Communications Management Units (Program Statement 5214.05)

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

Field	Value
Program Statement	5214.05
Subject	Communications Management Units
Effective / current edition	02-26-2026
Change notices	None. The February 26, 2026 issuance carries its own Summary of Changes; no change notice has been added since.
Supersedes	PS 5214.02, Communications Management Units (4/1/2015), rescinded — PS 5214.05 at p. 1
Governing statute	The Program Statement cites none. The Bureau’s placement authority is 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b); its general duties are 18 U.S.C. § 4042.
28 C.F.R. anchor	28 C.F.R. part 540, subpart J — “Communications Management Housing Units,” §§ 540.200 through 540.205. Six sections, no more. § 540.202 (Designation procedures) is the section inside that subpart carrying the notice and challenge language.
Related BP forms	BP-A0944, Notice to Inmate of Placement at a Communications Management Unit. BOP does not publish this form; the Warden hands it to you on arrival. The Program Statement’s own reference list at p. 16 calls it “BP-0944.”
Official PDF	bop.gov/policy/progstat/5214_005.pdf

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

A Communications Management Unit is a federal prison housing unit where every phone call, every letter, every email and every social visit is monitored, recorded, and capped — and where you live, eat, work, program and worship inside the unit rather than moving through the institution. Program Statement 5214.05, issued February 26, 2026, is the Bureau of Prisons’ instruction to its own staff for running those units, and it introduces something the previous edition did not have: a three-phase system that sets exactly how much contact with the outside world a person in a CMU gets at each stage.

Two things this page is careful about, because both get confused constantly. A CMU designation is not a Special Administrative Measure, and it is not the Special Housing Unit. SAMs are imposed by the Attorney General under a different regulation; the SHU is segregation. A CMU is a general-population housing unit with the communication tap fully open. The section below headed CMU, SAMs and the SHU are three different things sets out the distinction, with the governing regulation for each. For the day-to-day mechanics of reaching someone inside, start with Communication in Federal Prisons: How to Contact a Federal Inmate.

The rule itself: Communications Management Units

Everything in this section is transcribed from the Bureau’s own text at bop.gov/policy/progstat/5214_005.pdf. Where a passage is regulation rather than policy, the section number is given and linked to eCFR — that distinction decides what you can enforce.

The five designation criteria

These are the grounds. They are regulation, reproduced word for word inside the Program Statement at p. 3 and codified at 28 C.F.R. § 540.201:

§ 540.201 Designation criteria.

Inmates may be designated to a CMU if evidence of the following criteria exists:

(a) The inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction, or offense conduct, included association, communication, or involvement, related to international or domestic terrorism;

(b) The inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction, offense conduct, or activity while incarcerated, indicates a substantial likelihood that the inmate will encourage, coordinate, facilitate, or otherwise act in furtherance of illegal activity through communication with persons in the community;

(c) The inmate has attempted, or indicates a substantial likelihood that the inmate will contact victims of the inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction;

(d) The inmate committed prohibited activity related to misuse or abuse of approved communication methods while incarcerated; or

(e) There is any other substantiated/credible evidence of a potential threat to the safe, secure, and orderly operation of prison facilities, or protection of the public, as a result of the inmate’s communication with persons in the community.

Read (d) and (e) carefully. Subsection (d) means a disciplinary finding about phone, mail or email misuse — a 297 or 397 code shot, in the language of the Inmate Discipline Program — can itself become a designation ground. Subsection (e) is a catch-all with no offense-of-conviction requirement at all. The Program Statement adds at p. 2 that its provisions “apply to all inmates housed in the Bureau including pretrial, holdovers, and detainees,” and that “CMU designation is non-punitive.”

Referrals, under PS 5214.05 at pp. 2–3, “may come from any source,” and the policy lists four: the Counter Terrorism Unit’s own communication monitoring and intelligence gathering; the Designation and Sentence Computation Center as part of initial and re-designation; individual institutions or regional offices based on behavior; and “[r]ecommendations from other law enforcement agencies or courts.”

