Use of Force, Application of Restraints, and Firearms (Program Statement 5566.07)

By Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Esq., and Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA

Field	Value
Program Statement	5566.07
Subject	Use of Force, Application of Restraints, and Firearms
Effective / current edition	07-17-2024
Change notices	None. BOP’s published policy list carries 5566.07 with no change notice.
Supersedes	PS 5566.06 CN-1, Use of Force and Application of Restraints (8/29/2014), rescinded — PS 5566.07 at p. 2. The 2024 edition also added “and Firearms” to the title.
Governing statute	The Program Statement cites 18 U.S.C. § 3050, under which “[o]fficers and employees of the said Bureau of Prisons may carry firearms under such rules and regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe” (PS 5566.07 at p. 22). The Bureau’s general duty to provide for protection and discipline is 18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(3). No statute sets the restraint-check intervals.
28 C.F.R. anchor	Part 552, subpart C — “Use of Force and Application of Restraints,” §§ 552.20–552.27. Verified section by section. Eight of the Program Statement’s twenty-one numbered sections carry a § number and track the regulation; the rest are policy only. See What binds and what does not.
Related BP forms	BP-A0717 Fifteen Minute Restraints Check Form (24-Hours) · BP-A0718 Two-Hours Lieutenant Restraint Check Form (24-Hours) · BP-A0719 Health Services Restraint Review Form (24-Hours) · BP-A0720 Psychology Services Review Form (24-Hours) · BP-E583 Report of Incident · BP-E586 Use of Force After-Action Review — PS 5566.07 at p. 31
Official PDF	bop.gov/policy/progstat/5566.07.pdf

Checked against the BOP policy set · 2026-09-06.

Program Statement 5566.07 is the Bureau of Prisons’ rulebook for when staff may put hands on someone, what restraints they may use, how often a restrained person must be looked at, when the incident has to be on video, and when a firearm may be fired. It sits on top of a binding regulation — 28 C.F.R. §§ 552.20–552.27 — and the difference between the two matters enormously, because the regulation is enforceable law and the Program Statement is the Bureau’s internal instruction to its own staff.

If you are here because someone you love was hurt, sprayed, or held in four-point restraints, the companion page written for families is Violence and Sexual Assault in Prison, which covers what happens on the ground and how to respond in the first days. This page carries the rule itself: the intervals, the reviews, the recordings, and the paperwork that either exists or does not.

The rule itself: use of force

Everything quoted below is transcribed from the Bureau’s own text at bop.gov/policy/progstat/5566.07.pdf, with the page anchor for each passage. Where a passage is also regulation, the eCFR section is cited alongside it.

The five behaviors that authorize restraints

PS 5566.07 at p. 1, which is 28 C.F.R. § 552.20 verbatim:

The Bureau of Prisons authorizes staff to use force only as a last alternative after all other reasonable efforts to resolve a situation have failed. When authorized, staff must use only that amount of force necessary to gain control of the inmate, to protect and ensure the safety of inmates, staff, and others, to prevent serious property damage and to ensure institution security and good order. Staff are authorized to apply physical restraints necessary to gain control of an inmate who appears to be dangerous because the inmate:

(a) Assaults another individual; (b) Destroys government property; (c) Attempts suicide; (d) Inflicts injury upon self; or (e) Becomes violent or displays signs of imminent violence.

The same section carves out routine handcuffing: “This rule on application of restraints does not restrict the use of restraints in situations requiring precautionary restraints, particularly in the movement or transfer of inmates (e.g., the use of handcuffs in moving inmates to and from a cell in detention, escorting an inmate to a Special Housing Unit pending investigation, etc.).” Being cuffed for a move to the Special Housing Unit is not a “use of force” incident and generates none of the paperwork described below.

The Program Statement adds two implementing sentences at p. 2 that are not in the regulation and that matter a great deal: “Excessive force will not be tolerated. If substantiated it may constitute a prosecutable offense,” and that “Bureau employees in law enforcement positions must recognize and act upon the affirmative duty to intervene to prevent or stop, as appropriate, any fellow Bureau employee from engaging in excessive force.” That affirmative-duty language is new in 2024.

Immediate versus calculated use of force

This is the single most important distinction in the document, because almost every procedural protection attaches to one branch and not the other. Both definitions are 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 and appear at PS 5566.07 at pp. 5–6:

(a) Immediate use of force. Staff may immediately use force and/or apply restraints when the behavior described in § 552.20 constitutes an immediate, serious threat to inmate, staff, others, property, or to institution security and good order.

(b) Calculated use of force and/or application of restraints. This occurs in situations where an inmate is in an area that can be isolated (e.g., a locked cell, a range) and where there is no immediate, direct threat to the inmate or others. When there is time for the calculated use of force or application of restraints, staff must first determine if the situation can be resolved without resorting to force (see § 552.23).

The Program Statement’s own preference is stated flatly at p. 7: “Calculated rather than immediate use of force is preferred in all instances in a correctional environment unless an immediate response is deemed necessary.” It gives the paradigm case: “if an inmate is secured in a cell making verbal threats or brandishing a weapon” (p. 7).

