| Program Statement | 5522.03 |
|---|---|
| Subject | Whole Body Imaging |
| Current edition | June 15, 2017 |
| Change notices | None |
| Supersedes | Not stated — the Program Statement contains no “Directives Affected” or supersession section |
| Governing regulation | None claimed as authority. The Program Statement lists 28 C.F.R. § 552.13 among its references and expressly places whole body imaging outside it |
| Governing statute | None cited in the Program Statement |
| Related BP forms | BP-A1108, Whole Body Imaging System Maintenance and Radiation Survey Log |
| Official PDF | https://www.bop.gov/policy/progstat/5522_003.pdf |
Checked against the BOP policy set · 2026-09-07 · How we verify
Program Statement 5522.03 is the Bureau of Prisons’ instruction to staff on using Whole Body Imaging (WBI) scanners — walk-through machines that use ionizing radiation to look for contraband concealed on or inside a person — on inmates, and it sets the radiation limits that cap how often any one person may be scanned. If you are trying to understand a search that happened during a housing-unit shakedown or on the way back from a visit, read this page alongside Searches of Inmates and Housing (PS 5521.06); if you are a visitor asking whether you will be scanned on the way in, that is a different authority entirely, and the page you want is Inmate Visitation.
The rule itself: whole body imaging
Two things in this Program Statement are load-bearing, and both are reproduced here verbatim: the scan-frequency table, and the three dose limits.
Attachment A — the scan limits
This is the table that answers “how many times can they scan me.” It works backwards from a single annual radiation ceiling: divide the annual limit by the dose your institution’s machine delivers per scan, and you get the number of scans that machine is allowed to deliver to one person in a year.
Annual Limit established by ANSI/HPS N43.17-2009 (as amended) = 250 μSv/year
Key: μSv = micro-sievert · μrem = micro-rem
| Reference effective dose per scan (µSv) | (µrem) | Standard is met if number of scans per year does not exceed: | Standard is met if number of scans per day does not exceed (based on 250 work days for UNICOR/Facilities Work Cadre Applications): |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.05 | 5 | 5,000 | 20 |
| 0.10 (e.g., AS&E Smartcheck & Rapiscan Secure 1000) | 10 | 2,500 | 10 |
| 0.15 | 15 | 1,667 | 6 |
| 0.20 | 20 | 1,250 | 5 |
| 0.25 (e.g., Virtual Imaging SecurPASS & Smiths Detection B-Scan) | 25 | 1,000 | 4 |
Reproduced from Program Statement 5522.03, Attachment A, at p. 8.
Read the table this way. The limit is not a fixed number of scans — it depends on which machine your institution bought. On a device delivering 0.10 µSv per scan (the Program Statement names the AS&E Smartcheck and the Rapiscan Secure 1000 as examples), the annual ceiling is 2,500 scans and the daily ceiling is 10. On a device delivering 0.25 µSv per scan (it names the Virtual Imaging SecurPASS and the Smiths Detection B-Scan), the annual ceiling drops to 1,000 and the daily ceiling to 4. The daily column assumes 250 working days a year and is written for people working in UNICOR or on a facilities work cadre, who get screened repeatedly as a condition of the assignment.
The three dose limits
3. WHOLE BODY IMAGING SYSTEMS – DOSE LIMITATIONS
Operation of the WBI program must be suspended when dose limitations are exceeded, as determined by the annual radiation survey or by the specified output of the device as set by the manufacturer. It is critical to ensure that the annual limit on the number of scans allowed per inmate is not exceeded. Note: WBI systems used by the BOP have embedded software to track and limit the number of scans per inmate to prevent exceeding allowable annual exposure limits. WBI systems do not constitute a medical x-ray device as referenced in the Program Statement Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas.
a. Subject Dose Limitation. The radiation dose delivered to a human subject should be As Low As Reasonably Achievable (“ALARA”), while meeting the desired detection performance.
Reproduced from Program Statement 5522.03 at p. 3.
b. Operator Dose Limitation. The radiation dose delivered to the operator of a WBI system should not exceed an annual effective dose of 1 micro-sievert (100 micro-rem).
c. Bystander Dose Limitation. An inspection zone should be established around the WBI system where bystanders are prohibited while the system is in use. Radiation doses outside this inspection zone should not exceed 2 micro-rem in any one hour.
Reproduced from Program Statement 5522.03 at p. 4.
