Educational Good Time Sentence Credit for D.C. Code Offenders

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

Program Statement	5885.01
Subject	Educational Good Time Sentence Credit for D.C. Code Offenders
Current edition	May 7, 2026 — approved by William K. Marshall III, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons
Change notices	None
Supersedes	Rescinds P.S. 5884.02, Educational Good Time Sentence Credit for D.C. Code Offenders (8/1/2002). The policy also moved out of the 5884 series into its own number.
Governing statute	D.C. Code § 24-221.01 (educational good time); § 24-221.01b (15% limitation); § 24-221.06 (exceptions); § 24-403.01(d) (no DCEGT for offenses on or after 5 Aug. 2000); § 24-101(b) (Revitalization Act)
Governing regulation	28 C.F.R. §§ 523.30–523.34
Related BP forms	BP-A0711, D.C. Educational Good Time (DCEGT) — prescribed by this Program Statement · BP-A0148, Inmate Request to Staff
Official PDF	https://www.bop.gov/policy/progstat/5885_001.pdf

Checked against the BOP policy set · 2026-09-07 · How we verify

Program Statement 5885.01 tells Bureau of Prisons staff how to award D.C. educational good time — “DCEGT” — a sentence credit of five days for each month enrolled in a designated academic or occupational program, available only to people serving District of Columbia Code sentences for offenses committed before 5 August 2000. The credit comes off both the minimum term (which sets parole eligibility) and the maximum term, and once properly awarded it vests and cannot be taken back. For the wider D.C. computation framework this credit sits inside — which good-time system applies to which offense date — see D.C. Code sentence computation; if you believe a computation is wrong, start at challenging a BOP sentence computation and federal early release.

This is a brand-new edition, dated 7 May 2026, and it changed five substantive things. The most important is that credit is now available for months actively participating in a program even if the person withdrew from it or failed it — not only for completing it. If a family member was told years ago that they earned nothing because they did not finish, that answer is out of date.

The rule itself — maximum DCEGT by program type

Two numbers govern every DCEGT award: five days per calendar month enrolled, and a ceiling set by the type of program. The rate is the easy part; the ceiling is what people come here for.

The Bureau’s regulation states the rate. Under 28 C.F.R. § 523.32, “You can earn 5 days DCEGT for each month you were enrolled in a designated program, up to the maximum amount designated by the Bureau for the type of program successfully completed”; “You are limited to 5 days per month DCEGT, even if enrolled in more than one designated program”; “Enrollment in a designated program for any portion of a calendar month earns one full month’s worth of DCEGT”; “You are not eligible for DCEGT which, if awarded, would make you past due for release”; and “Once appropriately awarded, DCEGT vests, and cannot be forfeited.”

The ceiling is set by this table, which is the heart of the whole Program Statement:

Maximum Available DCEGT for Designated Programs

If the D.C. Code offender participates in:	Maximum DCEGT available is:	Based on program enrollment of:
Literacy/General Educational Development (GED)	150 days	30 months
English as a Second Language (ESL)	150 days	30 months
Occupational\* (Non-College) with Marketable Completion for a:
100-500 hour program	35 days	7 months
501–1000 hour program	70 days	14 months
1001-1500 hour program	105 days	21 months
> 1500 hour program	140 days	28 months
Advanced Occupational\* (One or more college course per semester)	25 days	5 months

\* Excluding exploratory or apprenticeship occupational programs and correspondence courses.

Reproduced verbatim from Program Statement 5885.01 at p. 4. Transcription checked a second time against the original PDF.

The Program Statement states the two rules that make the table work in both directions: “A D.C. Code offender may be enrolled in a designated program longer than the time shown above but may not earn more DCEGT than the maximum amount shown. If a D.C. Code offender completes a designated program successfully in less time than shown above, they will only earn five days of DCEGT for each calendar month they were enrolled” (PS 5885.01 at p. 4). The Bureau then works two examples, both using the same 900-hour occupational program with a 70-day ceiling:

• Longer than expected. Enrolled 20 January 2024, completed 5 May 2025 — 17 calendar months. Five days × 17 months = 85 days, but the ceiling is 70, so the award is 70 days (PS 5885.01 at p. 4).
• Shorter than expected. Enrolled 20 January 2024, completed 5 September 2024 — 9 calendar months. Five days × 9 months = 45 days, well under the ceiling (PS 5885.01 at p. 5).

