are both 
serving the interest of public safety.
    Another way in which this has sort of gone awry in 
California is something called realignment, where a lot of our 
serious offenders have been moved from the prisons into the 
county jails, which aren't really set up to have the sort of 
rehabilitation programs that are evidence based and will help 
people to turn their lives around.
    So, I'm always looking for suggestions for my State for the 
likes of Governor Newsom who have gotten this so wrong. I'm 
looking to other States. I know the Federal Government, the 
Federal correction system has recently undertaken some 
different approaches to rehabilitation with literacy programs, 
occupational education programs, trade skill programs, 
substance abuse disorder programs.
    So, I was hoping you could just give us a little sense of 
how this is working out and where you've seen success.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congressman. So as your previous 
neighbor to the North, as the Director of the Oregon Department 
of Corrections, I know that in my capacity there we 
collaborated closely with the California Department of 
Corrections on evidence-based programs, on these principles of 
normalcy and humanity. At the Federal Bureau of Prisons, I 
think our mission aligns with everything that you've just said. 
It is dual-missioned. Our job is to ensure public safety, both 
inside our institutions but also when they leave our 
institutions. I'm a former victims' advocate, so I believe 
strongly that our job is to ensure they don't create new 
victims on the way out.
    That second path of our mission is equally as important, 
and that's about providing programming and treatment and 
education so they have the resources they need and skills they 
need when they leave to be those productive taxpaying citizens.
    I think one of the jewels at the Federal Bureau of Prisons 
is our reentry centers in the community where we're able to 
contract with experts who live in those neighborhoods, live in 
those communities, and continue those services as they safely 
transition back into our neighborhoods.
    Mr. Kiley. Would you agree with my assessment, since you 
have some insight on the matter, that California's realignment 
has shifted offenders into an institutional setting that is not 
well equipped to provide proper evidence-based rehabilitation?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, I know enough about it to be 
familiar with what you're saying, but I'm certainly not expert 
enough to speak about the benefits or the outcomes of that 
process.
    Mr. Kiley. Thank you. I yield back.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congressman.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Kiley.
    The Chair now recognize the gentlewoman from Missouri, Ms. 
Bush, for five minutes.
    Ms. Bush. Thank you.
    Thank you for being here, Director Peters.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Bush. St. Louis and I are here today in support of 
genuine transparency, accountability, and oversight in our 
Federal prison system.
    Director Peters, as you know, you oversee a key component 
of our Federal system of mass incarceration. You are 
responsible for the conditions faced by nearly 160,000 
incarcerated people and 35,000 staff members. Right now, we 
understand our prison system needs a lot of work. It needs 
help. For many, many see it as a disgrace.
    I want to touch on a couple issues in this limited time 
that I have. First, I want to say thank you for the work that 
you have done and for what you are trying to achieve. I know 
that it isn't easy coming into and trying to change a system 
that is already so broken.
    I am deeply concerned by what we hear about oftentimes is 
the pervasive medical neglect of incarcerated people and those 
who have reported monthlong wait times for doctors' 
appointments and routine procedures, retaliation from staff, 
and fear when seeking medical care. Several deaths may have 
been preventable--well, preventable had proper medical care 
been provided.
    This issue is personal for me and my constituents, because 
right now we are facing some of the same issues at the St. 
Louis City Justice Center.
    The Bureau must overhaul its approach to providing medical 
care for incarcerated people and set an example for local 
carceral facilities in St. Louis and around the country, 
because we look to that to be able to go into our local jails 
to be able to say, this is what should be done. This is an 
example.
    The other issue I want to address is solitary confinement. 
It is shameful that solitary has increased in the Bureau during 
the Biden Administration, despite the President claiming he 
supported ending it.
    Director Peters, you have repeatedly recognized the harms 
of solitary and the need for holistic rehabilitative 
alternatives. You and I both know that solitary causes 
devastating harm, and it worsens safety for everyone involved. 
It drives anxiety, depression, psychosis, heart disease, self-
harm, and suicide. I know you know this from even before, in 
your background before you took this position.
    We also know that environments that are the exact opposite 
of solitary involve program-based interventions with full days 
of out-of-cell time and how to actually help both support 
people's health and it makes people--it makes everyone safer, 
even the staff, because we also care about the staff.
    So, instead of taking action on this issue based on the 
overwhelming evidence, the proposal of further studies, can we 
talk about that? Isn't it true that we don't need yet another 
study but, rather, an urgent action to replace solitary with 
proven alternative forms of separation?
    Ms. Peters. Congresswoman, first I'll address your 
healthcare issue. I want to assure you we want to be the model. 
As we pivot out of the pandemic, we're working through our 
backlog of that preventative healthcare that happened at the 
Bureau of Prisons, just like it happened in our communities. We 
have secured a contract with an external group of experts who 
are going to come in and do a quality assurance of our 
healthcare and help us create that future vision where we can 
be the example.
    As it relates to restrictive housing, I want to move as 
fast as you do, Congresswoman, but I also know that we have to 
bring our people along. I don't want to take a tool away from 
our correctional officers today without replacing it with a new 
tool tomorrow and with that training, to ensure their safety.