The last sentence of the block quote above is the single most consequential line in the document, and it is easy to read past. The Bureau’s position is that a whole body imaging scanner is not a “medical x-ray device.” That matters because a medical x-ray device used to hunt for contraband is governed by a regulation with real procedural teeth.
On this page
Why “not a medical x-ray device” is the whole ballgame
28 C.F.R. § 552.13 is the regulation that binds the Bureau when it wants to use a medical x-ray device to find contraband on a person. It requires a chain of approval that a routine body scan does not involve. The regulation provides that where “there exists no reasonable alternative,” and an examination “is determined necessary for the security, good order, or discipline of the institution, the Warden, upon approval of the Regional Director, may authorize the institution physician to order a non-repetitive examination using a medical x-ray device for the purpose of determining if contraband is concealed in or on the inmate.” That authority “may not be redelegated.” Staff “shall solicit the inmate’s consent,” though “the inmate’s consent is not required,” and the examination “may not be performed if it is determined by the institution physician that it is likely to result in serious or lasting medical injury or harm to the inmate.” Documentation goes in both the central file and the medical file.
Now compare what PS 5522.03 says about when a WBI scan may happen:
4. WHEN TO USE WHOLE BODY IMAGING
WBI systems that use ionizing radiation to detect contraband in body cavities may be used to scan inmates coming into or departing an institution. Staff may use WBI to conduct an electronic device search of an inmate on a routine or random basis to control contraband (see the Program Statement Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas).
Screening Inmates for Work Areas. If inmates refuse to submit to screening, proper disciplinary action should be taken in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Discipline Program.
Reproduced from Program Statement 5522.03 at p. 4.
Set the two side by side and the practical difference is stark.
| Medical x-ray for contraband | Whole Body Imaging | |
|---|---|---|
| Source of the rule | 28 C.F.R. § 552.13 — a regulation | PS 5522.03 — the Bureau’s own policy |
| Who approves | Warden, on approval of the Regional Director; physician orders it; authority may not be redelegated | Staff, on a routine or random basis |
| How often | Non-repetitive | Capped only by the Attachment A annual and daily ceilings |
| Medical involvement | Institution physician orders it and may block it for risk of serious or lasting harm | None specified |
| Consent | Solicited, but not required | Not addressed |
| Documentation | Central file and medical file | Device software tracks scan counts; survey log on BP-A1108 |
Nothing here should be read as a claim that the Bureau’s classification is wrong. It is the Bureau’s stated position, and the Program Statement is the Bureau’s own instrument. The point for a reader is narrower and more useful: the procedural protections in § 552.13 attach to the medical x-ray route, and the Bureau does not treat a body scanner as traveling that route. If someone tells you a body scan required a Regional Director’s sign-off, that is not what this policy says.
Who is allowed to see the image
This is the second question people actually ask, and the Program Statement answers it in four short subsections.
b. Cross-Gender Viewing. Cross-gender viewing of screened images is only permitted if the WBI system is equipped with BOP-tested and -approved privacy filters. All BOP-approved WBI systems have the tested and approved privacy filters.
c. Investigative No Filter Same-Sex Viewing. Investigative staff authorized by the Warden and of the same sex as the scanned inmate may retrieve scanned images without the digitized privacy filter for evidentiary purposes for an internal or criminal investigation.
d. Prohibition on Inmates Viewing Images. Inmates must never be allowed to see the monitor that displays the scanned images either of themselves or another inmate. However, if an inmate is subject to disciplinary action, they may view the image being used as evidence.
Reproduced from Program Statement 5522.03 at p. 4.
Three things follow. First, the unfiltered image exists, and named staff can pull it — but only investigative staff, only with the Warden’s authorization, only of the same sex as the person scanned, and only for an internal or criminal investigation. Second, the default bar on seeing your own image has an express exception: if the scan is being used as evidence against you in a disciplinary case, the policy says you may view that image. Third, the Program Statement also directs that screening happen in a controlled area so that “following each scan, contact between screened and unscreened inmates is prohibited” (at p. 4), and that scan results route two ways — a negative image means you proceed, while a positive image means further examination under the searches Program Statement (at p. 5).