The communication limits — the phase table

PS 5214.05 at p. 8, transcribed exactly:

Communication Type	Phase 1 Restrictions	Phase 2 Restrictions	Phase 3 Restrictions
Telephone calls	Total of 3 (15 minute) connected calls per month	Total of 1 (15 minute) connected call per week	Total of 2 (15 minute) connected calls per week
Electronic Messaging	No limits unless otherwise restricted, to and from the allowed 10 contacts	No limits unless otherwise restricted, to and from the allowed 20 contacts	Limited to current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual
Social Postal Mail	Unless otherwise restricted, limited to a maximum of 10 approved social contacts	Unless otherwise restricted, limited to a maximum of 20 approved social contacts	Limited to current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual
Legal Mail/Calls	No limits unless otherwise restricted	No limits unless otherwise restricted	No limits unless otherwise restricted
Visits	May be limited as outlined in § 540.205 Visiting limitations	May be limited as outlined in § 540.205 Visiting limitations	May be limited as outlined in § 540.205 Visiting limitations
Approved Community Contacts	10 per inmate	20 per inmate	Limited to current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual

The policy then states, same page: “Inmates designated to the CMU will typically enter Phase 1.” Movement between phases is “typically initiated by Unit Management during the inmate’s scheduled program reviews,” reviewed with Intelligence Research Specialists, the Counter Terrorism Unit and relevant department heads, “with the Warden making the final determination,” and is “determined by the inmate’s conduct, programming, adherence to the phase allowances, and sound correctional judgement” (pp. 8–9).

The rest of the numbers, in the policy’s own words

The phase table is not the whole of it. Several limits sit in the narrative text and apply across phases.

Limit	The Program Statement’s own words	Pin-cite
Pages per letter	“Postal mail correspondence will be limited to six pieces of paper as outlined in section (a) General Correspondence, to and from a single recipient… The page limits apply in all three phases.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 9
Calling hours, weekdays	“Calls may be made Monday through Friday, except holidays, between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., local time.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 12
Calling hours, weekends and holidays	“On weekends and holidays, telephone calls may be placed between 8:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m., local time.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 12
Visiting hours per month	“In all three phases, unless otherwise restricted, inmates will ordinarily be allowed up to eight hours, but no less than four of visiting time per month.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 12
Length of a single visit	“Visits may be scheduled in increments of up to four hours at the discretion of the institution. No single visit (visiting day) may be scheduled for a period longer than four hours.”	PS 5214.05 at pp. 12–13
Publications	“While housed in the CMU, an inmate can receive up to five publications at a time and can maintain possession of five publications.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 7
Internet-capable devices	“All electronic devices that are available to inmates must not have the ability to connect to the internet or transmit communications via unmonitored wireless capabilities.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 7
Step-down after redesignation	“Inmates approved for transfer from a CMU are ordinarily redesignated to the general population in the institution where the CMU is located, for a period of no less than six months.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 15
Monitoring during step-down	“During the initial six-month step-down period, the inmate’s communications continue to be monitored by the CTU.”	PS 5214.05 at p. 15

What the regulation permits, and why “may be limited” matters

Here is the interpretive point that decides most CMU disputes. The regulation is written as a grant of authority, not as a schedule of entitlements. It says what the Bureau may do. It does not promise you anything.