    So, we do have a short- and long-term plan. I think you'll 
be pleased to know the short-term plan is, first, we ensure 
that all the recommendations that have been brought to the 
Bureau in the past have been implemented, and then that our 
group of experts have traveled across the country to get best 
practices from other systems and bringing it back. We're 
actually meeting next week as an executive team where we will 
review those recommendations and get moving on with that work.
    Then the partnership with NIJ is historic, Congresswoman. 
It's the first time that the Federal Bureau of Prisons will 
have an outside entity come in and take this global look at our 
restrictive housing.
    You and I share the same values. The more normalized 
environment we can create for the adults in custody, the better 
outcomes they'll have in the community, the fewer victims that 
will be created, and as you said and most importantly, a better 
work environment for our people.
    Ms. Bush. Thank you. Looking forward to that, and our 
office will be in contact as that moves forward.
    I yield back.
    Ms Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Congresswoman Bush.
    I now recognize myself for five minutes.
    Director Peters, thank you so much for being with us here 
today. I'd like to pick up right where you left off with 
Congresswoman Bush on the subject of special housing units. 
President Biden's Executive Order titled, ``Advancing 
Effective, Accountable Policing of Criminal Justice 
Practices,'' touched on those special housing units and asked 
that you ensure that this type of housing is used rarely, 
applied fairly, and subject to reasonable constraints.
    I very much appreciate your prior answer indicating how 
much thought and study you are giving to the use of special 
housing units, when and how they are applied, but also wanted 
to note that we hear many correctional officers, including 
representatives from the Council of Prison Locals, have 
endorsed the continuing use of special housing units as an 
essential tool for officer safety.
    Could you please speak a little more about your point on 
finding an alternative tool, that if we are to try to reduce or 
get closer to eliminating special housing units the necessity 
to have an alternative tool for those corrections officers 
available.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman. That's very important 
to me. Their safety and security are top of mind every day as I 
do this work.
    I think one of the data points that I'll take a deeper dive 
on is those individuals who are in special housing who are 
there because they're in protective custody status, so either 
because they've asked to be in the special housing unit because 
they don't feel safe, or we've made an intelligence 
determination that they wouldn't be safe in the general 
population.
    So, that's a large portion of our special housing unit. So, 
I think one of the recommendations that I'll likely dive into 
more next week with my executive team is this notion of 
creating more safe and humane environments inside the prisons 
so that those individuals in protective custody status feel 
more comfortable in our general population units.
    Our reintegration units do just that, help these 
individuals step down from that higher level of restrictive 
housing in a safe way, safe for them and safe for our officers. 
So, I think that's a great model to advance this notion and 
these ideas.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. I'd also like to touch on a new effort 
to utilize licensed counselors in the Employee Assistance 
Program as part of your overall wellness and retention program 
for correctional officers.
    Could you tell us a little bit about that? Have these 
changes been implemented? Have you gotten any feedback on how 
that program is going?
    Ms. Peters. Thank you. So, employee wellness is incredibly 
important to me. As you know, the data points are really tough 
in law enforcement, specifically in corrections. We've talked 
about overtime and augmentation and the impact there as well.
    So, we have a lot of work to do. We did change three of our 
policies this year. One of them included requiring that those 
counselors providing Employee Assistance Program counseling be 
certified. That has taken place. It's our hopes that this 
higher-level certification will give a more meaningful session 
for those who have the courage to seek it.
    Ms. Lee. Now, we're nearing the end of our hearing time, so 
I'd also like to ask you if there is something that you were 
hoping to share with us today that you haven't already touched 
on and whether there is anything that we as Congress can be 
doing to further support you in your mission.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congresswoman. So, I think the short 
answer to that is always resources. The conversation we had 
earlier with your colleagues around being able to increase pay 
for our frontline workers would be incredibly helpful as we try 
to retain the ones we have and get the ones in the front door 
that we want.
    Training. We haven't talked about training yet today. One 
of the things that surprised me when I took this role was the 
small amount of training that our employees receive at the 
front end. They get three weeks in the classroom and three 
weeks on the job. The data would suggest that the average 
onboarding for law enforcement in this country is actually 21 
weeks. So, that's much shorter than that.
    My dream would be to have a training academy where we're 
able to train these individuals from recruitment to retirement 
and everything in between.
    So, I appreciate your support and appreciate the question 
very much. Thank you.
    Ms. Lee. On the subject of recruitment and retention, you 
mentioned that you're working very hard on that and focused, in 
part, on recruiting and retaining by enhancing the Bureau of 
Prisons' image.
    Could you tell us, in your view, what image is the Bureau 
of Prisons portraying and what would you like for it to be?
    Ms. Peters. Yes. So, I think we've done a lot of work on 
this issue. We're really looking for public safety-minded 
individuals who want to come and change hearts and minds, not 
that traditional stereotypical view of a correctional 
professional that the movies or TV might portray. We have 
hardworking professionals who engage in really meaningful work, 
keeping our prisons safe, but we ask them to do such complex 
work. They're not standing in the corner looking over people. 
They're engaging in conversations and helping them get into 
that programming, that treatment and that education.