	Immediate use of force	Calculated use of force
Trigger	An “immediate, serious threat” (§ 552.21(a))	Person is isolated; “no immediate, direct threat” (§ 552.21(b))
Supervisor first?	No — “employees may respond with or without the presence or direction of a supervisor” (p. 5)	Yes — the ranking custodial official confers first (§ 552.23)
Health Services consulted before chemical agents?	No — “employees are not required to consult Health Services prior to the use of chemical agents/OC as an immediate response is required” (p. 5)	Yes, ordinarily — “the inmate’s medical file must be reviewed by qualified Health Services personnel” (p. 12)
Confrontation avoidance first?	Not applicable	Yes (§ 552.23)
Video	“As soon as feasible, employees must obtain a video camera and record any use of force incident,” subject to a stated exception (p. 5)	“The entire calculated use of force process must be video recorded” (p. 7)
Video to the Regional Director	Not specified	“within four working days of the incident” (p. 7)

Confrontation avoidance — what has to happen before a calculated use of force

This is 28 C.F.R. § 552.23 in full, and it appears verbatim at PS 5566.07 at p. 11:

Prior to any calculated use of force, the ranking custodial official (ordinarily the Captain or shift Lieutenant), a designated mental health professional, and others shall confer and gather pertinent information about the inmate and the immediate situation. Based on their assessment of that information, they shall identify a staff member(s) to attempt to obtain the inmate’s voluntary cooperation and, using the knowledge they have gained about the inmate and the incident, determine if use of force is necessary.

The regulation stops there. The Program Statement’s implementing text at pp. 11–12 fills in who ordinarily takes part — “the Captain or Lieutenant, Psychology Services, Health Services, Chaplaincy Services, or other employees such as the inmate’s Unit Manager, Case Manager, or Counselor” — and adds that “[t]his discussion must be accomplished by telephone or in person,” that its purpose is to gather “relevant information concerning the inmate’s medical/mental health history and any recent incident reports,” and that “it may identify other employees who have a rapport with the inmate and can possibly resolve the incident without the use of force.”

Two things follow that are worth knowing before anyone reads an incident report. First, the confrontation-avoidance conference is a regulatory step for a calculated use of force, not an optional courtesy. Second, the whole of it is supposed to be on camera: p. 7 directs that the video include “the introduction of all employees participating in the confrontation avoidance process.”

The principles and the flat prohibitions

28 C.F.R. § 552.22, at PS 5566.07 at pp. 9–11. These are the sentences that do the work in any dispute about what happened:

(a) Staff ordinarily shall first attempt to gain the inmate’s voluntary cooperation before using force.

(b) Force may not be used to punish an inmate.

(c) Staff shall use only that amount of force necessary to gain control of the inmate. Situations when an appropriate amount of force may be warranted include, but are not limited to: (1) Defense or protection of self or others; (2) Enforcement of institutional regulations; and (3) The prevention of a crime or apprehension of one who has committed a crime.

(f) Restraints should remain on the inmate until self-control is regained.

(g) Except when the immediate use of restraints is required for control of the inmate, staff may apply restraints to, or continue the use of progressive restraints on, an inmate while in a cell in administrative detention or disciplinary segregation only with approval of the Warden or designee.

(h) Restraint equipment or devices (e.g., handcuffs) may not be used in any of the following ways:

(1) As a method of punishing an inmate. (2) About an inmate’s neck or face, or in any manner which restricts blood circulation or obstructs the inmate’s airways. (3) In a manner that causes unnecessary physical pain or extreme discomfort. (4) To secure an inmate to a fixed object, such as a cell door or cell grill, except as provided in § 552.24.

(i) Medication may not be used as a restraint solely for security purposes.

The Program Statement’s implementing text at pp. 10–11 sharpens several of these. “Tape must not be placed over an inmate’s mouth or nose, or around the neck,” and “[e]mployees will not use any unauthorized item or device (e.g., towels, sheets, blankets, hosiery, masks) in use of force situations” (p. 10). “[P]rohibited uses of restraints include but are not limited to ‘hogtying,’ unnecessary tightness, or improperly applied restraints” (p. 11). Hard restraints are a step up, not a default: “When it is necessary to use continued restraints after any use of force incident, hard restraints (e.g., steel handcuffs and leg irons) are to be used only after soft restraints have proven ineffective or the inmate has a documented history of defeating soft restraints” (p. 11). And where restraints followed an assault on staff, “the assaulted employee must not be involved in deciding whether the inmate has regained self-control” (p. 10).

The restraint ladder: ambulatory, progressive, four-point

Section 7 of the Program Statement, at p. 13, has no § number — it is policy, not regulation — and it defines the vocabulary everyone else uses:

Restraints should be used only when other effective means of control have failed or are impractical. Progressive restraint is the process of using the least restrictive restraint method to control the inmate as deemed necessary for the situation.

Ambulatory restraints are defined as approved soft and hard restraint equipment which allow the inmate to eat, drink, and take care of basic human needs without employee intervention. Ambulatory restraints should initially be used to restrain an inmate if deemed appropriate.

The escalation options are named at p. 14: “hard restraints with or without waist chain or waist belt, four-point soft restraints with hard restraints used for securing the inmate to the bed, or four-point hard restraints.”