Regulation	What it authorizes
28 C.F.R. § 540.203(a)	“General written correspondence as defined by this part, may be limited to six pieces of paper (not larger than 8.5 x 11 inches), double-sided writing permitted, once per calendar week, to and from a single recipient at the discretion of the Warden, except as stated in (c) below.”
28 C.F.R. § 540.203(b)	“Special mail, as defined in this part, is limited to privileged communication with the inmate’s attorney.” Such mail “is subject to staff inspection in the inmate’s presence,” and “[i]nmates may not seal such outgoing mail before giving it to staff for processing.”
28 C.F.R. § 540.203(c)	“Unless the quantity to be processed becomes unreasonable or the inmate abuses or violates these regulations, there is no frequency or volume limitation on written correspondence with the following entities: (1) U.S. courts; (2) Federal judges; (3) U.S. Attorney’s Offices; (4) Members of U.S. Congress; (5) The Bureau of Prisons; (6) Other federal law enforcement entities; or (7) The inmate’s attorney (privileged communications only).”
28 C.F.R. § 540.203(d)	“Electronic messaging may be limited to two messages, per calendar week, to and from a single recipient at the discretion of the Warden.”
28 C.F.R. § 540.204(a)	“Monitored telephone communication may be limited to immediate family members only. The frequency and duration of telephone communication may also be limited to three connected calls per calendar month, lasting no longer than 15 minutes.”
28 C.F.R. § 540.204(b)	“Unmonitored telephone communication is limited to privileged communication with the inmate’s attorney… permitted as necessary in furtherance of active litigation, after establishing that communication with the verified attorney by confidential correspondence or visiting, or monitored telephone use, is not adequate due to an urgent or impending deadline.”
28 C.F.R. § 540.205(a)	“Regular visiting may be limited to immediate family members. The frequency and duration of regular visiting may also be limited to four one-hour visits each calendar month… Such visits must occur through no-contact visiting facilities.” Visits “may be simultaneously monitored and recorded, both visually and auditorily.”
28 C.F.R. § 540.205(b)	“Attorney visiting is limited to attorney-client privileged communication as provided in this part. These visits may be visually, but not auditorily, monitored.”

Now compare the two. Phase 1’s telephone allowance — three fifteen-minute calls a month — is exactly the floor § 540.204(a) permits the Bureau to impose. Phases 2 and 3 sit above that floor. On visiting, the Program Statement is more generous than the regulation requires: § 540.205(a) would permit limiting a person to four one-hour visits a month, and the policy instead directs “up to eight hours, but no less than four” (p. 12). On electronic messaging the regulation would permit two messages a week per recipient; the phase table says “[n]o limits unless otherwise restricted” within the approved contact list.

The practical consequence: an argument that a CMU is exceeding the regulation is available only where the institution goes below the regulatory floor or outside the enumerated authorities. An argument that the institution is not following its own Program Statement is a different and weaker thing — a Program Statement is the Bureau’s internal instruction to staff, not a rule you can enforce as if it were regulation. Both arguments are worth making, in that order, and they are made in different sentences.

The written notice you are supposed to receive

28 C.F.R. § 540.202(c) is the only place in this scheme where the Bureau commits to telling you anything. Reproduced in the Program Statement at pp. 4–5, and delivered on the BP-A0944 form:

(c) Written notice. Upon arrival at the designated CMU, inmates will receive written notice from the facility’s Warden explaining that:

(1) Designation to a CMU allows greater Bureau staff management of communication with persons in the community through complete monitoring of telephone use, written correspondence, and visiting. The volume, frequency, and methods of CMU inmate contact with persons in the community may be limited as necessary to achieve the goal of total monitoring, consistent with this subpart;

(2) General conditions of confinement in the CMU may also be limited as necessary to provide greater management of communications;

(3) Designation to the CMU is not punitive and, by itself, has no effect on the length of the inmate’s incarceration. Inmates in CMUs continue to earn sentence credit in accordance with the law and Bureau policy;

(4) Designation to the CMU follows the Assistant Director’s decision that such placement is necessary for the safe, secure, and orderly operation of Bureau institutions, or protection of the public. The inmate will be provided an explanation of the decision in sufficient detail, unless the Assistant Director determines that providing specific information would jeopardize the safety, security, and orderly operation of correctional facilities, or protection of the public;

(5) Continued designation to the CMU will be reviewed regularly by the inmate’s Unit Team under circumstances providing the inmate notice and an opportunity to be heard, in accordance with the Bureau’s policy on Classification and Program Review of Inmates;

(6) The inmate may challenge the CMU designation decision, and any aspect of confinement therein, through the Bureau’s administrative remedy program.

Four features of that notice matter. It arrives on arrival, not before transfer — so the decision is already made and executed when you learn the reasons. The explanation is “in sufficient detail” unless the Assistant Director decides detail would jeopardize security, which is an escape hatch with no stated standard. The review is by the Unit Team, which does not hold the designation authority. And the only stated challenge route is the Administrative Remedy Program.