What whole body imaging means for you
If you are the person inside: when you can be scanned
You can be scanned coming into or leaving the institution, and on a routine or random basis as a contraband-control measure. If your work assignment is in UNICOR or on a facilities cadre, expect screening as a condition of that assignment — the Program Statement’s own inmate information sheet says so plainly: “In some cases, inmates must submit to the Whole body Imaging System as a requirement for working in certain areas, such as in Unicor, Facilities, etc.” (Attachment C, at p. 10).
On refusal, be clear-eyed rather than hopeful. The policy states that where inmates refuse to submit to screening for work areas, “proper disciplinary action should be taken in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Discipline Program.” That is a disciplinary route, and the consequences of a disciplinary finding are set out on our Inmate Discipline Program page. This page does not tell you what to do; it tells you what the Bureau’s policy says will happen.
On the scan itself, the mechanics are in Attachment C: you “stand in front of the device with their legs spread slightly and arms extended away from their sides while the scan is taken, this takes approximately 8 seconds to process,” and “[s]hould the subject move during the scan, the scan will be repeated” (at p. 10). A repeated scan for movement counts against the same annual ceiling as any other.
If you are the family: two practical points on scanning
Two practical points. First, the number that matters is not “how many scans is too many” in the abstract — it is which device your loved one’s institution uses, because the ceiling changes with the machine. The Program Statement says the systems have “embedded software to track and limit the number of scans per inmate,” so the count exists somewhere in the institution’s records even though it is not something the person being scanned is handed.
Second, and more often relevant to you: this Program Statement is about scanning inmates. It is not the authority for screening visitors. Searches of people who are not in Bureau custody are governed by 28 C.F.R. part 511, subpart B, titled “Searching and Detaining or Arresting Non-Inmates.” That regulation provides that a non-inmate “may be electronically searched for the presence of contraband, either randomly or upon reasonable suspicion,” and that “[e]xamples of electronic searches include, but are not limited to, metal detectors and ion spectrometry devices” — a list that is expressly not exhaustive and that does not name whole body imaging. What happens if a visitor declines is answered by 28 C.F.R. § 511.17: at the Warden’s or designee’s discretion, you “may be denied entry to, or required to leave, a Bureau facility or Bureau grounds if … [y]ou refuse to be searched under this subpart.” That is denial of entry, not discipline — a different consequence flowing from a different rule. For the visitor side in full, see Searching and Detaining Visitors and Ion Spectrometry Visitor Screening.
If you are counsel: whole body imaging
The Fourth Amendment question has been litigated in the federal system, and the result is instructive on what a record has to contain. In United States v. Shields, No. 1:15-cr-00200 (D. Colo. July 20, 2017), a federal defendant moved to suppress contraband recovered after repeated SecurPASS scans on entry to the Special Housing Unit — SecurPASS being one of the two 0.25 µSv devices the Program Statement names in Attachment A. The court found the search reasonable, reasoning that it “was conducted pursuant to a routine protocol applicable to all inmates entering the SHU, a procedure justified in itself by legitimate penalogical concerns for staff and inmate safety and institutional security,” and that “[t]he repeated use of the scanner to determine whether Mr. Shields was secreting contraband was not unreasonable given the inability to obtain a clear image initially.”
The radiation holding is the part worth carrying forward. The court noted the defendant “elicited no evidence whatsoever to suggest the type or amount of radiation emitted by the SecurPASS device presents any danger to persons subject to the scan,” and added that “this is not a matter of which a court can take judicial notice.” A challenge premised on cumulative radiation exposure is therefore an evidentiary undertaking, not an argument that can be asserted. The records that would build it — the BP-A1108 maintenance and radiation survey log, the annual survey results, the device’s own scan counts, and the manufacturer’s stated per-scan dose — are all identified in the Program Statement itself, and the survey obligations are specific: surveys must be performed “[u]pon installation,” “[a]t least once every 12 months,” after maintenance affecting shielding or x-ray production components, and after any incident that may have caused leakage (at p. 3).
Keep the Program Statement in its proper register when you argue from it. In Reno v. Koray, 515 U.S. 50 (1995), the Supreme Court described a Program Statement as “an internal agency guideline” that is “akin to an ‘interpretive rule’ that ‘do[es] not require notice and comment,'” and is “still entitled to some deference.” It is not a regulation, and a departure from it is not automatically a legal violation.