Note what the “any portion of a calendar month” rule does to those numbers. A person who enrolls on 30 January and withdraws on 2 February has been enrolled in two calendar months and earns ten days, not two. That rule is in the regulation, not just in policy, so it binds.

One limit the policy adds beyond the ceiling: “DCEGT may be prorated only to avoid late release” (PS 5885.01 at p. 3). The Bureau will not shave an award for any other reason.

Who can earn it

Eligibility is set by regulation, and the Bureau’s policy reproduces the regulation word for word. 28 C.F.R. § 523.31 provides:

“You are eligible for DCEGT if:

(a) You are incarcerated in a Bureau of Prisons’ (Bureau) institution or a Bureau contract facility;

(b) You are serving a term of imprisonment for a D.C. criminal code violation committed before August 5, 2000;

(c) Your Unit Team approved or designed a plan for you to complete a program designated by the Bureau as eligible for DCEGT;

(d) The Supervisor of Education (SOE) finds that you successfully completed a Bureau-designated education program on or after August 5, 1997; and

(e) You did not violate prison discipline rules while enrolled in the program (see § 523.33).”

Four boundaries follow from that list and from the Program Statement’s own scope section:

• The 5 August 2000 line is an offense date, not a sentencing date. “D.C. Code offenders who committed their offenses on or after August 5, 2000, are not eligible for DCEGT,” because D.C. Code § 24-403.01(d) provides that a person sentenced under that section “may receive good time credit toward service of the sentence only as provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b)” (PS 5885.01 at p. 2).
• The 5 August 1997 line is when the Bureau’s authority begins. “D.C. Code offenders who successfully completed academic programs in D.C. Department of Corrections (DC DOC) custody, or Bureau custody prior to August 5, 1997, are not eligible for DCEGT under this program statement” (PS 5885.01 at p. 2). That date is when the Revitalization Act made the Bureau responsible for D.C. sentences under D.C. Code § 24-101.
• The policy reaches every kind of Bureau facility. It “applies to D.C. Code offenders incarcerated in Bureau institutions, including Federal Detention Centers, Metropolitan Correctional Centers, Metropolitan Detention Centers, and the Federal Transportation Center, as well as Bureau contract facilities” (PS 5885.01 at p. 2).
• It does not reach D.C. Department of Corrections custody. “This program statement does not apply to D.C. Code offenders in custody at a DC DOC institution or a DC DOC contract facility as they are not in Bureau custody” (PS 5885.01 at p. 3).

The credit itself is broad in one respect that matters: “DCEGT awards reduce both the minimum and maximum terms of imprisonment, unless otherwise limited by this program statement” (PS 5885.01 at p. 2). Reducing the minimum term is what advances a parole eligibility date. That is the whole point of the credit.

The discipline limit — one month’s worth per incident

The first of two statutory limits is disciplinary, and it is not a sanction. It operates automatically. 28 C.F.R. § 523.33(a) provides: “If you violate prison rules, you are not eligible for one month’s worth of DCEGT for each disciplinary incident committed during the program enrollment period. A Discipline Hearing Officer, or other staff using procedures similar to those in 28 CFR 541.17, must determine that you committed a prohibited act.”

The Program Statement is careful to say why the distinction matters: “Ineligibility for DCEGT because of a violation of a prohibited act is not a sanction the Discipline Hearing Officer (DHO) imposes. Rather, D.C. Code § 24-221.01 mandates compliance with institution rules as a pre-condition to eligibility for DCEGT” (PS 5885.01 at p. 5, emphasis added). You will not see it on a DHO report. It surfaces later, on the computation.