Who decides, and who cannot

Designation authority is narrow and explicit. Section 540.202(b) gives it to the Assistant Director, Correctional Programs Division, whose “decision must be based on a review of the evidence, and a conclusion that the inmate’s designation to a CMU is necessary.” The Program Statement adds, at p. 4: “Only the Assistant Director, or the individual appointed by the Director to serve as acting Assistant Director, CPD, has the authority to designate an inmate to a CMU. CMU designation approval authority may not be delegated below this level.” The same sentence appears for redesignation out at p. 14.

That single sentence is the most useful fact on this page for a family. The Warden did not make this decision and cannot reverse it. Neither can the Regional Director. Complaints addressed to the institution about the fact of designation are addressed to someone without power over it — which is exactly why the administrative-remedy ladder has to run all the way to the Central Office.

Review, phases and redesignation out

PS 5214.05 at p. 13 sets the redesignation architecture:

For an inmate to be considered for redesignation from the CMU, the inmate must ordinarily be in Phase 3. Progression through the three phases with clear conduct does not outweigh other contributing factors that support continued placement in the CMU. Based on exigent circumstances, Unit Management, in consultation with the Intelligence Research Specialists and relevant Department Heads, may review the inmate’s conduct for redesignation consideration prior to Phase 3.

And on the review cycle, same page: “Phase Progression Review will be conducted in connection with Unit Management’s regularly scheduled program reviews.” Program-review intervals are set by the Unit Management and Inmate Program Review statement, not by this one. Two further sentences on p. 13 are worth knowing verbatim: “Any misconduct to include, but not limited to disciplinary or communication management infractions, will result in review of phase progression and consideration for phase regression to Phase 1,” and “An inmate’s phase status is not part of the inmate disciplinary process.”

Note what the policy declines to promise. Nothing in it commits to any timetable for reaching Phase 3, and the Program Objectives at p. 2 say plainly that “[c]ompletion of the three phases and clear disciplinary history do not outweigh national security concerns or the Counter Terrorism Unit’s (CTU) assessment of an inmate’s threat to institution, staff, and public safety.” A denial of redesignation triggers one concrete obligation: “Inmates denied redesignation from a CMU are notified in writing by Unit Management of the reason(s) for continued CMU designation” (p. 14).

CMU, SAMs and the SHU are three different things

Families and even counsel routinely merge these. They come from different authorities, are imposed by different people, and are challenged differently.

	Communications Management Unit	Special Administrative Measures (SAMs)	Special Housing Unit (SHU)
Authority	28 C.F.R. part 540, subpart J	28 C.F.R. § 501.3	28 C.F.R. part 541, subpart B
Who imposes it	Assistant Director, Correctional Programs Division, BOP — “may not be delegated below this level” (PS 5214.05 at p. 4)	“Upon direction of the Attorney General, the Director, Bureau of Prisons, may authorize the Warden to implement special administrative measures” — § 501.3(a); the Director’s authority “may not be delegated below the level of Acting Director”	The Warden, through the institution; reviewed by the Segregation Review Official
What it is	A housing assignment. “A CMU is a general population housing unit where inmates ordinarily reside, eat, and participate in all educational, recreational, religious, visiting, unit management, and work programming, within the confines of the CMU” — § 540.200(b)	A set of restrictions on an individual, which can follow the person anywhere	Segregated housing — administrative detention or disciplinary segregation
Trigger	The five criteria in § 540.201	Written notification that “there is a substantial risk that a prisoner’s communications or contacts with persons could result in death or serious bodily injury to persons, or substantial damage to property that would entail the risk of death or serious bodily injury to persons” — § 501.3(a)	Discipline, investigation, protection, or pending transfer
Duration in the rule	None stated	“may be imposed for up to 120 days or, with the approval of the Attorney General, a longer period of time not to exceed one year,” extendable “in increments not to exceed one year” on renewed written notification — § 501.3(c)	Reviewed at three days, seven days, and every 30 days — § 541.26
Attorney communication	Privileged. “Privileged attorney-client communications are not monitored” (PS 5214.05 at p. 9); attorney visits “may be visually, but not auditorily, monitored” — § 540.205(b)	Can be monitored. Where the Attorney General so orders on reasonable suspicion that an inmate “may use communications with attorneys or their agents to further or facilitate acts of terrorism,” the Director “shall… provide appropriate procedures for the monitoring or review of communications between that inmate and attorneys” — § 501.3(d)	Privileged
Challenge route	Administrative Remedy Program — § 540.202(c)(6)	Administrative Remedy Program — § 501.3(e)	Administrative Remedy Program

