Multimedia Communications

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

Program Statement	1480.06
Subject	Multimedia Communications
Current edition	June 22, 2026
Change notices	None — this is a full reissue, not a change notice
Supersedes	PS 1480.05, News Media Contacts (9/21/2000) — rescinded
Governing regulation	28 C.F.R. part 540, subpart E (§§ 540.60–540.65)
Statutes named in the PS	5 U.S.C. § 552a (Privacy Act); 5 U.S.C. §§ 7321–7326 (Hatch Act); 29 U.S.C. § 794d (Section 508); 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (E-Government Act)
Related BP forms	BP-A0232 Media Representative’s Agreement · BP-A0233 News Interview Authorization · BP-A0928 Audiovisual Production Proposal
Official PDF	bop.gov/policy/progstat/1480_006.pdf

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

Program Statement 1480.06 is the Bureau of Prisons’ instruction to its own staff on how reporters get into a federal prison, who inside may be interviewed, and what the Bureau will and will not say about a person in its custody. If you are a journalist working out how to reach someone inside, or a family member who has been told the press cannot talk to your loved one, the practical companion to this page is our media guide, which explains how our firm handles press inquiries about federal post-conviction cases.

Two things about this page before you read further. First, an interview is never something an incarcerated person is entitled to — the regulation gives the warden broad discretion, and this page will not tell you an interview will be granted. Second, the June 2026 reissue changed this policy substantially, and one of those changes puts the Program Statement ahead of the regulation it implements. That gap is set out below, because it is the single most useful thing on this page for anyone whose interview request was refused.

The rule itself: media interviews

Two objects in this Program Statement carry the weight. The first is the closed list of reasons a warden may refuse an interview. The second is the closed list of facts the Bureau will confirm about a person in its custody. Both are reproduced verbatim.

Artifact 1 — the grounds for denying an interview, as printed in PS 1480.06

§ 540.63 Personal interviews.

(g) The Warden shall document any disapproval. A request for interview may be denied for any of the following reasons.

(1) The news media representative, or the news organization which he or she represents, does not agree to the conditions established by this subpart or has, in the past, failed to abide by the required conditions.

(2) The inmate is physically or mentally unable to participate. This must be supported by a medical officer’s statement (a psychologist may be used to verify mental incapacity) to be placed in the inmate’s record, substantiating the reason for disapproval.

(3) The inmate is a juvenile (under age 18) and written consent has not been obtained from the inmate’s parent or guardian. If the juvenile inmate’s parents or guardians are not known or their addresses are not known, the Warden of the institution shall notify the representative of the news media of the inmate’s status as a juvenile, and shall then consider the request.

(4) The interview, in the opinion of the Warden, would endanger the health or safety of the interviewer, or would probably cause serious unrest or disturb the good order of the institution.

(5) The inmate is involved in a pending court action and the court having jurisdiction has issued an order forbidding such interviews.

(6) In the case of unconvicted persons (including competency commitments under 18 U.S.C. 4244 and 4246) held in federal institutions, interviews are not authorized until there is clearance with the court having jurisdiction, ordinarily through the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

(7) The inmate is a “protection” case and revelation of his or her whereabouts would endanger the inmate’s safety.

(8) In the opinion of the Warden, the interview may portray the agency or institution as endorsing or glorifying an inmate’s view or crime (e.g., providing notoriety, revictimization of victims).

Reproduced from Program Statement 1480.06 at pp. 9–10.

Read paragraph (8) carefully, because it is not in the regulation. The codified text of 28 C.F.R. § 540.63(g) — the version in force on the eCFR today — ends at (7), the protection-case ground. There is no eighth paragraph. The rescinded prior edition of the policy, PS 1480.05 (9/21/2000), also ended at (7), and it printed those seven grounds in brackets to mark them as the rule rather than the Bureau’s own instruction.

So the notoriety-and-revictimization ground is something the Bureau added to its staff instruction in the June 2026 reissue, printed in the same numbered style as the seven regulatory grounds around it. The Bureau’s own Summary of Changes describes the reissue as one that “[p]rovides clarity on existing policy-based reasons to deny an interview request” (PS 1480.06 at p. 1) — the Bureau’s characterization of paragraph (8) is that it makes an existing policy reason explicit, not that it adds a new regulatory one. Whether that characterization holds is not something this page can resolve, and no court has been shown to have addressed it. What can be said is narrow and checkable: the eighth ground appears in the Program Statement and does not appear in 28 C.F.R. § 540.63. If a denial letter cites it, that is worth knowing.