Four operating rules, each with the Bureau’s own worked figures:

• One incident, not one charge. “Ineligibility for one month’s worth DCEGT due to violation(s) of prohibited acts refer to all violations arising from a single disciplinary incident.” Several prohibited acts in a single incident report cost five days, not five days each (PS 5885.01 at p. 5).
• Separate incidents count separately. Violations arising from separate incidents on different dates — or the same date at different times — in separate incident reports resolved separately by the DHO are separate incidents. Two incidents on the same day cost ten days (PS 5885.01 at pp. 5–6).
• A UDC finding does not disqualify. “A DHO or alternate member must find the D.C. Code offender committed a prohibited act… Unit Discipline Committee findings of prohibited act violations do not disqualify D.C. Code offenders for DCEGT” (PS 5885.01 at p. 6). This is one of the most useful sentences in the document, and it is routinely overlooked.
• The deduction can bite in a month that earned nothing anyway. “This limitation applies for every disciplinary incident during the program enrollment period, even if committed during a calendar month that would not otherwise earn DCEGT.” The Bureau’s example: a GED completed in 35 calendar months with one incident in the 33rd month yields 145 days, not 150 — because the GED ceiling is 150 days, which is 30 months of credit, and the single incident removes one of those 30: five days × 29 eligible months = 145 (PS 5885.01 at p. 6). The incident fell in month 33, past the point where any further credit was accruing, and it still cost five days.
• The limitation is cumulative. Two separate incidents in the ninth month of a nine-month GED leave seven eligible months: five days × 7 = 35 days. One incident during a six-month GED leaves five: five days × 5 = 25 days (PS 5885.01 at p. 6).

Two timing rules staff must follow: “DSCC staff must delay making final DCEGT awards when a D.C. Code offender’s disciplinary action is pending before the DHO. When the DHO completes disciplinary action, DCEGT should be awarded or denied regardless of pending appeals.” And, critically for anyone appealing: “Previously denied DCEGT may be awarded later as the result of D.C. Code offender appeals through the Bureau’s administrative remedy program or federal court orders” (PS 5885.01 at p. 6). A denial is not final. See inmate discipline and the administrative remedy program.

The offense limits — what the conviction itself forecloses

The second limit turns on the offense of conviction rather than on conduct in prison. Under 28 C.F.R. § 523.33(b), “The nature of your offense may limit your eligibility for DCEGT under D.C. Code 24-221.01b or 24-221.06.” The Program Statement sets out the mapping:

If the D.C. Code offender’s offense is for:	Then DCEGT:	The authority for this is:
A conviction for a crime of violence under D.C. Code §22-4501, as defined by D.C. Code §23-1331(4).	Must not reduce the minimum term by more than 15%.	D.C. Code § 24-221.01b, Limitations. Only applies to dates of offense on or after June 22, 1994
Violating D.C. Code §48-901.02 and 48-904.01, Controlled Substances Act,	Must not be applied to the minimum term of imprisonment.	D.C. Code § 24-221.06, Exceptions.
Violating D.C. Code §22-2104(b), Penalty for murder in first and second degree; or 22-4504(b), Carrying concealed weapons; Possession of weapons during commission of crime of violence.	Must not be applied to the minimum term of imprisonment if the offense occurred on or after November 2, 1989.	D.C. Code § 24-221.06, Exceptions.
Violating D.C. Code §22-2803, Carjacking.	Must not be applied to the minimum term of imprisonment if the offense occurred on or after October 2, 1993.	D.C. Code § 24-221.06, Exceptions.
Violating D.C. Code §22-4502, Additional penalty for committing crime when armed. See the Program Statement District of Columbia Sentence Computation Manual.	Must not be applied to the mandatory minimum term.	D.C. Code § 24-221.06, Exceptions.

Reproduced verbatim from Program Statement 5885.01 at p. 7. Transcription checked a second time against the original PDF.