Three PS-only rules travel with this section and are the ones most often at issue:

• Constant supervision in four-points. “Upon placement of an inmate in four-point restraints, the supervising Lieutenant shall assign an employee to provide constant visual supervision until the restraints are removed or downgraded to less-restrictive restraints such as ambulatory restraints” (p. 14). This requirement was new in 2024 — the Summary of Changes at p. 3 lists it as “Added the requirement to immediately assign employees to supervise inmates placed in four-point restraints.”
• Eight hours in ambulatory restraints triggers a call. “When it is necessary to place an inmate in ambulatory restraints for longer than eight hours, the Regional Director or Regional Duty Officer must be notified telephonically by the Warden or designee” (p. 13).
• Only a Lieutenant releases. “A Lieutenant makes the decision to release an inmate from, modify, or maintain restraints. This authority may not be delegated below the Lieutenant level” (p. 14).

Four-point restraints themselves are governed by 28 C.F.R. § 552.24, which opens: “When the Warden determines that four-point restraints are the only means available to obtain and maintain control over an inmate, the following procedures must be followed.” Soft restraints must be used “unless: (1) Such restraints previously have proven ineffective with respect to that inmate, or (2) Such restraints are proven ineffective during the initial application procedure,” and the Program Statement adds at p. 14 that “[t]his may not be delegated below the Warden’s level.” The person “will be dressed in clothing appropriate to the temperature” and “[b]eds will be covered with a mattress, and a blanket/sheet will be provided” — with the Program Statement adding at p. 15 that “[u]nder no circumstances shall an inmate be allowed to remain nude or uncovered without a blanket/sheet unless determined necessary by qualified health personnel.”

The check intervals

These are the numbers families come looking for. Every row is transcribed from the source cited; the “Source” column says whether the sentence is binding regulation or the Bureau’s own instruction to staff.

Check	Interval, in the source’s own words	Who	Applies to	Source
Restraint check	“Staff shall check the inmate at least every 15 minutes, both to ensure that the restraints are not hampering circulation and for the general welfare of the inmate.”	Staff	Four-point restraints	Regulation — 28 C.F.R. § 552.24(d); PS 5566.07 at p. 15
Lieutenant review	“A review of the inmate’s placement in four-point restraints shall be made by a Lieutenant every two hours to determine if the use of restraints has had the required calming effect and so that the inmate may be released from these restraints (completely or to lesser restraints) as soon as possible.”	A Lieutenant	Four-point restraints	Regulation — 28 C.F.R. § 552.24(e); PS 5566.07 at p. 15
Health Services visits	“When inmates are so restrained, qualified health personnel ordinarily are to visit the inmate at least twice during each eight hour shift.”	Qualified health personnel	Four-point restraints	Regulation — 28 C.F.R. § 552.24(f); PS 5566.07 at p. 16
Medical supervision past eight hours	“Use of four-point restraints beyond eight hours requires the supervision of qualified health personnel.”	Qualified health personnel	Four-point restraints	Regulation — 28 C.F.R. § 552.24(f); PS 5566.07 at p. 16
Regional notification	“When it is necessary to restrain an inmate for longer than eight hours, the Warden (or designee) or institution administrative duty officer shall notify the Regional Director or Regional Duty Officer by telephone.” The PS adds: “made for each consecutive eight-hour period the inmate remains in restraints.”	Warden/designee or administrative duty officer	Four-point restraints; the PS extends a parallel call to ambulatory restraints past eight hours (p. 13)	Regulation — 28 C.F.R. § 552.24(g); PS 5566.07 at pp. 16–17
Constant visual supervision	“the supervising Lieutenant shall assign an employee to provide constant visual supervision until the restraints are removed or downgraded”	An assigned employee	Four-point restraints	Program Statement only — PS 5566.07 at p. 14
Psychology examination	“A qualified Psychology Services employee will examine inmates in four-point restraints at least once during every 24-hour period the inmate is restrained.”	Psychology Services	Four-point restraints	Program Statement only — PS 5566.07 at p. 19
Behavior Management Plan review	“Within 24 hours of placement in restraints, a review of the inmate’s status will be conducted, and a BMP prepared.” Then: “BMP reviews must be conducted every 48-hour period following the initial 24-hour review.”	Warden, Associate Warden, Captain, Unit Manager, Health Services Administrator, Chief Psychologist, or designees	Restraints, including ambulatory (p. 13)	Program Statement only — PS 5566.07 at pp. 19–20
After-Action Review report	“must be completed as soon as possible, but no later than two working days after the incident or two days after the inmate has been removed from restraints, if placed in prolonged restraints”	After-Action Review Team; the Warden submits it	Every calculated or immediate use of force	Program Statement only — PS 5566.07 at p. 21

Four practical points sit inside those intervals and are easy to miss:

• Asleep does not count. “[I]nmates asleep at the time of the 15-minute check are to be awakened to visually assess their condition and this information must be documented” (p. 15), and “[i]nmates asleep at the time of the two-hour reviews should be awakened to assess their condition” (p. 15).
• A camera is not a check. “Visual checks are not to be conducted via closed circuit television (CCTV)” (p. 15).
• Every two-hour review includes a bathroom offer. “At every two-hour review, the inmate will be afforded the opportunity to use the toilet, unless the inmate is continuing to actively resist or becomes violent while being released from the restraints for this purpose” (p. 15).
• A calm break should end the four-points. “If an inmate is released temporarily from four-point restraints for any reason (e.g., to use the toilet, consumption of food or beverage, etc.) without continuing disruptive or aggressive behavior, the Lieutenant must consider authorizing lesser restraints or removing the restraints. If an inmate is returned to four-point restraints after a non-disruptive break, the Lieutenant must document the reasons for the action in detail” (pp. 15–16).