    So, for anyone who is listening to this hearing today, the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons is hiring, and we're looking for 
those right people to come in and really do heroes' work day in 
and day out.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
    Mr. Biggs. [Presiding.] The gentlelady yields back.
    Director, thanks for being here. I apologize for having to 
step out, so I missed much of your testimony and I apologize 
for that.
    One of the things that we talked about the other day in our 
conversation was that on behalf of a particular committee we 
are conducting an investigation where I need to be able to get 
in to interview and meet with an incarcerated individual.
    So, I didn't have this response, but the response that we 
had received from BOP was, quote: ``It is not generally agency 
practice to facilitate such a visit.''
    So, I'm seeking your commitment today that you'll help 
facilitate for me and my staff to be able to get in and meet 
with an incarcerated individual pertaining to an investigation 
we're conducting in a part of our Congressional Committee.
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, at first glance it appears there 
might have been some confusion around the initial request. So, 
as I committed to you when we met earlier last week, we're 
certainly happy to look into this and see what we can figure 
out.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Biggs. Well, I'm hoping it's more than see what you can 
do. I'm hoping it's you're going to facilitate this, our 
interview of that witness.
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, if we can facilitate that visit, 
we will do everything we can to facilitate that visit.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you. I hope that we'll have good 
communication, so we'll know what is necessary to facilitate 
that.
    Ms. Peters. Can you say that again, Congressman?
    Mr. Biggs. Yes. I'm hoping that we have clear 
communication, so we know exactly what we need to do and what 
we can expect.
    Ms. Peters. Yes, Congressman. Your staffer had our 
staffer's phone number, and so I know that they're going to 
connect.
    Mr. Biggs. OK, good. Thank you.
    Question: Does the Bureau of Prisons have any contracts 
with State or local governments or other outside groups to 
house prisoners?
    Ms. Peters. We contract with individuals in the community 
to run our residential reentry centers. They provide that 
stepdown service into the community and provide those 
wraparound services for reentry.
    Mr. Biggs. Do you have any other relationships with any 
other entities except for in the residential reentry housing?
    Ms. Peters. We would have government agreements with other 
corrections agencies. If they needed to house someone that they 
didn't think they could safely house at the State level, then 
we would engage in a prisoner swap, if you will, where we would 
then send them one of ours.
    Mr. Biggs. OK. So, is it an intergovernment agreement of 
some kind?
    Ms. Peters. Yes.
    Mr. Biggs. OK. I know you talked about contraband. A study 
released earlier this year by DOJ's National Institute of 
Justice found, quote:

        Detection technologies, such as radiofrequency detection, that 
        can locate a cell phone signal or recognize components that are 
        trafficked at multiple locations within a facility show the 
        greatest promise for limiting cell phone contraband.

    How widely is radiofrequency detection equipment deployed 
within BOP, and do you have the resources you need to ensure 
such detection equipment is available?
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congressman. We would appreciate the 
additional resources. We currently use--we're piloting two 
pieces of technology, one that captures all cellular signals 
and another one that actually jams all cellular signals.
    The initial feedback I'm getting from my team is the 
preference to capture the cellular signals rather than jam 
them, because then we can actually deploy our investigative 
techniques, find the phones, and hold people accountable.
    We're piloting those at a handful of facilities but would 
love the resources to spread that technology out through all 
our facilities.
    Mr. Biggs. When you and I were talking, we talked about 
contraband, whether it's drugs, phones, or other, and I asked 
you, how is contraband entering? I'd like you to please explain 
that for us.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you. So, unfortunately, sometimes 
contraband comes through the front door by employees who are 
engaging in misconduct or through visiting, but, as you and I 
talked about, one of the most dangerous ways right now is 
drones.
    So, the ability for these drones to be able to carry an 
excessive amount of weight and drop it near the fence line or 
over the fence line is one of the things that we're working to 
combat every single day.
    Mr. Biggs. That's an interesting thing, drones. Can you 
describe for us how you detect them right now? What are you 
seeing? Has this happened like at one location or is this a 
daily occurrence? What's the frequency?
    Ms. Peters. Congressman, this is a near daily occurrence at 
the Federal Bureau of Prisons across our 122 institutions. 
Sometimes it's reoccurrence at the same institution and the 
same people, and we're able to detect those drones and deploy 
and activate local law enforcement.
    So, it is a constant engagement. We have detection devices 
at 31 of our high-risk institutions. We've had over 180 drone 
sightings this year alone. While only a handful of those 
ultimately allowed us to find the drone, often we're finding 
the drops and the contraband that the drones have dropped. We 
certainly rely on local law enforcement then to help us find 
the individuals who are flying those drones.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you. My time has expired. I think we've 
exhausted the Members.
    So, thank you very much, Director, for being here. I know 
that we'll have further opportunities to talk, and I know I 
have additional questions, so look forward to communication 
continuing.
    With that, we are adjourned.
    Ms. Peters. Thank you, Congressman. Thank you, Committee.
    [Whereupon, at 11:14 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

    The record for this hearing by the Members of the 
Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance is 
available at: https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/
ByEvent.aspx?Event ID=116495.

                                 [all]