Every citation in that table is current, and the chain is worth following once. D.C. Code § 24-221.01b provides that “Educational and meritorious good time credits shall not reduce the minimum sentence of any person convicted of a crime of violence as defined by § 22-4501, by more than 15%.” Section 22-4501 in turn provides that “‘Crime of violence’ shall have the same meaning as provided in § 23-1331(4).” So the definition that decides whether the 15% cap applies lives in the pretrial-release chapter, two cross-references away from the good-time statute. And D.C. Code § 24-221.06 reads, in full: “Institutional and educational good time credits shall not be applied to the minimum terms of persons sentenced under § 22-4502, § 48-901.02, § 48-904.01, § 22-2104(b), § 22-2803, or § 22-4504(b).”

Two things to hold onto. First, these are limits on where the credit is applied, not bars on earning it. A credit that cannot reduce a minimum term can still reduce the maximum term and therefore the mandatory-release date. Second, the 15% cap runs from 22 June 1994 forward — the Program Statement says so in the table’s own authority column — so an earlier offense is not subject to it.

Withdrawal and the literacy exception

This is where the 2026 edition departs from twenty-four years of prior policy, and it is the part most likely to change a real number.

Voluntary withdrawal. “If a D.C. Code offender withdraws from an education program voluntarily, they are eligible for DCEGT credit for the time they spent in the program before withdrawing voluntarily. This applies even if the D.C. Code offender subsequently re-enrolls and successfully completes the program. D.C. Code offenders are limited to five days per month DCEGT, even if voluntarily withdrawn and re-enrolled” (PS 5885.01 at p. 7).

Involuntary withdrawal. Where a person is “removed from a designated education program due to administrative reasons (e.g., writ, medical, administrative detention or disciplinary segregation) for more than 30 days, Education staff designate the D.C. Code offender as an involuntary withdrawal,” and the same rule applies — credit for the time spent before withdrawal, even on later re-enrollment and completion (PS 5885.01 at pp. 7–8).

Re-enrollment. “The Bureau will not give the D.C. Code offender DCEGT while on a waiting list to be re-enrolled in a designated program” (PS 5885.01 at p. 8). Waiting-list time is not earning time.

The literacy exception for special learning needs. “D.C. Code offenders who participated in the literacy program and who were later exempted by the Bureau because of special learning needs are eligible for DCEGT for the time enrolled in the program, if otherwise eligible for DCEGT under this program statement” (PS 5885.01 at p. 7). An exemption from the literacy requirement does not erase the months already served in it.

The Program Statement also reaches failing grades. Its scope section states that “DCEGT credits are awarded to D.C. Code felony offenders who participate in a program, such as a post-secondary program, but ultimately receive a failing grade. Those offenders still receive DCEGT credit for the months actively participating” (PS 5885.01 at pp. 1–2). Read together with the withdrawal rules, the 2026 edition converts DCEGT from a completion award into a participation award.

How an award actually happens — the BP-A0711

No credit is awarded because a person earned it. It is awarded because a form moves. Understanding the form is the practical core of this policy.

The Program Statement directs that if D.C. Code offenders “believe they meet the eligibility requirements they may advise the Supervisor of Education (SOE) they are D.C. Code offenders and request DCEGT via a BP-A0148, Inmate Request to Staff” (PS 5885.01 at p. 8). From there the process is two-part and two-office:

Part 1 — the Supervisor of Education. The SOE completes Part 1 of the BP-A0711, certifying the offender’s “successful completion of or withdrawal from a DCEGT designated program,” the “period(s) of enrollment (specific dates),” and the “maximum allowed DCEGT for the program.” The form is completed only when the person completes or withdraws from an eligible program. The SOE signs and dates it, and “Education staff forward a scanned copy (in .pdf format) to DSCC staff via email, with a copy to the local Correctional Systems staff, within three working days” (PS 5885.01 at p. 8).