Medical assessment

28 C.F.R. § 552.26 is short and unconditional. At PS 5566.07 at p. 17:

(a) In immediate use of force situations, staff shall seek the assistance of mental health or qualified health personnel upon gaining physical control of the inmate. When possible, staff shall seek such assistance at the onset of the violent behavior. In calculated use of force situations, the use of force team leader shall seek the guidance of qualified health personnel (based upon a review of the inmate’s medical record) to identify physical or mental problems. When mental health staff or qualified health personnel determine that an inmate requires continuing care, and particularly when the inmate to be restrained is pregnant, the deciding staff shall assume responsibility for the inmate’s care, to include possible admission to the institution hospital, or, in the case of a pregnant inmate, restraining her in other than face down four-point restraints.

(b) After any use of force or forcible application of restraints, the inmate shall be examined by qualified health personnel, and any injuries noted, immediately treated.

The Program Statement adds a sentence at p. 6 that people inside frequently do not know: “An inmate may not refuse a medical assessment following a use of force.” It also lists what the Lieutenant supervising that assessment must ensure — including that “employees, ordinarily those not involved in the immediate use of force, maintain proper control of the inmate throughout the medical assessment” and that “the Lieutenant has no physical involvement in the medical assessment” (p. 6).

For someone in four-point restraints, p. 16 sets out exactly what Health Services must examine and document on each check:

• date and time of examination
• examining employee
• body position
• restraints (adequate circulation)
• vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and temperature)
• medication
• injuries
• the inmate’s intake, output, hydration, etc.
• possible medical reasons for behavior
• deterioration of inmate’s health
• any other significant findings and comments

Two more from the same page: qualified Health Services personnel “shall evaluate the inmate restrained to a bed to determine the position the inmate should be placed in,” and if they are not immediately available “the inmate will be placed in a ‘face-up’ position until evaluated.” And: “Under no circumstances will non-medical employees perform a medical assessment of an inmate.”

Where the use of force involved someone with a mental illness, a physical disability, an intellectual disability, pregnancy, or postpartum status, p. 17 directs that “[t]he decision to use force on inmates who meet these criteria must be individually assessed,” with the Clinical Director or designee consulted on medical conditions and the Chief Psychologist or designee consulted on mental illness or intellectual disability, and the Warden or designee making the final call. Our related pages are Patient Care (PS 6031.06), Treatment and Care of Inmates With Mental Illness (PS 5310.16), and the Female Offender Manual (PS 5200.09), which the Program Statement cross-references at p. 17 “[f]or guidance regarding the rare use of restraints on pregnant or postpartum inmates.”

Video recording

The video rules are Program Statement text, not regulation, and they differ by branch.

For an immediate use of force, p. 5: “As soon as feasible, employees must obtain a video camera and record any use of force incident, unless it is determined a delay in resolving the situation would endanger the inmate, employees, or others, or would result in a major disturbance or serious property damage.”

For a calculated use of force, p. 7: “The entire calculated use of force process must be video recorded, including the introduction of all employees participating in the confrontation avoidance process and decontamination procedures, if applicable.”

Three items are specified as being on camera in both branches: decontamination after chemical agents (“[m]andated decontamination for chemical agents/OC be conducted on video” is listed as a 2024 change at p. 2), the medical assessment (“[n]ormally, this is conducted in conjunction with the medical examination and must be documented on video,” p. 5), and the debriefing (pp. 6–7). The debrief must include “the camera operator is identified,” “the date and time of the debriefing is stated on camera,” “a detailed review of the incident and the use of force stated by the Lieutenant,” “identification of employees involved by their name, title, and statement of any injuries incurred,” Health Services noting the results of the initial medical assessment, and “the details surrounding any breaks in filming, by the Lieutenant, if applicable.”

The After-Action Review Team’s video checklist at pp. 20–21 is, in effect, a list of the things that go wrong. It directs the team to confirm, among other items, that “[t]he inmate was given the opportunity to voluntarily submit to the placement of restraints,” that “Use of Force Team members used only the amount of force necessary,” that “[u]nauthorized items such as towels, tape, surgical mask, hosiery, etc., were not being used,” that “[p]rompt examination of the inmate was conducted following the use of force and findings were noted on video,” and that “[t]here was continuous operation of the video and breaks were documented and appropriately justified.”

Chemical agents, deadly force, and chokeholds

28 C.F.R. § 552.25, at PS 5566.07 at p. 12, limits less-than-lethal weapons and chemical agents to situations where the person “(1) Is armed and/or barricaded; or (2) Cannot be approached without danger to self or others; and (3) It is determined that a delay in bringing the situation under control would constitute a serious hazard to the inmate or others, or would result in a major disturbance or serious property damage.” The Warden may delegate that authority “to one or more supervisors on duty and physically present, but not below the position of Lieutenant.”