What changed with Program Statement 5522.03
PS 5522.03 was signed on June 15, 2017 by then-Acting Director Thomas R. Kane. Unusually for a Program Statement carrying a .03 suffix, it contains no “Directives Affected” section and no supersession statement anywhere in the document — a full-text search of the ten-page PDF returns no rescission language at all. So the Bureau’s own instrument does not record what it replaced, and we will not guess.
What has plainly changed is everything around it. PS 5522.03 has not been reissued since 2017, but three of the four Program Statements in its reference list have moved:
| Referenced in PS 5522.03 (2017) | Status as of the current in-force policy set |
|---|---|
| P1600.11 National Occupational Safety and Health Policy (6/1/17) | Succeeded by PS 1600.14, National Occupational Safety and Health Policy (April 8, 2024), which was itself rescinded in the 22 June 2026 reissue and replaced by PS 1614.01, Occupational Safety (June 22, 2026) — a new number and a new title |
| P5270.09 Inmate Discipline Program (7/28/11) | Amended by Change Notice CN-1 (November 18, 2020), which added prohibited act code 231 |
| P5521.06 Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas (06/04/15) | Amended by Change Notice CN-1 (March 6, 2025) |
| P5500.14 Correctional Services Manual (8/1/16) | Not verified for this page |
Two consequences are worth stating. First, §2.f of PS 5522.03 tells staff that radiation exposure badge evaluations, testing procedures and exposure data are governed by “the Program Statement National Occupational Safety and Health Policy.” No Program Statement of that title remains in the in-force set. The successor instruction now sits under a different number and a different name, so the WBI policy’s radiation-safety cross-reference points at a title that no longer exists.
Second, there is a terminology divergence. PS 5522.03 §5.b is headed “Cross-Gender Viewing.” The Change Notice that amended the searches Program Statement it repeatedly cross-references states that “[t]hroughout this CN the term ‘gender’ has been replaced with ‘sex’ and the term ‘cross-gender’ has been replaced with ‘opposite sex.'” The searches policy moved; the imaging policy did not. Expect to see both vocabularies in institution paperwork.
One further housekeeping defect in the document itself: the Program Statement runs section 6 (Training) straight to section 8 (Recordkeeping). There is no section 7 in the published PDF. If you are pin-citing to this policy, cite by page, not by an assumed section sequence.
Where people get stuck on the annual scan limit
“I was scanned more times than the limit allows.” The ceiling is per person per year against a specific device’s per-scan dose, and it is tracked by the machine, not by you. The route is the administrative remedy process: an informal resolution attempt (the BP-8 cop-out) first, then a formal request. Under 28 C.F.R. § 542.14, “[t]he deadline for completion of informal resolution and submission of a formal written Administrative Remedy Request, on the appropriate form (BP-9), is 20 calendar days following the date on which the basis for the Request occurred.” Appeals follow under 28 C.F.R. § 542.15: a BP-10 to the Regional Director “within 20 calendar days of the date the Warden signed the response,” then a BP-11 to the General Counsel “within 30 calendar days of the date the Regional Director signed the response.” Ask, in writing, for the scan count and the survey log. See How to File a BP-9 and the Administrative Remedy Program.
“An officer of the opposite sex was looking at the screen.” The policy permits cross-gender viewing only where the system has BOP-tested and approved privacy filters, and states that all BOP-approved systems have them. The unfiltered image is a narrower category: investigative staff, Warden-authorized, same sex, investigation purposes. A complaint here is fact-specific — who viewed, filtered or unfiltered, and on whose authorization — and those are the three facts to pin down in the informal resolution attempt while memories are fresh.
“They used the scan as evidence in my disciplinary case but wouldn’t show it to me.” The Program Statement’s general prohibition on inmates viewing images carries an express carve-out: “if an inmate is subject to disciplinary action, they may view the image being used as evidence.” Raise it at the hearing stage, on the record, and see Inmate Discipline Proceedings for how the record is built.
“I have a medical reason not to be scanned.” The Program Statement sets no medical-exception procedure, no consent requirement, and no physician gatekeeper — those features belong to the medical x-ray regulation the Bureau says does not apply here. A medical concern therefore travels through Health Services and the administrative remedy process rather than through this policy, and documentation created contemporaneously is worth far more than a recollection later. See Medical and Dental Care.