One structural detail ties the two together and is easy to miss. Section 540.200(e) says the CMU regulations “supersede and control to the extent they conflict with, are inconsistent with, or impose greater limitations than the regulations in this part, or any other regulations in this chapter, except 28 CFR part 501.” In other words, the CMU rules yield to SAMs. A person can be under both, and where they conflict, § 501.3 wins. If your loved one is in a CMU and under SAMs, the attorney-communication protections described on this page may not apply. Our overview of that regime is at special administrative measures in federal prison.

Applied Insight — Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA, Managing Director: Get the BP-A0944 in hand, in a legible copy, in the first week. It is the only document that states the Bureau’s reasons, and § 540.202(c)(4) lets the Assistant Director withhold specifics whenever detail is thought to jeopardize security — which means the notice you receive is often the most detail you will ever be given. Read it against the five criteria in § 540.201 and identify, in writing, which subsection the stated reason maps to. If the notice recites criterion (a) but the judgment shows no terrorism-related count and the presentence report contains no terrorism finding, that mismatch is the whole case, and it is far easier to document while the paperwork is fresh than two years and two transfers later.

What a Communications Management Unit means for you

If you are the person inside: assume Phase 1

Assume Phase 1 and plan around it. That means three fifteen-minute calls in a calendar month, ten approved social contacts, and letters capped at six pieces of paper to a single recipient once a week. Choose the ten contacts deliberately — they are vetted and pre-approved by the Counter Terrorism Unit (p. 9), and “[e]xtenuating circumstances will be reviewed on an individual basis by Unit Management, Intelligence Research Specialists, and the CTU, with final approval being at Warden’s discretion.”

Protect the legal channel, because it is the one that is not capped. The phase table shows “[n]o limits unless otherwise restricted” for legal mail and legal calls in all three phases, and p. 10 repeats it: “In all three phases, Legal and court contacts will not be limited unless otherwise restricted. Legal calls will not be limited unless other restrictions are in place.” But under § 540.203(c), only privileged attorney correspondence is handled as special mail — the Program Statement is explicit at p. 10 that letters to courts, judges, U.S. Attorneys, Congress, the Bureau and other federal law enforcement have no volume limit but “do not receive special handling and will be treated as general correspondence,” and that the same is true of media representatives. Mail to a journalist is not legal mail. Mail to a judge is read.

Understand what phase status is and is not. It is not discipline — p. 13 says so — but misconduct triggers a phase-progression review and possible regression to Phase 1, and the discipline itself proceeds normally under the Inmate Discipline Program. Two systems, one incident. Keep the Trust Fund and commissary contact list clean, because Phase 3 messaging and mail are pegged to “the current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual.”

Finally, the conditions listed at pp. 6–8 are the baseline you can hold the institution to in writing: daily shower access, hair-care services, meals “the same as those served to the general population in accordance with the national menu,” library services under 28 C.F.R. part 544, religious practice under the Religious Beliefs and Practices statement, sick call and medication delivered in the unit, and the same access to Psychology Services as general population. Work assignments exist — orderly, food service, recreation — and are assigned by Unit Management.

If you are the family member: the CMU call arithmetic

The hardest part is the arithmetic. Three calls a month at fifteen minutes each is forty-five minutes of voice contact, and calls can only be placed Monday through Friday between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. local time, or 8:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on weekends and holidays (p. 12). Plan around the institution’s time zone, not yours. Visits are non-contact by regulation — a partition and a phone handset — capped at four hours in a day and ordinarily four to eight hours in a month, monitored and recorded, and the Warden may require them to be conducted in English or through an approved interpreter.

Two things you can actually do. First, get onto the approved contact list correctly and early; the list is small, it is vetted by the CTU, and a name that never clears is a name that cannot write, call or email. Second, keep a dated log of every call that did not connect, every letter returned, and every visit denied or cut short. Under § 540.202(c)(6) the challenge route is the administrative-remedy system, and administrative remedies are won or lost on specificity — a filing that says “they keep cutting off our calls” goes nowhere; one that lists six dates, times and outcomes is a different document. Our family-facing pages are Inmate Phone Calls, Inmate Visitation, Write an Inmate and Corrlinks and TRULINCS email.