The medical screen before a calculated deployment is specific: p. 12 directs that the medical file be reviewed “to determine whether the inmate has any diseases or conditions which would be adversely affected if chemical agents or less-than-lethal munitions are used,” listing “asthma, emphysema, bronchitis, tuberculosis, obstructive pulmonary disease, angina pectoris, cardiac myopathy, congestive heart failure, pregnancy, or postpartum (the 12-week period following a pregnancy outcome).”

Decontamination, added in 2024, is at p. 5: it “must be conducted without delay, upon the incident being contained, and regardless of the availability of Health Services employees,” and includes “fresh air and rinsing with water focusing on affected areas with special attention to the face, eyes, nose, and mouth,” plus “a change of clothing.”

On deadly force, p. 24: “Employees may use deadly force only, when necessary, that is, when the employee has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person,” and “[d]eadly force should not be used against persons whose actions are a threat solely to themselves or property unless an individual poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the employee or others in close proximity.” At p. 25, one sentence that was not in the 2014 edition: “The carotid restraint and chokehold techniques are prohibited unless use of deadly force is justified under law and this policy.”

On firearms, the Firearm Matrix at p. 32 distinguishes by security level. At secure facilities, “[v]erbal warnings and warning shots are not required when the employee reasonably believes there is imminent threat of danger of death or serious physical injury to self or others.” But “[a]t Low, Medium, and High security institutions, an employee who determines an escape is in progress must issue a verbal warning, then fire a warning shot prior to shooting the subject,” and warning shots “should be used only if there is no apparent danger to self, other employees, inmates, or the community.”

The paper trail

Every one of these creates a record, and the records are what a later dispute turns on. From PS 5566.07 at pp. 18–19:

Form	What it documents	When
BP-E583 Report of Incident	“the use of force, chemical agents/OC, progressive restraints, and less-than-lethal delivery systems,” including “the application of progressive restraints on an inmate who complies”	To the Warden or designee “no later than the end of the tour of duty”; copies to five named officials “within two workdays”
BP-A0717 Fifteen Minute Restraints Check Form (24-Hours)	The 15-minute checks	Until release from restraints
BP-A0718 Two-Hours Lieutenant Restraints Check Form (24-Hours)	The two-hour Lieutenant reviews	Until release from restraints
BP-A0719 Health Services Restraints Review Form (24-Hours)	The Health Services reviews	Until release from restraints
BP-A0720 Psychology Services Review Form (24-Hours)	The 24-hour psychology examination	Until release from restraints
BP-E586 Use of Force After-Action Review	The review team’s findings and whether the force was appropriate	“no later than two working days after the incident or two days after the inmate has been removed from restraints”

Where those documents live is stated at p. 19: “After release from restraints, these forms must be compiled and maintained in the Inmate’s Central File.” The Captain “maintains all documentation, including the video,” and the BP-E583 “is maintained electronically in TRUINTEL.” The regulation independently directs at 28 C.F.R. § 552.27 that “[a] copy of the report shall be placed in the inmate’s central file.”

Applied Insight — Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA, Managing Director: The BP-A0717 and BP-A0718 logs are the most useful documents in this entire policy, and almost nobody asks for them in time. They are contemporaneous, they are timestamped, and they are filed in the Inmate Central File after release from restraints. If someone spent hours in four-point restraints, the logs either show fifteen-minute entries and two-hour Lieutenant reviews or they do not — and a gap in a log is a fact, not an argument. Video is harder: the Program Statement does not set a retention period for it, and the practical window is short. Ask for the video by date, time, institution and incident number as early as possible, in writing, and keep the copy of the request.

What binds and what does not in PS 5566.07

A Program Statement is the Bureau’s internal instruction to its staff. It is not a regulation, and it is not a statute. The Supreme Court described a BOP Program Statement in Reno v. Koray, 515 U.S. 50 (1995), as “an internal agency guideline” that is “akin to an ‘interpretive rule’ that ‘do[es] not require notice and comment,'” though still “entitled to some deference” where it reasonably construes the statute. That is why this page says the policy “directs staff” to do things rather than that it “requires” them.

PS 5566.07 makes the line unusually easy to see, because it prints the two kinds of text differently and says so in its own page header: “Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type.” Eight of its twenty-one numbered sections carry a C.F.R. section number and reproduce the regulation; the rest are policy alone.