Artifact 2 — the eight facts the Bureau will confirm about a person in custody

§ 540.65 Release of information.

(b) The Warden shall provide information about an inmate that is a matter of public record to the representatives of the media upon request. The information is limited to the inmate’s:

(1) Name; (2) Register number; (3) Place of incarceration; (4) Age; (5) Race; (6) Conviction and sentencing data: this includes the offense(s) for which convicted, the court where convicted, the date of sentencing, the length of sentence(s), the amount of good time earned, the parole eligibility date and parole release (presumptive or effective) date, and the date of expiration of sentence, and includes previous Federal, state, and local convictions; (7) Past movement via transfers or writs; (8) General institutional assignments.

(c) Information in paragraphs (b)(1) through (8) of this section may not be released if confidential for protection cases.

Reproduced from Program Statement 1480.06 at pp. 11–12. This list matches the codified text of 28 C.F.R. § 540.65(b) item for item.

The Program Statement layers three staff instructions on top of that list, and each one narrows what the public actually gets. On item (3), place of incarceration, PS 1480.06 tells staff to “[o]nly provide the specific Bureau institution name or the specific RRM field office that oversees the inmate in community confinement,” and states that “[t]he specific location of an inmate is not releasable while they are in community confinement (e.g., at an RRC or in home confinement.)” It adds that “[t]he release of inmate designation information is prohibited. An inmate’s designated place of incarceration becomes public information only after the inmate has arrived at the designated institution” (PS 1480.06 at p. 12). None of those three sentences is in the regulation; they are the Bureau’s instruction to its own staff. The practical consequence is real: between sentencing and arrival, the Bureau will not tell a reporter — or anyone else — where a person has been designated.

What the regulation requires and what the Program Statement adds

This distinction runs through the whole document and it decides what you can actually do about a decision you disagree with.

Start with what the regulation says it is for, because it sets expectations honestly. 28 C.F.R. § 540.60 provides that the Bureau “recognizes the desirability of establishing a policy that affords the public information about its operations via the news media,” that media representatives “may visit institutions for the purpose of preparing reports about the institution, programs, and activities,” and then states the limit plainly: “It is not the intent of this rule to provide publicity for an inmate or special privileges for the news media, but rather to insure a better informed public.” The rule exists to inform the public about the prison system. It does not exist to give any individual a platform, and it says so.

28 C.F.R. part 540, subpart E is the regulation. It binds the Bureau. It was last amended in relevant part in 2010 and the current text carries an effective date of December 29, 2016.

Program Statement 1480.06 is the Bureau’s instruction to its staff. The Supreme Court described a BOP Program Statement as an “internal agency guideline” rather than a “published regulation[] subject to the rigors of the Administrative Procedure[] Act, including public notice and comment,” and held that such a guideline “is akin to an ‘interpretive rule’ that ‘do[es] not require notice and comment'” while remaining “entitled to some deference” where it is a permissible construction of the statute. Reno v. Koray, 515 U.S. 50, 61 (1995). That is the frame to hold: the Program Statement tells you what staff have been told to do; the regulation is the enforceable text.

PS 1480.06 prints a typographic key on every page — “Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type.” Two different typefaces separate the regulation from the Bureau’s instruction. That distinction survives in the printed PDF, but it does not survive plain-text extraction, which is one reason the eighth denial ground reads as though it were part of the rule. If you are working from the PDF, look at the typeface. If you are working from an extracted copy, check the section against the eCFR.

Here is where the regulation and the instruction diverge on the points a reader is most likely to care about.

Question	What 28 C.F.R. part 540, subpart E provides	What PS 1480.06 adds as staff instruction
Grounds to deny an interview	Seven, at § 540.63(g)(1)–(7)	An eighth — notoriety / revictimization / glorifying a crime (p. 10)
How a reporter applies	Written application to the warden, § 540.61(a); no form named	“This will be accomplished by the news media representative using the BP-A0232, Media Representative’s Agreement form” (p. 6)
How an interview is requested	Either the inmate or the media representative may initiate, § 540.63(b)	Requests “must be submitted to the designated PIO at the correctional institution or RRM office where the inmate is assigned” (p. 9)
Who decides	“The Warden,” § 540.63(f)–(g)	Authority “resides solely with an institution’s Warden or the Residential Reentry Manager… and their decision is final” (p. 9)
Consent to be interviewed	Written consent obtained before the interview; consent or denial goes in the central file, § 540.63(d)	“The inmate who agrees to an interview must complete the BP-A0233, News Interview Authorization form” (p. 9)
Photographs and recordings	Written permission from the inmate required before photographing or recording, § 540.62(b)	“Permission to film or take photographs will be at the discretion of the Warden”; use of a name, identifiable photo or voice recording “is not recommended” (p. 7)
Book writers	Not addressed	Warden “may approve institutional visits and interviews requested by writers for the purpose of writing a book,” on proof of a previously published book or a publisher’s letter of contractual support (p. 8)