Expect delay in translation. All foreign-language correspondence, incoming and outgoing, “must be translated before delivery to the inmate or further processing to the post office” (p. 9), and the same rule applies to electronic messaging (p. 11). Where a family communicates in a language other than English, the translation queue — not the page limit — is usually the real bottleneck.

If you are counsel: Communications Management Units

Start with the two documents that exist: the BP-A0944 notice and the referral packet. Under PS 5214.05 at pp. 3–4, the CTU assembles the referral from the presentence report, the judgment, the statement of reasons, DHO reports on communication-related misconduct, SIS reports and protective-custody investigations, and “[c]orrespondence (e.g., memorandums, letters) from courts, United States Attorneys’ Offices, law enforcement officials, etc., relating to the referral.” Some of that is your own client’s record and some of it you have never seen. The Office of General Counsel reviews the packet before it goes to the Assistant Director (p. 4). A Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act request is the only civilian route to the non-privileged parts, and the policy notes that classified material is handled separately.

Know the state of the law before you set expectations. In Aref v. Lynch, 833 F.3d 242 (D.C. Cir. 2016), the D.C. Circuit held that federal prisoners have a protected liberty interest in avoiding CMU placement. Its reasoning is worth quoting because it is unusual: “What we think pushes CMU designation over the Sandin threshold is its selectivity and duration, not its severity, and BOP’s recognition that some process—however de minimis—is due.” The court described CMU conditions as involving “significantly less deprivation than administrative segregation,” but found the designation “indefinite—lasting years in appellants’ case—and atypical because even though several thousand inmates could be designated to CMUs based on their commitment offenses, only a handful are placed under these restrictions.” It set out a three-part method: “(i) the conditions of confinement relative to administrative segregation, (ii) the duration of that confinement generally, and (iii) the duration relative to length of administrative segregation routinely imposed on prisoners serving similar sentences,” adding that “a liberty interest can potentially arise under less-severe conditions when the deprivation is prolonged or indefinite.”

Then know what happened next, because it is the more important half. The D.C. Circuit remanded for the district court to decide what process is due, and that question was never answered. In Aref v. Garland, No. 20-5368 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 25, 2022) (unpublished), the court vacated and remanded with instructions to dismiss as moot, because the remaining plaintiff had been released and could not show a concrete, non-speculative harm redressable by expungement. So the state of the law after more than a decade of litigation is: a liberty interest exists in the D.C. Circuit, and no court has said what process it entitles anyone to. That asymmetry — a recognized interest with no defined procedure — is the frame for any challenge, and it also means transfer out of a CMU during litigation is a live mootness risk to be planned for from the first filing.

Exhaustion is not optional if court is ever the destination. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), no action may be brought about prison conditions until available administrative remedies are exhausted — meaning every level of the internal ladder, completed on time, before filing. Because designation authority sits with the Assistant Director and cannot be delegated downward, a challenge to the fact of designation has to travel the whole ladder to the Office of National Inmate Appeals; institution-level relief on that question does not exist.

What changed from PS 5214.02 to 5214.05

PS 5214.05 rescinded PS 5214.02, Communications Management Units (4/1/2015). Its own Summary of Changes at p. 1 lists exactly three:

– Implements the three CMU phases and use of Enhanced Classification Range. – Updates the BP-A0944, Notice to Inmate of Placement to a Communications Management Unit form. – Clarifies the designation and re-designation process.

The first is the one that changes daily life, and its effect is easy to state precisely because a federal court described the prior baseline. In Aref v. Lynch, decided in 2016 and describing CMU practice under the pre-2026 regime, the D.C. Circuit wrote: “CMU inmates can make two fifteen-minute calls per week and are allowed two four-hour non-contact visits per month.” Under PS 5214.05, two fifteen-minute calls per week is Phase 3 — the top of the ladder — and a new arrival ordinarily begins at Phase 1 with three fifteen-minute calls per month. The monthly visiting ceiling is unchanged at eight hours with a four-hour maximum in any single day. So the 2026 edition did not tighten the outer limits; it converted what had been the ordinary allowance into something earned through phase progression, and made the entry point the regulatory floor.

