28 C.F.R. § 550.50
Purpose and scope
The purpose of this subpart is to describe the Bureau's drug abuse treatment programs for the inmate population, to include drug abuse education, non-residential drug abuse treatment services, and residential drug abuse treatment programs (RDAP). These services are provided by Psychology Services department.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Close v. Thomas, 653 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2011).
Close v. Thomas, 653 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2011). “Neither the statute nor its regulations, 28 C.F.R. §§ 550.50 — .57, indicate whether BOP should factor in the early release incentive when it determines how close inmates are to them release date.”
Hicks v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 603 F. Supp. 2d 835 (D.S.C. 2009). “§ 2241 , as his challenge to 28 C.F.R. § 550.50 and Program Statement 5162.”
Willits v. United States, 182 F. Supp. 3d 1278 (M.D. Fla. 2016). “Codified at 28 C.F.R. § 550.50 (b). . The difficulty in predicting possible adverse collateral consequences has cautioned at least one Circuit to eschew the concurrent sentence doctrine.”
Parsons v. Pitzer, 960 F. Supp. 191 (W.D. Wis. 1997). “28 C.F.R. § 550.50 -.60. Section 550.58 provides: An inmate who completes a residential drug abuse treatment program during his or her current commitment may be eligible for early release by a period not to exceed 12 months .”
United States v. Elaine Pritchett, 419 F. App'x 652 (6th Cir. 2011). “; 28 C.F.R. § 550.50 -.53. In fact, Pritchett’s brief to this court only equivocally asserts that she will be unable to obtain treatment during her time in prison, stating that “[although she is at Alderson camp, which has a non residential drug abuse program, there is a waiting…”
Alward v. Elkton FSL (M.D. Penn. 2024). “28 C.F.R. § 550.50 et seq. The BOP’s authority to reduce an inmate’s sentence for completion of RDAP falls under 18 U.”
Pisciotta v. Warden, Fci Fort Dix (D.N.J. 2025). “28 C.F.R. § 550.50 et seq. The BOP’s authority to reduce an inmate’s sentence for completion of RDAP falls under 18 U.”
Vanochten v. United States (M.D. Penn. 2025). “28 C.F.R. § 550.50 et seq. The BOP’s authority to reduce an inmate’s sentence for completion of RDAP falls under 18 U.”
Patrick McNulty v. Warden of FCI-Schuylkill (M.D. Penn. 2026). “28 C.F.R. § 550.50 ef seq. Pursuant to 18 U.”
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.