28 C.F.R. § 523.16

Lump sum awards

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Any staff member may recommend to the Warden the approval of an inmate for a lump sum award of extra good time. Such recommendations must be for an exceptional act or service that is not part of a regularly assigned duty. The Warden may make lump sum awards of extra good time not to exceed thirty days. If the recommendation is for an award in excess of thirty days and the Warden concurs, the Warden shall refer the recommendation to the Regional Director who may approve the award. No award may be approved which would exceed the maximum number of days allowed under 18 U.S.C. 4162. The actual length of time served on the sentence, to the date that the exceptional act or service terminated, is the basis on which the maximum amount possible to award is calculated. No seniority is accrued for such awards. Staff may recommend lump sum awards of extra good time for the following reasons:

(a) An act of heroism;

(b) Voluntary acceptance and satisfactory performance of an unusually hazardous assignment;

(c) An act which protects the lives of staff or inmates or the property of the United States; this is to be an act and not merely the providing of information in custodial or security matters;

(d) A suggestion which results in substantial improvement of a program or operation, or which results in significant savings; or

(e) Any other exceptional or outstanding service.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1988–2008 · leading case: Moss v. Clark, 698 F. Supp. 640 (E.D. Va. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Moss v. Clark, 698 F. Supp. 640 (E.D. Va. 1988). · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 523.16 . Lump sum awards of up to thirty days credit may be recommended and made by the Warden of a prisoner’s facility, and amounts in excess of thirty days may be approved and awarded by the Regional Director.”

United States v. Ellis, 527 F.3d 203 (1st Cir. 2008). “Attorney for consideration of a Rule 35(b) motion based on the inmate’s cooperation; recommending transfer of the inmate to another facility, as the warden did here; perhaps improving individual confinement conditions; and granting a lump sum award of “extra good time” credit to…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.