Part 2 — the Designation and Sentence Computation Center. On receiving the form, DSCC staff in Grand Prairie, Texas complete Part 2 by certifying the discipline status while enrolled using the chronological disciplinary record, calculating and awarding the authorized DCEGT and updating the Bureau’s inmate management system, and filing the disciplinary record and the BP-A0711 in the DSCC file (PS 5885.01 at p. 8).

The published form itself — a one-page document with a JUN 10 date stamp on its face — carries two named parts and a distribution line:

PART 1 – SUPERVISOR OF EDUCATION: This inmate successfully completed ______, a program designated for earning a maximum of ______ days DCEGT. The following dates are for determining actual DCEGT. [ELIGIBLE DATES OF ENROLLMENT] [INELIGIBLE DATES]

PART 2 – INMATE SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT: This inmate: (Check one) ☐ Violated prison rules ______, as determined by DHO report no(s). ______ ☐ Did not violate prison rules while enrolled in this program. DCEGT in the amount of ______ days is awarded, based on ______ calendar months enrollment.

Record Copy – J & C; Copy – Central File; Copy – Inmate

Quoted from the published form BP-A0711, D.C. Educational Good Time (DCEGT), retrieved from bop.gov 7 September 2026. The form face is dated JUN 10 and its footer reads “Prescribed by P5300.”

Three practical points follow. The inmate gets a copy — the distribution line says so, so if a BP-A0711 was completed there should be one in the person’s property. Part 2 has a checkbox for discipline and a line for the DHO report number, which is where a disqualification becomes visible. And the form has no field for a partial award on withdrawal — its Part 1 sentence is “This inmate successfully completed” — even though the Program Statement now requires the SOE to certify completion or withdrawal. That gap between the 2010 form and the 2026 policy is the most likely place for a participation-based award to fall through.

The Eleventh Circuit has put the burden squarely on the prisoner. In David A. Sawyers v. USP Atlanta Warden, 465 F. App’x 837 (11th Cir. 2012) (unpublished), the court held that a § 2241 petitioner claiming DCEGT “had the burden of proving that the BOP had received the D.C. Educational Good Time form from the Supervisor of Education and, having received it, incorrectly calculated his parole eligibility date.” Under Bureau policy, the court noted, DCEGT credits are not awarded “until the D.C. Educational Good Time form is received from the Supervisor of Education.” The form is the case.

What educational good time means for D.C. Code offenders

If you are the person inside: your offense date and a BP-A0711

Two documents decide this: your offense date and a BP-A0711. If the offense predates 5 August 2000 and you have been enrolled in a designated program on or after 5 August 1997, the next step is a cop-out to the Supervisor of Education identifying yourself as a D.C. Code offender and asking for a DCEGT determination — that is exactly what the policy tells staff to expect. Ask for a copy of any BP-A0711 already completed; the form’s own distribution line gives you one.

If you withdrew from a program, failed a course, or were pulled out for medical reasons or a writ, do not assume you earned nothing. The 2026 edition credits months of active participation. If an earlier answer was based on the old completion rule, it was answering a policy that no longer exists.

If you are the family: what DCEGT is worth

DCEGT is small in daily terms and large in aggregate: five days a month, up to 150 days on a GED or ESL program. On a D.C. indeterminate sentence it comes off the minimum term, which is what sets the date the U.S. Parole Commission can first consider release. That is why it is worth chasing.

What you cannot do from outside is make it happen. The credit moves only when the Supervisor of Education completes Part 1 of a BP-A0711 and sends it to Grand Prairie. What helps is knowing the exact program names and enrollment dates — the form requires specific dates — and keeping a copy of every education certificate. If a program was completed in D.C. Department of Corrections custody, the credit for it is a D.C. question, not a Bureau question, unless the completion was on or after 5 August 1997.

If you are counsel: D.C. educational good time

Three checks. One: confirm the award was computed on calendar months, not on days enrolled — any portion of a calendar month is a full month under 28 C.F.R. § 523.32(c), and a day-based computation systematically undercounts.