Program Statement section	C.F.R. section	Status
1. Purpose and scope	§ 552.20	Regulation, plus implementing text
2. Training under this Program Statement	—	Policy only
3. Types of force	§ 552.21	Regulation, plus implementing text
4. Principles governing use of force and restraints	§ 552.22	Regulation, plus implementing text
5. Confrontation avoidance procedures	§ 552.23	Regulation, plus implementing text
6. Less-than-lethal weapons, including chemical agents	§ 552.25	Regulation, plus implementing text
7. Progressive and ambulatory restraints	—	Policy only
8. Use of four-point restraints	§ 552.24	Regulation, plus implementing text
9. Medical attention	§ 552.26	Regulation, plus implementing text
10. Documentation	§ 552.27	Regulation, plus implementing text
11–21. Psychological assessment; Behavior Management Plans; After-Action Review; Firearms; Deadly force; Escape prevention; and related	—	Policy only

The practical consequence is precise. The fifteen-minute check and the two-hour Lieutenant review are regulation — but only as to four-point restraints. The Program Statement extends fifteen-minute and two-hour logging to progressive and ambulatory restraints at p. 13, and that extension is policy. The constant-visual-supervision post, the 24-hour psychology examination, the Behavior Management Plan cycle and the entire After-Action Review apparatus are policy. None of that makes them meaningless — they are how the Bureau tells its own staff to behave, and departures from them are what internal reviews and the Office of Inspector General look for. It does mean that “they violated the Program Statement” is not by itself a legal claim.

The constitutional floor

Separate from the regulation and the policy is the Constitution, and the standard depends on the person’s legal status.

For someone serving a sentence, the Eighth Amendment governs. In Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312 (1986), the Court held that where a prison security measure responds to a disturbance, the question “ultimately turns on ‘whether force was applied in a good faith effort to maintain or restore discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm,'” and that prison administrators “should be accorded wide-ranging deference in the adoption and execution of policies and practices that in their judgment are needed to preserve internal order and discipline and to maintain institutional security.” Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992), extended that core inquiry to all excessive-force claims and rejected a serious-injury threshold: “the use of excessive physical force against a prisoner may constitute cruel and unusual punishment when the inmate does not suffer serious injury.” Hudson also excluded “de minimis uses of physical force, provided that the use of force is not of a sort ‘repugnant to the conscience of mankind.'” The Court reaffirmed all of this in Wilkins v. Gaddy, 559 U.S. 34 (2010): “An inmate who is gratuitously beaten by guards does not lose his ability to pursue an excessive force claim merely because he has the good fortune to escape without serious injury.”

For a pretrial detainee — someone held before trial or sentencing, including in a federal detention center — the Fourteenth Amendment governs and the standard is objective. Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (2015), held that “a pretrial detainee must show only that the force purposely or knowingly used against him was objectively unreasonable,” measured “from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, including what the officer knew at the time, not with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.” The Court’s reason for the difference is one sentence: “pretrial detainees (unlike convicted prisoners) cannot be punished at all, much less ‘maliciously and sadistically.'” Kingsley lists non-exclusive factors: “the relationship between the need for the use of force and the amount of force used; the extent of the plaintiff’s injury; any effort made by the officer to temper or to limit the amount of force; the severity of the security problem at issue; the threat reasonably perceived by the officer; and whether the plaintiff was actively resisting.”

So the same incident, in the same building, is measured differently depending on whether the person had been sentenced yet. That is worth knowing before anyone characterizes what happened.

What this firm does, and does not do, here

We defend people accused of federal crimes and we advocate inside the Bureau of Prisons. We do not bring civil damages lawsuits against BOP employees, and we do not represent BOP staff. If what you want is a money judgment against an officer, this is not the firm for that, and we would rather tell you plainly than take up your time.

What we do handle, and what actually helps in the weeks after a use of force:

• The disciplinary case. A use of force is very often accompanied by an incident report. That report has its own process, its own deadlines and its own defenses, and it can affect good conduct time, custody classification and housing. See Inmate Discipline Program (PS 5270.09).
• Medical care that did not follow. If injuries were not treated, or a chronic condition worsened, that is a health-services advocacy problem with its own route. See Patient Care (PS 6031.06).
• Housing and safety. SHU placement, separation needs, protective concerns. See Special Housing Units (PS 5270.12) and Protective Custody.
• Getting the records. The check logs, the incident reports, the After-Action Review, and where staff will not produce them, a Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act request.
• The criminal case itself — appeal, § 2255, sentence reduction — where the underlying conviction or sentence is the real problem.

For a damages claim, there are two administrative routes and they are not the same thing. Money for personal injury caused by staff negligence goes through an administrative tort claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act — see Federal Tort Claims Act (PS 1320.07) and our practical page on how to file a tort claim against the Bureau of Prisons. Changing a decision or a condition goes through the Administrative Remedy Program. Either way, exhaustion matters: under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions … by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” “Exhaustion” means completing every level of the internal grievance ladder, on time, before filing anything in court. And § 1997e(e) bars a federal civil action “for mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody without a prior showing of physical injury or the commission of a sexual act.”

What the use of force policy means for you

If you are the person inside: three things to do, in order

Three things to do, in order, and none of them require a lawyer.

Get examined and let it be documented. Under 28 C.F.R. § 552.26(b), “[a]fter any use of force or forcible application of restraints, the inmate shall be examined by qualified health personnel, and any injuries noted, immediately treated.” The Program Statement adds that you may not refuse that assessment (p. 6). Say what hurts, including things that do not show — ribs, wrists, breathing after OC. What is written that day is the record.

Write it down while you remember it. Date, time, unit, who was present, who was in charge, whether a camera was running and who was holding it, whether anyone tried to talk to you first, whether you were offered the chance to submit to restraints voluntarily, whether you were awakened for checks, whether you were offered the toilet at each two-hour review. Those are the exact items the After-Action Review Team is directed to look for (pp. 20–21), which is why they are the right things to record.