Two of these deserve a sentence each. The regulation says the warden “shall normally approve or disapprove an interview request within 24 to 48 hours of the request” (§ 540.63(f)) — “normally,” not “must,” and the regulation attaches no consequence to a slower answer. And the regulation says flatly that “[i]nterviews are not subject to auditory supervision” (§ 540.63(j)); the Program Statement adds that official media interviews “must be afforded the same privilege as counsel or attorney visits regarding auditory supervision,” while confirming that they “will be visually supervised” (PS 1480.06 at p. 11). A media interview is not listened to. It is watched.

The two forms that actually get signed

Nearly every dispute in this area turns on one of two pieces of paper. Both are published by the Bureau and both are worth reading before anyone signs.

BP-A0232 — Media Representative’s Agreement

This is signed by the reporter, not by the incarcerated person, and it is the document that gets a journalist through the gate. Its printed text commits the signer to four things:

“I have familiarized myself with Program Statement ‘Contact With The News Media’ governing my conduct during interviews and visits within the institution and agree to comply fully with them.

I hereby fully and completely waive my personal right to be free from search of my person or property so long as I remain within the boundaries of the institution grounds.

I agree to provide no compensation, either direct or indirect, to the inmate or his or her family for any interviews or correspondence. I further agree to respect the rights of privacy of all inmates and to obtain a release from any inmate before any photos or recordings are utilized or personal information derived from any interview or correspondence is used in any publication or broadcast.

I recognize a visit to a prison presents certain hazards, and I agree to assume all ordinary and usual risks to my personal safety inherent in a visit to an institution of this type.”

Reproduced verbatim from BP-A0232, Media Representative’s Agreement, p. 1. The form’s distribution line reads “Record Copy – Inmates File; Copy – Media Representative.” Its footer reads “Prescribed by P1440” and “This form replaces BP-232(14) dated JULY 1979.” Form-face date: 6/10.

The form also requires the signer to state that they are “primarily employed in the business of gathering or reporting news” for a general-circulation newspaper, a news magazine or periodical with national or international news services, or a radio or television news program holding an FCC license — and to name their employer, their immediate supervisor, and that supervisor’s phone number. That definition, not a press pass, is the gate.

Three details on this form are worth flagging. It names a Program Statement titled “Contact With The News Media” — a title that matches neither the rescinded PS 1480.05 (News Media Contacts) nor the current PS 1480.06 (Multimedia Communications). Its footer says it is prescribed by P1440, while PS 1480.06’s own reference list at p. 20 places it under “Bureau Forms Prescribed by 1480,” and its companion BP-A0233 prints “Prescribed by P1480.” And the form carries a June 2010 face date, meaning the published form has not been reissued to match the June 2026 policy. None of that makes the form invalid; it does mean the form and the policy do not currently describe each other accurately.

BP-A0233 — News Interview Authorization

This is the form the incarcerated person signs, and its structure is the most practically important fact on this page: it contains three separate signature blocks, and the recording and photography permission is separate from the interview permission.

The first block reads: “I, the above-named inmate, do hereby freely give permission to the above-named news media representative to interview me on or about date: ___ and I do hereby authorize the news media represented by this person to use any information gathered about me during this interview for any legitimate purpose. I further authorize the Bureau of Prisons and the Department of Justice, and their authorized representatives, to release to representatives of the news media any documents or information relating to allegations or comments made by me in this interview.”

The second block is a refusal, with its own signature and witness lines: “I, the above-named inmate, refuse permission to the above-named news media representative to interview me.”

The third block, set off by asterisks, reads: “I, the above-named inmate, do further freely give permission to the above-named news media representative to make recordings of my voice during this interview and to make photos of me (still, movie, or video) and I do hereby authorize the use of such pictures or recordings by the news media represented by this person for any legitimate purpose.”

Reproduced verbatim from BP-A0233, News Interview Authorization, p. 1. Distribution: “Record Copy – Inmate’s File; Copy – Media Representative.” Footer: “Prescribed by P1480. This form replaces BP-233(14) dated JULY 1979.” Form-face date: JUN 10.