Two: on a disciplinary reduction, confirm the finding was made by a DHO, not a Unit Discipline Committee, and that multiple charges from one incident were counted as one incident. Both errors reduce an award by whole months.

Three: on an offense-limit reduction, follow the chain rather than the label. The 15% cap applies only to a “crime of violence as defined by § 22-4501,” which incorporates § 23-1331(4); the absolute exceptions in § 24-221.06 apply only to six enumerated sections and only to the minimum term. A credit blocked from the minimum term should still be reducing the maximum.

Applied Insight — Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA, Managing Director: When we work a DCEGT question we do not start with the statute. We start by asking the education department for the program’s designation status and hour count, because the ceiling in the table is set by program type and hours, and a 900-hour course and a 1,100-hour course sit in different rows worth 35 days apart. Half the DCEGT disputes we see are not disputes about law at all — they are disputes about which row of the Bureau’s own table a course belongs in, and that is answered by a course catalog, not a brief.

What changed with Program Statement 5885.01

PS 5885.01 was signed on 7 May 2026 by Director William K. Marshall III, and it rescinds P.S. 5884.02, Educational Good Time Sentence Credit for D.C. Code Offenders (8/1/2002) — a policy that had stood for nearly twenty-four years. The Program Statement’s own Summary of Changes lists six changes, reproduced here in full:

– Replaces references to Inmate Systems Management (ISM) staff with Designation and Sentence Computation Center (DSCC) staff. – Removes the nature of offense being the basis for the eligibility for D.C. Educational Good Time (DCEGT). – Incorporates changes to allow good time credits for participation in an academic or occupational program, even if withdrawn prior to completing the program. – Replaces references to inmates with D.C. Code offenders. – Incorporates necessary information from the rescinded Mandatory Training Standards Operations Memorandum. – Updates the program statement number to 5885.01.

Reproduced verbatim from Program Statement 5885.01 at p. 1.

Four of those six matter to a reader rather than to a records office:

The withdrawal change is the substantive one. Under the rescinded 2002 policy the credit followed the old statutory language: no award until completion. The 2026 edition credits months of active participation whether or not the program was finished, and whether or not it was passed. This brings Bureau policy into line with the underlying D.C. statute, which the D.C. Council amended effective 10 December 2009 to require only “successfully participating in” a program rather than “successfully completing” one — see D.C. Code § 24-221.01(a). The Program Statement’s scope section says as much: “Effective December 10, 2009, the Code was amended to provide D.C. Code felony offenders with DCEGT for completion or participation in an academic or occupational program… This amendment does not alter the types of programs for which credit is earned. Classes that previously resulted in DCEGT credits upon completion now result in DCEGT credits for each month the D.C. Code offenders actively participate” (PS 5885.01 at pp. 1–2). The statute changed in 2009; the Program Statement caught up in 2026.

The office changed. Every reference to institution-level Inmate Systems Management staff became the Designation and Sentence Computation Center. Part 2 of the BP-A0711 is now completed at Grand Prairie, not at the institution — even though the printed form still says “INMATE SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT.”

The policy moved out of the 5884 series. The rescinded predecessor sat at 5884.02, in a number series otherwise occupied by good conduct time under the Prison Litigation Reform Act — PS 5884.01 (1997) and its live successor PS 5884.03 (31 March 2006) are both PLRA good-conduct-time statements. Giving the D.C. education credit its own number, 5885.01, separates two unrelated credits that had been filed as if they were variants of each other.

The terminology changed. “Inmates” became “D.C. Code offenders” throughout — a small edit that has a practical use, because it makes the population boundary of the policy legible on the face of every paragraph.

This edition is part of the Bureau’s 2026 policy modernisation. It carries no Change Notices, and it was not among the 23 Program Statements reissued in the Bureau’s 22 June 2026 mass reissue, nor among the 24 statements retired in that reissue — it predates the June wave by six weeks. Its rescinded predecessor, PS 5884.02, is not in the Bureau’s published set of superseded statements, which covers only the June 2026 retirements; obtaining the 2002 text now requires a FOIA request.

