C.F.R. » Title 28 » CHAPTER V—BUREAU OF PRISONS, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › SUBCHAPTER C—INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT › PART 540—CONTACT WITH PERSONS IN THE COMMUNITY › Subpart I—Telephone Regulations for Inmates

28 C.F.R. § 540.101

Procedures

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

(a) Telephone list preparation. An inmate telephone call shall ordinarily be made to a number identified on the inmate's official telephone list. This list ordinarily may contain up to 30 numbers. The Associate Warden may authorize the placement of additional numbers on an inmate's telephone list based on the inmate's individual situation, e.g., size of family.

(1) During the admission and orientation process, an inmate who chooses to have telephone privileges shall prepare a proposed telephone list. At the time of submission, the inmate shall acknowledge that, to the best of the inmate's knowledge, the person or persons on the list are agreeable to receiving the inmate's telephone call and that the proposed calls are to be made for a purpose allowable under Bureau policy or institution guidelines.

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, telephone numbers requested by an inmate will ordinarily be placed on the inmate's telephone list. When an inmate requests the placement of numbers for persons other than for immediate family or those persons already approved for the inmate's visiting list, staff ordinarily will notify those persons in writing that their numbers have been placed on the inmate's telephone list. The notice advises the recipient that the recipient's number will be removed from the list if the recipient makes a written request to the institution, or upon the written request of the inmate, or as provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this section.

(3) The Associate Warden may deny placement of a telephone number on an inmate's telephone list if the Associate Warden determines that there is a threat to institution security or good order, or a threat to the public. Any disapproval must be documented in writing to both the inmate and the proposed recipient. As with concerns about any correctional issue, including any portion of these telephone regulations, an inmate may appeal the denial through the administrative remedy procedure (see 28 CFR part 542). The Associate Warden will notify the denied recipient that he or she may appeal the denial by writing to the Warden within 15 days of the receipt of the denial.

(b) Telephone list update. Each Warden shall establish procedures to allow an inmate the opportunity to submit telephone list changes on at least a quarterly basis.

(c) Telephone access codes. An inmate may not possess another inmate's telephone access code number. An inmate may not give his or her telephone access code number to another inmate, and is to report a compromised telephone access code number immediately to unit staff.

(d) Placement and duration of telephone call. The placement and duration of any telephone call is subject to availability of inmate funds. Ordinarily, an inmate who has sufficient funds is allowed at least three minutes for a telephone call. The Warden may limit the maximum length of telephone calling based on the situation at that institution (e.g., institution population or usage demand).

(e) Exception. The Warden may allow the placement of collect calls for good cause. Examples of good cause include, but are not limited to, inmates who are new arrivals to the institution, including new commitments and transfers; inmates confined at Metropolitan Correctional Centers, Metropolitan Detention Centers, or Federal Detention Centers; pretrial inmates; inmates in holdover status; inmates who are without funds (see § 540.105(b)); and in cases of family emergencies.

[59 FR 15824, Apr. 4, 1994]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1980–2012 · leading case: Crooker v. U. S. Dep't of Just., 497 F. Supp. 500 (D. Conn. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Crooker v. U. S. Dep't of Just., 497 F. Supp. 500 (D. Conn. 1980). · cites it 6× “These calls are randomly and routinely monitored by FCI officials, a procedure specifically sanctioned by 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 and Policy Statement DAN 5264.”
Anthony King v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons & Charles Gilkey, 415 F.3d 634 (7th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 540.101 (a)(2). The prison may also remove a number from the list if it determines that allowing the prisoner to call the number would endanger the welfare of the prison or the public, and the regulation specifies a procedure that the associate warden must follow in…”
United States v. Kojo Sababu, Jaime Delgado, & Dora Garcia, 891 F.2d 1308 (7th Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “Further, prisoners are notified about the monitoring policy in four different ways. First, a bilingual sign is mounted at eye level on each telephone indicating that the telephone is subject to monitoring.”
United States v. Angelo Amen, Mark A. Deleonardis, Michael Paradiso & Oreste Abbamonte, Jr., 831 F.2d 373 (2d Cir. 1987). “28 C.F.R. § 540.101 provides: The Warden shall establish procedures that enable monitoring of telephone conversations on any telephone located within the institution, said monitoring to be done to preserve the security and orderly management of the institution and to protect the…”
Searcy v. United States, 668 F. Supp. 2d 113 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 4× “” 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 (a). The inmate certifies to the best of his knowledge that the persons on his list are agreeable to receiving his calls.”
Washington v. Reno, 35 F.3d 1093 (6th Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “4, 1994); 28 CFR § 540.101 (a). The new rule also abandons the controversial Request for Telephone Privilege Form that required private information from potential call recipients outside the prison system.”
Lee v. Carlson, 645 F. Supp. 1430 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). “30 Consonant therewith, 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 states that the warden shall established procedures that enable monitoring of telephones located within the institution for those purposes and that the warden must provide notice to the inmate of the potential for monitoring.”
United States v. Clark, 651 F. Supp. 76 (M.D. Penn. 1986). “At 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 , the regulations prohibit the monitoring of a properly placed call to an inmate’s attorney.”
United States v. Vasta, 649 F. Supp. 974 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). “3 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 ; see Bell v. Wolfish, supra, 441 U.”
United States v. Montgomery, 675 F. Supp. 164 (S.D.N.Y. 1987). · cites it 2× “In addition to the public notice of this telephone monitoring published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 (1987), MCC inmates receive notice that the telephones are taped and monitored in three ways.”
United States v. Valencia, 711 F. Supp. 608 (S.D. Fla. 1989). “See 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 , et seq. Finally, Agent Joseph Shepherd of the Drug Enforcement Administration testified that he caused to be issued subpoenas directed to MCC-Miami to produce the taped conversations at issue in this case.”
Kimberlin v. Quinlan, 774 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1991). “*11 28 C.F.R. § 540.101 . But that same regulation requires the warden to “provide notice to the inmate of the potential for monitoring.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.