Signing the first block does two things at once, and the second is easy to miss. It permits the interview, and it authorizes the Bureau and the Department of Justice to answer publicly — to “release to representatives of the news media any documents or information relating to allegations or comments made by me in this interview.” That is not incidental. The regulation makes it a prerequisite: “[a]s a prerequisite to granting the interview, an inmate must authorize the institutional staff to respond to comments made in the interview and to release information to the news media relative to the inmate’s comments” (28 C.F.R. § 540.63(e)). A person who describes a medical problem, a use-of-force incident, or a disciplinary hearing in an interview has, by signing, authorized the Bureau to release records and information about that subject in response.

The signed original goes into the central file and stays there. PS 1480.06 directs that “[t]he original copy of the BP-A0233, News Interview Authorization form is to be placed in the inmate’s central file, and a copy is to be sent to the media representative making the request” (PS 1480.06 at p. 8), and the regulation provides that “[t]he written consent or denial becomes part of the inmate’s central file” (§ 540.63(d)). A refusal is filed as permanently as a consent.

Applied Insight — Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA, Managing Director: Before anyone in custody signs a BP-A0233, the question we ask is not “do you want to talk to this reporter.” It is: what in your file are you about to authorize the Bureau to release, to whom, and does any of it touch a pending motion, a pending administrative remedy, or a pending criminal matter? Where a case is live, that conversation belongs with counsel first. Where the person is represented, the interview decision is one the client makes — but it is not a decision to make without knowing that the same signature opens the Bureau’s file on the subject you plan to discuss.

What the media interview policy means for you

If you are the person inside: you may request an interview

You may initiate an interview request yourself; the regulation says “[e]ither an inmate or a representative of the news media may initiate a request for a personal interview at an institution” (28 C.F.R. § 540.63(b)). Under PS 1480.06 the request goes to the institution’s Public Information Officer, or the RRM office if you are in community confinement (p. 9).

You cannot be paid. The regulation provides that “[a]n inmate may not receive compensation or anything of value for interviews with the news media” (§ 540.63(a)), and PS 1480.06 extends that to correspondence: “[i]nmates may not receive compensation for their correspondence with representatives of the news media” (p. 8). You also cannot work as a journalist while confined — “[a]n inmate currently confined in an institution may not be employed or act as a reporter” (§ 540.62(d)) — and PS 1480.06 extends that reading to everyone “in the custody and care of the Bureau, including inmates in community confinement” (p. 8).

You have a right not to be photographed or recorded. The regulation says so directly: “[a]n inmate has the right not to be photographed and not to have his or her voice recorded by the media,” and a visiting media representative “is required to obtain written permission from an inmate before photographing or recording the voice of an inmate participating in authorized programs and activities” (§ 540.62(b)). That right applies whether or not you are the subject of the story — it covers being in the background of footage shot in a program area.

If you are in the Special Housing Unit, holdover status, a control unit, or hospital status, the warden may “[l]imit to one one-hour interview per month” where “required by special security, custodial, or supervisory needs” (§ 540.63(h)(3)). That is a ceiling the warden may impose, not a floor you are owed. And if you are under special administrative measures, media interviews are among the privileges that may be limited outright: 28 C.F.R. § 501.3(a) provides that such measures “ordinarily may include housing the inmate in administrative detention and/or limiting certain privileges, including, but not limited to, correspondence, visiting, interviews with representatives of the news media, and use of the telephone.”

If you are the family: you cannot consent for an adult

You are not the requester here and you cannot consent on an adult’s behalf. The consent has to come from the person inside, in writing, on the BP-A0233. If your relative is a juvenile under 18, the position reverses: the interview may be denied unless “written consent has not been obtained from the inmate’s parent or guardian” is cured — meaning parental consent is the thing that unlocks it (§ 540.63(g)(3)).

What you can rely on is the public-record list above. If a reporter tells you the Bureau will not confirm where your relative is held, check the list: place of incarceration is item (3), and it is releasable once the person has arrived — but under PS 1480.06 the specific location is not released while someone is in community confinement, only the RRM field office that oversees them (p. 12). And the whole list is withheld for protection cases (§ 540.65(c)).

Understand also that the family’s own contact with the outside press is not governed by this policy at all. Nothing in part 540 subpart E restricts what a family member says publicly. What it restricts is media access to the institution and to the person inside. Our separate page on what families should know about federal prison covers the wider communication picture — mail, visits and phones.

If you are counsel: media interviews

Three points bear on litigation and on advising a client.