Where people get stuck when the BP-A0711 never moves

The form never moves. This is the failure mode. The Program Statement gives the Supervisor of Education three working days to send a completed BP-A0711 to DSCC, but nothing starts that clock except completion of, or withdrawal from, a designated program — and nothing tells the person inside that it has or has not happened. Sawyers confirms who bears the burden if it becomes litigation. Route: a BP-A0148 Inmate Request to Staff to the Supervisor of Education asking (a) whether the program is DCEGT-designated, (b) its hour count, and (c) whether a BP-A0711 has been completed and forwarded. Keep the response. If the answer is no or there is no answer, that document is the foundation of the BP-8 → BP-9 → BP-10 → BP-11 sequence.

Credit was denied under the old completion rule. A person who withdrew or failed and was told years ago that they earned nothing was told the truth under the 2002 policy and is being told the wrong thing today. The 2026 edition is explicit in both directions — voluntary withdrawal, involuntary withdrawal, and a failing grade all now earn credit for months of active participation. Route: a fresh request to the Supervisor of Education citing the current Program Statement by number and date, then the administrative remedy sequence. The regulation’s appeals provision is direct: 28 C.F.R. § 523.34 provides that “You can use the Administrative Remedy Program, 28 CFR 542.10 through 542.19, to challenge Bureau of Prisons decisions regarding DCEGT.” The deadlines are 20 calendar days for the BP-9 after the event, 20 calendar days for the BP-10 after the Warden signs, and 30 calendar days for the BP-11 after the Regional Director signs.

A UDC finding is treated as a disqualifier. Only a DHO finding — or a finding by other staff using procedures similar to 28 C.F.R. § 541.17 — disqualifies a month. The Program Statement says in terms that “Unit Discipline Committee findings of prohibited act violations do not disqualify D.C. Code offenders for DCEGT.” If a computation shows months stripped for incidents resolved at the UDC level, that is a policy error on the face of the document. Route: request the chronological disciplinary record that DSCC used, identify which incidents went to the DHO, then administrative remedy.

The credit is applied only to the maximum term, or only to the minimum. DCEGT reduces both, “unless otherwise limited by this program statement.” The exceptions in § 24-221.06 and the 15% cap in § 24-221.01b limit application to the minimum term for certain offenses; nothing limits application to the maximum. A computation showing no DCEGT anywhere for a person with an eligible offense date and a completed program is not the same problem as one showing DCEGT on the maximum but not the minimum, and the two get different arguments. Route: get the sentence monitoring computation sheet before filing anything, and check it against the tables above. Where the issue is legal rather than clerical, a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district of confinement is the vehicle once administrative remedies are exhausted.

Related BOP policy on D.C. educational good time

• D.C. Code Sentence Computation (PS 5880.33) — the framework this credit sits inside: which good-time system applies to which offense date, and how the minimum and maximum terms are computed. Read it first if you are not sure which era your sentence falls in.
• Sentence Computation Manual — Old Law (PS 5880.30) — governs D.C. sentences for offenses before 11 April 1987, which borrow federal statutory and extra good time.
• Good Conduct Time and good conduct time for families — the 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b) credit, which is the only good time available on a D.C. offense committed on or after 5 August 2000.
• Literacy Program (GED) — the program in the top row of the table, and the one with the largest available credit.
• Education Program Standards and inmate education levels — what “designated program” means in practice.
• Inmate Discipline Program and inmate discipline proceedings — the DHO findings that cost a month’s credit each.
• Administrative Remedy Program — the appeal route the regulation names.
• BP-A0148 Inmate Request to Staff — how to open the file.
• Sentence Monitoring Computation Sheet — where an award appears, or fails to.
• BOP Grand Prairie / DSCC — the office that now completes Part 2 and updates the release date.
• Challenging a BOP Sentence Computation and federal early release — what to do once you have found the error.

Frequently Asked Questions About Educational Good Time

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