The second change is the notice form. The BP-A0944 was revised, and the reader should be aware the Bureau does not publish it: it is not among the BOP forms posted on bop.gov, so the only copy in circulation is the one the Warden hands over on arrival. Keep it. Photocopy it through the unit team if you can.

The third change shows up in the redesignation section, which is now considerably more structured than a rescinded-policy summary can convey: the Phase 3 prerequisite, the exigent-circumstances exception, the requirement of at least one program review in Phase 3 before redesignation is ordinarily considered, the written-reasons obligation on denial, and the six-month step-down in the CMU institution’s general population with continued CTU monitoring (pp. 13–15).

Two things did not change. The five designation criteria are the same regulation text that has been in force since the CMU rule was codified; the 2026 Program Statement reproduces §§ 540.200 through 540.205 without amendment, because a Program Statement cannot amend a regulation. And the challenge route is still the Administrative Remedy Program — § 540.202(c)(6) and PS 5214.05 at p. 15 both say so, and neither adds a hearing.

Where people get stuck in a CMU

Four problems recur. The route matters more than the complaint, and in a CMU the route usually runs upward rather than sideways.

“Nobody will tell me why I am here.” This is the designed feature, not an accident: § 540.202(c)(4) permits withholding specifics whenever the Assistant Director concludes detail would jeopardize security. Start with an Inmate Request to Staff — form BP-A0148, universally called a “cop-out” — to the Unit Manager asking for a copy of your BP-A0944 and asking which subsection of § 540.201 the designation rests on. Then run the formal ladder: 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 clock is short — 28 C.F.R. § 542.14(a) sets “20 calendar days following the date on which the basis for the Request occurred,” extendable “[w]here the inmate demonstrates a valid reason for delay.” BOP publishes BP-A0148 but does not publish the BP-9, BP-10 or BP-11 forms; the unit team supplies those. See Administrative Remedy Program, Request to Staff and Prison Grievances.

A legal call or legal letter got treated as social mail. This is the most consequential CMU dispute and the most winnable, because the categories are regulatory. Special mail is attorney-privileged correspondence only (§ 540.203(b)). Unmonitored attorney calls are available “as necessary in furtherance of active litigation” once it is established that correspondence, visiting or monitored calls are inadequate “due to an urgent or impending deadline” (§ 540.204(b)) — so the request should name the case, the deadline and the date. Attorney visits are visually but not auditorily monitored (§ 540.205(b)). Cite the subsection by number, not the policy. Background: Inmate Legal Activities and Attorney-Client Communications in Federal Prison.

A contact will not clear, or was removed without explanation. Approved community contacts are vetted and pre-approved by the CTU (p. 9), and the number is the phase cap — ten in Phase 1, twenty in Phase 2. The policy provides one opening: extenuating circumstances “will be reviewed on an individual basis by Unit Management, Intelligence Research Specialists, and the CTU, with final approval being at Warden’s discretion.” A cop-out that identifies the person, the relationship, the date submitted and the reason the relationship matters is the document that triggers that review. Mail and visiting mechanics live in the Correspondence and Visiting Regulations statements, and the broader mail machinery in the Mail Management Manual.

A phase regression followed a disciplinary charge. Two proceedings run on the same facts. The incident report goes through the discipline process with its own procedural protections; the phase regression is a separate correctional judgment that p. 13 expressly places outside the disciplinary process. Defend the shot on its merits first — see prison disciplinary infractions — because an expunged incident report removes the factual predicate for the regression, and a regression review conducted while the charge is pending is worth objecting to in writing at the time.

Where the underlying problem is the designation itself, sentence computation, or medical care, the administrative remedy is necessary but rarely sufficient on its own. Those belong in a consult — see Federal Prison Consulting Services or contact us.

Related BOP policy on communications management units

The paired information page: Communication in Federal Prisons: How to Contact a Federal Inmate covers the ordinary phone, mail, email and visiting system that a CMU designation modifies. Read it first if you are new to this; read this page for what changes.