A media interview is not a legal visit. It is conducted under part 540 subpart E and the visiting regulations, not under the attorney-visit rules. PS 1480.06 borrows the auditory privilege of a legal visit — media interviews “must be afforded the same privilege as counsel or attorney visits regarding auditory supervision” (p. 11) — but that is a policy statement about monitoring, not a grant of privilege in the evidentiary sense. Nothing your client says to a reporter is confidential.

The consent form is broader than it looks. Paragraph (e) of the regulation and the first block of the BP-A0233 together authorize the Bureau to release “documents or information relating to allegations or comments made by me in this interview.” Where a client has a pending § 2255 motion, a pending administrative remedy, a pending FTCA claim or an open criminal matter, that authorization interacts with all of them.

And the denial is documented but not appealable to a court on its own terms. The regulation says “[t]he Warden shall document any disapproval” (§ 540.63(g)) and that “[a]ny questions as to the meaning or application of this subpart are resolved by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons” (§ 540.61(g)). PS 1480.06 states that the warden’s or RRM’s decision “is final” (p. 9). For an incarcerated person, the route that exists is the Administrative Remedy Program — that is the route § 501.3(e) itself names for special-administrative-measures restrictions, and it is the exhaustion path any later filing will be measured against.

What changed in the June 2026 reissue

This is a full reissue, not an amendment, and the Bureau rescinded a policy that had stood for nearly twenty-six years. PS 1480.05, News Media Contacts, dated September 21, 2000, is rescinded. PS 1480.06, Multimedia Communications, took effect June 22, 2026 as part of the mass reissue in which the Bureau replaced twenty-three Program Statements on a single date.

The Bureau’s own Summary of Changes at PS 1480.06 at pp. 1–2 lists the following. These are the Bureau’s words, condensed only by grouping:

On the policy’s identity. The title changed from “News Media Contacts” to “Multimedia Communications.” References to BOPDOCS were removed. So was “Resolution 22, Department of Justice (DOJ) (8/3/1998).”

On staff representation. The reissue “[r]emoves references to the union’s role in representing bargaining unit staff.” The rescinded PS 1480.05 had carried an express paragraph stating that the policy “shall not restrict the union’s role in representing bargaining unit employees” and that union officials “will be allowed to represent the Bargaining Unit in their official capacity (e.g., providing interviews with the print or broadcast media…) without fear or reprisal” (PS 1480.05 at p. 1). That paragraph is gone from the 2026 edition. For a reader trying to understand why staff-side accounts of conditions at a particular institution have become harder to find, that deletion is a concrete change.

On interviews. The reissue “[p]rovides additional clarity for how members of the news media must request an institutional visit or personal interview”; “[d]efines a personal interview”; “[p]rovides clarity regarding who has the final authority to grant or deny interview requests”; “[p]rovides clarity on existing policy-based reasons to deny an interview request”; “[c]larifies responsibilities regarding denial of interview requests”; “[p]rovides clarity regarding auditory supervision of personal interviews”; and “[p]rovides clarity regarding the permission of news media to use film or photography during institutional visits” and “regarding access to institutional property by members of the news media.”

On who counts as a reporter. The reissue “[p]rovides clarity regarding inmates not being employed or acting as reporters.”

On information release. It “[p]rovides clarity regarding the release of information” and “regarding the release of staff names,” and “[r]emoves language regarding transmitting a message to the Central Office.”

On everything that is new. The reissue adds two subject areas the old policy did not have at all: multimedia production, “encompassing audiovisual and digital content creation… cloud-based workflows, accessibility standards, and contemporary methods”; and the Bureau’s use of third-party websites and applications, including social media, which “establishes guidelines for managing official Bureau social media accounts, designates authorized personnel for media engagement, and outlines standards for content accuracy, verification, and timely correction.”

Three of those changes have teeth for an outside reader. Access to prison property for filming is now restricted by default: “[u]nless otherwise specified and granted permission by the Warden, representatives of the news media are not permitted access to institution property for the use of film or photography but may film from nearby public property” (PS 1480.06 at p. 11). Photography of visitors on Bureau grounds is now treated as consented-to by entry: by entering government or public property or attending a Bureau event, individuals “including visitors, media representatives, contractors, volunteers, invitees, and attendees” are stated to “acknowledge and consent to such photography, filming, recording, and the subsequent use, reproduction, distribution, or publication of those images/audio by the Bureau or its authorized representatives, without further notice, compensation, or the requirement of an individual release form,” with an express carve-out that the policy “does not apply to areas where individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy” (PS 1480.06 at p. 14). And staff names are now released against a written list of exceptions, including where “the staff member is the subject of allegations of wrongdoing, and an internal investigation or disciplinary process is pending or imminent” (PS 1480.06 at p. 13).