Related BOP policy on body scanning and searches
Three policies do most of the work around this one. Searches of Inmates and Housing is the most important companion: PS 5522.03 points to it three separate times — for the routine-and-random search authority, for what happens after a positive scan, and for the medical x-ray comparison — and it is the policy that carries the March 2025 Change Notice. The Inmate Discipline Program is where a refusal goes, and Inmate Discipline Proceedings is where a scan used as evidence gets tested; if a charge has already issued, the BP-A0288 Incident Report is the document to read first. Because the policy authorizes scanning inmates “coming into or departing an institution,” it also connects directly to Receiving and Discharge and to The Intake Process.
On the visitor side — a different authority entirely — the governing material is Searching and Detaining Visitors and Ion Spectrometry Visitor Screening, with practical guidance for families at Inmate Visitation and Visiting Regulations. Where a scan-related problem is not resolving through staff, see the Administrative Remedy Program, Prison Grievances, and Federal Prison Consulting Services for how the firm approaches Bureau-facing advocacy.
Frequently Asked Questions About Whole Body Imaging
How many times can the BOP scan me in a year?
It depends on which machine your institution uses. Attachment A to PS 5522.03 sets the ceiling by dividing an annual limit of 250 µSv by the device’s per-scan dose: 5,000 scans a year at 0.05 µSv per scan, 2,500 at 0.10 µSv, 1,667 at 0.15 µSv, 1,250 at 0.20 µSv, and 1,000 at 0.25 µSv. The daily ceilings for the same devices are 20, 10, 6, 5 and 4 scans, calculated on 250 working days a year for UNICOR and facilities work cadre assignments.
Is a body scanner the same as an x-ray?
Both use ionizing radiation, but the Bureau treats them as different things for policy purposes. PS 5522.03 states that “WBI systems do not constitute a medical x-ray device as referenced in the Program Statement Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas.” That classification matters, because the approval chain in 28 C.F.R. § 552.13 — Warden plus Regional Director, a physician’s order, non-repetitive use — attaches to the medical x-ray route rather than to routine body scanning.
What happens if an inmate refuses a scan?
The Program Statement addresses refusal in the context of screening for work areas, and states that “[i]f inmates refuse to submit to screening, proper disciplinary action should be taken in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Discipline Program.” It is a disciplinary matter, not a matter of consent. The policy does not describe any right to decline, and nothing on this page should be read as advice about whether to submit to a scan.
Will I be scanned when I visit?
PS 5522.03 governs scanning inmates, not visitors. Searches of people who are not in Bureau custody are governed by 28 C.F.R. part 511, subpart B, which allows electronic searches of non-inmates “either randomly or upon reasonable suspicion” and gives metal detectors and ion spectrometry devices as examples — a list the regulation says is not exhaustive and that does not name whole body imaging. Screening practice varies by institution, so check with the facility before you travel.
Can staff see me without the privacy filter?
Only in a defined circumstance. Under PS 5522.03, investigative staff who are authorized by the Warden and are of the same sex as the person scanned “may retrieve scanned images without the digitized privacy filter for evidentiary purposes for an internal or criminal investigation.” Routine viewing runs through the privacy filter, and the policy states that all BOP-approved systems have tested and approved filters.
Can I see my own scan image?
Generally no — the Program Statement says inmates “must never be allowed to see the monitor that displays the scanned images either of themselves or another inmate.” There is one stated exception: “if an inmate is subject to disciplinary action, they may view the image being used as evidence.” If a scan is being used against you in a disciplinary proceeding, that exception is the provision to raise.
How much radiation is one scan?
The Bureau’s own inmate information sheet offers this comparison: “50 scans from a typical whole body imaging system that uses ionizing radiation is the equivalent to about 2 hours of air travel at 39,000 ft” (Attachment C, at p. 10). Attachment A puts the per-scan reference doses between 0.05 and 0.25 micro-sieverts depending on the device, against an annual limit of 250 micro-sieverts drawn from ANSI/HPS N43.17-2009.
What records exist about my scans?
More than most people expect. PS 5522.03 states that the systems have “embedded software to track and limit the number of scans per inmate,” and it requires the Institution Program Coordinator to keep operator training records, upgrade and maintenance records for the life of the system, radiation survey results logged on form BP-A1108, and “[e]vidence to show the dose limits outlined above are being met and the number of scans routinely conducted on inmates does not exceed the ANSI Standard” (at p. 6). Those are the documents to name specifically in a written request.
Reviewed for legal accuracy by Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Esq., Principal Attorney·September 2026