Use the written channels. Start with an Inmate Request to Staff — form BP-A0148, universally called a “cop-out” — to the Health Services Administrator for a copy of your medical encounter, and to the Captain for the incident number. See Request to Staff (PS 5511.08). The formal ladder is the Administrative Remedy Program: BP-9 to the Warden, BP-10 to the Regional Director, BP-11 to the Office of National Inmate Appeals, under 28 C.F.R. part 542, subpart B. The deadline is short: 28 C.F.R. § 542.14(a) sets “20 calendar days following the date on which the basis for the Request occurred,” though “[w]here the inmate demonstrates a valid reason for delay, an extension in filing time may be allowed,” and the listed valid reasons include “an extended period of time during which the inmate was physically incapable of preparing a Request or Appeal.” BOP publishes BP-A0148 but does not publish the BP-9, BP-10 or BP-11 forms; the unit team supplies those.

If you are the family member: the silence after a restraint episode

The first thing you will notice is silence. Someone in four-point restraints or in SHU after an incident is not going to call you, and the institution will not call you either. That silence is not information — it is the ordinary consequence of housing and phone status, and it is the reason so many families do the wrong thing first.

What helps. Write down every date and time you were told anything, and by whom. Keep the letters. If your loved one can write, ask for the specifics above — times, names, whether checks happened, whether they were offered the bathroom. If there are visible injuries at a later visit, note them in your own dated record.

What usually does not help. Calling the institution repeatedly and asking for a supervisor rarely produces a record and can burn the relationship you will need later. Posting details publicly before anyone knows what is in the incident report can complicate a disciplinary defense. And a call to the Regional Office before the institution has had a written request is generally sent straight back down.

When to escalate. If someone has been in restraints for an extended period, or you have reason to believe they are in medical or psychiatric crisis, the routes that actually move are Health Services and Psychology Services, not custody. The policy directs that a psychologist be notified to evaluate suicide risk when someone “engaged in self-directed violence” (p. 14), and that psychology examine anyone in four-point restraints at least once every 24 hours (p. 19). Our overview for families is What Families Should Know About Federal Prison, and the companion page for this subject is Violence and Sexual Assault in Prison. If the incident involved sexual contact by staff or another incarcerated person, the governing policy is different — see PREA and Sexual Abuse Prevention (PS 5333.01).

If you are counsel: use of force

Treat the incident as a document set with known names and known custodians, and request it by name.

The set is: BP-E583 Report of Incident (electronic, in TRUINTEL, p. 19); the BP-A0717, BP-A0718, BP-A0719 and BP-A0720 check logs (filed in the Inmate Central File after release from restraints, p. 19); the BP-E586 After-Action Review Report (submitted by the Warden through TRUINTEL to the Regional Director “within two working days after the inmate has been released from restraints,” p. 20); the Warden’s Behavior Management Plan memorandum, which p. 20 directs be documented “in memorandum format to the file with a copy provided via e-mail to the Regional Director immediately upon completion”; and the video, held by the Captain (p. 19), with a copy of a calculated use of force sent to the Regional Director “within four working days” (p. 7). Medical documentation of the restraint checks lives in the health record, not the central file.

Two structural points are worth building into any request. First, the Program Statement makes clear that reports and videos “must be reviewed and audited by Regional and Central Office” (p. 11), so a records request that stops at the institution is incomplete. Second, p. 22 contemplates referral “to the Office of Inspector General, Office of Internal Affairs, or Federal Bureau of Investigation” where the Warden deems further investigation necessary — the existence or absence of such a referral is itself a fact.

On the merits, be careful about status. Whitley and Hudson supply the standard for a sentenced person; Kingsley supplies a different and more favorable one for a pretrial detainee. And keep the regulation and the policy separate in the writing: § 552.22(b)‘s “Force may not be used to punish an inmate” and § 552.24(d)‘s fifteen-minute check are binding text; the constant-supervision post and the 24-hour psychology examination are not. Where the client’s real exposure is the incident report, the disciplinary file is the priority — see Inmate Discipline Program. Records not produced through the unit team are ordinarily obtainable through a FOIA or Privacy Act request.

What changed from PS 5566.06 to 5566.07

PS 5566.07, dated July 17, 2024, rescinded PS 5566.06 CN-1, Use of Force and Application of Restraints (8/29/2014) — PS 5566.07 at p. 2. The title itself changed: firearms were folded into a statement that previously covered only force and restraints. The Bureau’s own Summary of Changes at pp. 2–3 lists fourteen items:

• Added language for consistency with the Department of Justice Policy on Use of Force.
• Provided direction that employees must recognize and act upon the affirmative duty to intervene to prevent or stop, as appropriate, any fellow Bureau law enforcement officer from engaging in excessive force.
• Mandated training be provided to all employees in confrontation avoidance and use of force techniques.
• Added decontamination procedures for chemical agents/OC.
• Mandated decontamination for chemical agents/OC be conducted on video.
• Revised guidance related to medical and mental health consultation in use of force and application of restraint incidents.
• Added general procedures and direction regarding the use of and reporting requirements for firearms in the Bureau.
• Added guidance specific to the use of firearms inside an institution.
• Provided guidance regarding armed escort by commercial aviation.
• Provided guidance and procedures related to the use of deadly force to restore order, in non-custodial circumstances, and in the prevention of escape, serious physical injury or death.
• Mandated that carotid restraint and chokehold techniques are prohibited unless the use of deadly force is justified under law and this Program Statement.
• Added the requirement to immediately assign employees to supervise inmates placed in four-point restraints.
• Created Attachment A: Bureau of Prisons Firearm Matrix.
• Created Attachment B: Training in the Confrontation Avoidance/Use of Force Technique.
• Created Attachment C: Use of Force Model and Continuum.
• Created Attachment D: Steps for De-escalation.