The Bureau’s list of releasable staff information is short and worth having: “Name; Position Title (past and present); Grade (past and present); Salary (past and present); Duty Station (past and present); Duty Station Address (past and present)” (PS 1480.06 at p. 13), and the Program Statement attributes that list to the Program Statement on Release of Information.

Where people get stuck when an interview request goes unanswered

An interview request goes unanswered. The regulation’s 24-to-48-hour window is a “normally,” and PS 1480.06 routes requests through the institution’s Public Information Officer rather than directly to the warden (p. 9). For a reporter, the escalation is to the Office of Public Affairs, which the Program Statement makes responsible for “assisting in coordinating interviews and special media or high-profile tours” (p. 4). For the person inside, the first step is a written Inmate Request to Staff — a cop-out — to the PIO or unit team, kept as a dated copy. That written request is what later shows a remedy filing that the issue was raised and when.

A denial arrives with no reason, or with reason (8). The regulation requires the warden to document the disapproval (§ 540.63(g)) but does not require the reason to be given to the person inside. If a denial is communicated and the stated ground is the notoriety-and-revictimization ground, the point worth making in an administrative remedy is the narrow, verifiable one: that ground appears in the Program Statement and not in 28 C.F.R. § 540.63(g). The route is informal resolution first — 28 C.F.R. § 542.13(a) provides that “an inmate shall first present an issue of concern informally to staff” — then the BP-9 within 20 calendar days of the event (§ 542.14(a)), then BP-10 to the Regional Director within 20 days and BP-11 to the General Counsel within 30 (§ 542.15(a)). Filing does not make an interview happen. It creates the record and completes exhaustion.

Someone signed the recording block without meaning to. The BP-A0233 puts photographs and voice recordings in a separate paragraph with a separate signature line for a reason. If a person signed the interview block and did not sign the recording block, the regulation still stands behind them: written permission is required before photographing or recording (§ 540.62(b)). The place to raise it is a written cop-out to the PIO and unit team, immediately, with a request that the signed form in the central file be reviewed. An inmate may ask to review the disclosable portions of that file at any time under 28 C.F.R. § 513.40.

The Bureau will not confirm where someone is. If the person has not yet arrived at their designated institution, PS 1480.06 directs staff not to release it — “[a]n inmate’s designated place of incarceration becomes public information only after the inmate has arrived at the designated institution” (p. 12). If they are in a residential reentry center or on home confinement, only the overseeing RRM field office is released. If they are a protection case, the whole list is withheld (§ 540.65(c)). None of those is a records error; all three are the policy operating as written.

A press pool has been called. When request volume “reaches a volume that warrants limitations,” the warden may establish a press pool (§ 540.64(a)). Pool members “are selected by their peers” and consist of not more than one representative each from the national and international news services; the television and radio networks and outlets; the news magazines and newspapers; and all media in the local community. All material generated by the pool “is made available to all media without right of first publication or broadcast” (PS 1480.06 at p. 11). A pool is not a denial. It is a distribution mechanism, and access is through the pool rather than individually.

Related BOP policy on media access

• Release of Information (Program Statement 1351.05) — the policy PS 1480.06 points to for the staff-name list and for the wider law on what the Bureau discloses.
• Staff Correspondence About Inmates (Program Statement 5840.04) — the companion rule on when a staff member may write about a person in custody to anyone outside.
• Standards of Employee Conduct (Program Statement 3420.14) — the schedule under which unauthorized dissemination of official information is itself a disciplinary offense.
• FOIA and Privacy Act requests — the route for records the media-release list does not cover.
• Central file and records — where the signed BP-A0233 goes and how to review it.
• Inmate correspondence — the separate rules for writing to a journalist rather than being interviewed by one.
• Visiting regulations and inmate visitation — the general visiting rules a media interview is conducted alongside.
• Special Housing Units — relevant to the one-interview-per-month limit for people in restricted status.
• What rights do prisoners have — the wider constitutional picture this policy sits inside.
• Our media guide and in the news pages set out how our firm responds to press inquiries about federal post-conviction matters.
• Where the problem is a live one inside a facility, our federal prison consulting page describes the kinds of institutional problems the firm works on and how legal work is handled by the firm’s attorneys.

Frequently Asked Questions About News Media Contact

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