Four of those are the ones that change what a reader should look for in a 2024-or-later incident. The affirmative duty to intervene means the conduct of officers who watched is now within the policy’s scope. Video decontamination means that where OC was used, there should be recorded footage of the rinse and the change of clothing. Constant supervision in four-points means an assigned post, and a post means a name. And the chokehold and carotid-restraint prohibition is now express text rather than inference.

Note also what did not change: the regulation. 28 C.F.R. §§ 552.20–552.27 were last amended in the 1990s and 2011 — § 552.27 most recently at 76 FR 6056 (Feb. 3, 2011). The fifteen-minute and two-hour intervals have been the rule since 1989. The 2024 edition added policy on top of a regulation that stood still.

BOP’s June 22, 2026 mass reissue of 23 program statements, and the February–May 2026 reissues, did not reach 5566.07. It remains on BOP’s published policy list at its July 2024 edition with no change notice.

Where people get stuck when the check logs do not match

“The check logs do not match what happened.” This is the most common and the most productive complaint, because it is checkable. The 15-minute and 2-hour logs exist on named forms, are filed in the Inmate Central File after release, and are supposed to record awakenings and bathroom offers. Ask for them by form number — BP-A0717 and BP-A0718 — on a BP-A0148 cop-out to the Captain, and if that fails, through the Administrative Remedy Program and a Privacy Act request. A log with identical handwriting and evenly spaced entries across eight hours is a different document than one with real variation in it.

“They sprayed him and left him in it.” Decontamination is 2024 policy, not regulation, but it is specific: without delay, once the incident is contained, regardless of whether Health Services is available, with fresh air, water to the face, eyes, nose and mouth, a change of clothing, and video (p. 5). A Lieutenant is directed to ensure it happened (p. 6). Name the date, the time, the agent, and the absence of a rinse and a clothing change, and ask for the decontamination video by incident number.

“He was in four-points for a day and nobody told me.” There is no family-notification provision in this policy at all — that is worth knowing rather than discovering. What does exist is an escalating internal review: Regional notification at eight hours and each eight-hour period after (§ 552.24(g)); a Behavior Management Plan within 24 hours; BMP reviews every 48 hours thereafter; and psychology examination at least once every 24 hours. If the restraint period was long, those documents were generated, and they are the ones to ask for.

“He filed a BP-9 and it came back as the wrong remedy.” Property, money and injury claims do not travel on the administrative-remedy ladder. A claim for money because of staff negligence is an administrative tort claim; a request to change a decision or a condition is a BP-9. Filing the wrong one loses time you may not have, given the 20-calendar-day BP-9 deadline in 28 C.F.R. § 542.14(a). See Federal Tort Claims Act (PS 1320.07) and Prison Grievances.

Where the underlying issue is designation, sentence computation, medical care, or a First Step Act problem rather than the incident itself, the administrative ladder is necessary but rarely sufficient. Those belong in a consult — see Federal Prison Consulting Services or contact us.

Related BOP policy on use of force and restraints

The paired information page is Violence and Sexual Assault in Prison, which covers what these incidents look like from the inside and what to do in the first days; it links back here for the rule.

Policies that meet this one directly: Special Housing Units (PS 5270.12), because SHU placement almost always follows a use of force; Inmate Discipline Program (PS 5270.09), because an incident report almost always follows too; PREA and Sexual Abuse Prevention (PS 5333.01), which governs instead of this one where the conduct was sexual; Patient Care (PS 6031.06) and Treatment and Care of Inmates With Mental Illness (PS 5310.16) for the medical and psychological side; Female Offender Manual (PS 5200.09) for restraints on pregnant and postpartum women; and Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas (PS 5521.06), since searches are where many incidents begin.

Routes and records: Administrative Remedy Program (PS 1330.18) for the BP-9/BP-10/BP-11 ladder, Request to Staff (PS 5511.08) for the cop-out that starts it, Federal Tort Claims Act (PS 1320.07) and how to file a tort claim against the Bureau of Prisons for injury claims, FOIA and Privacy Act Requests (PS 1351.05) for the documents, and Inmate Central File, Privacy Folder, and Parole Mini-Files (PS 5800.17) for where the check logs are filed. Further reading on our site: Solitary Confinement and Special Housing Units, Protective Custody, Mental Health Programs for Inmates, and What Rights Do Prisoners Have?.

Frequently Asked Questions About Use of Force and Restraints

Reviewed for legal accuracy by Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Esq., Principal Attorney·September 2026