Policies a CMU designation touches directly, all of which the Program Statement’s reference list at p. 16 names: Inmate Telephone Regulations (PS 5264.08), Correspondence (PS 5265.14), Visiting Regulations (PS 5267.09), Inmate Legal Activities (PS 1315.08), Inmate Discipline Program (PS 5270.09), Special Housing Units (PS 5270.12), Unit Management and Inmate Program Review (PS 5321.09), Religious Beliefs and Practices (PS 5360.10), Inmate Personal Property (PS 5580.10), Incoming Publications (PS 5266.11) and the Trust Fund/Deposit Fund Manual (PS 4500.13).

Adjacent designations that are frequently confused with a CMU: Special Management Units (PS 5217.02), the Central Inmate Monitoring System (PS 5180.05) — whose CIM clearance and separatee data are where a CMU designation is actually recorded (PS 5214.05 at p. 4) — and Solitary Confinement and Special Housing Units. How the institution itself was chosen is Security Designation and Custody Classification (PS 5100.08), and the office that loads the designation is the Designation and Sentence Computation Center at Grand Prairie.

The two institutions: the D.C. Circuit in Aref v. Lynch recorded that “[t]he CMUs at the heart of this controversy are located at two federal correctional facilities in Terre Haute, Indiana, and Marion, Illinois,” established in 2006 and 2008 respectively. Our facility records are FCI Terre Haute, the adjacent USP Terre Haute, and Marion — which BOP’s current facility roster lists as a medium-security FCI, though court decisions and older Bureau documents call it USP Marion.

Frequently Asked Questions About Communications Management Units

---

Program Statement 5214.05 — full text

What follows is the Bureau of Prisons’ own text, reproduced in full from the agency’s published PDF. Nothing has been summarized or condensed. Source: Program Statement 5214.05 (bop.gov).

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 1

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Federal Bureau of Prisons

PROGRAM STATEMENT Communications Management Units Approved by

William K. Marshall III Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons DPI CPD Number 5214.05 Date February 26, 2026

Summary of Changes Program Statement Rescinded:

• 5214.02 Communications Management Units (4/1/2015) Changes:
• Implements the three CMU phases and use of Enhanced Classification Range.
• Updates the BP-A0944, Notice to Inmate of Placement to a Communications Management Unit form.
• Clarifies the designation and re-designation process.

1. § 540.200 Purpose and scope.

(a) Purpose of this subpart. This subpart defines the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ (Bureau) authority to operate, and designate inmates to, Communications Management Housing Units (CMUs) within Bureau facilities.

(b) CMU. A CMU is a general population housing unit where inmates ordinarily reside, eat, and participate in all educational, recreational, religious, visiting, unit management, and work programming, within the confines of the CMU. Additionally, CMUs may contain a range of cells dedicated to segregated housing of inmates in administrative detention or disciplinary segregation status.

(c) Purpose of CMUs. The purpose of CMUs is to provide an inmate housing unit environment that enables staff to more effectively monitor communication between inmates in CMUs and persons in the community. The ability to monitor such communication is necessary to ensure the safety, security, and orderly operation of correctional facilities, and protection of the public. The volume, frequency, and methods, of CMU inmate contact with persons in the community

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 2

may be limited as necessary to achieve the goal of total monitoring, consistent with this subpart.

(d) Application. Any inmate (as defined in 28 CFR 500.1(c)) meeting criteria prescribed by this subpart may be designated to a CMU.

(e) Relationship to other regulations. The regulations in this subpart supersede and control to the extent they conflict with, are inconsistent with, or impose greater limitations than the regulations in this part, or any other regulations in this chapter, except 28 CFR part 501.

The Communications Management Unit (CMU) is established to house inmates who require increased monitoring of communications with persons in the community due to their current offense of conviction, offense conduct, or other verified information. The goal of the CMU is to maintain the safety, security, and orderly operation of Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) facilities, and to protect the public. The provisions of this program statement apply to all inmates housed in the Bureau including pretrial, holdovers, and detainees.

CMU designation is non-punitive and may be appropriate for any inmate meeting the referral criteria in Section 2 of this program statement. All Bureau policies and procedures apply to inmates housed in a CMU unless otherwise prescribed by this program statement. Waivers from any Bureau policy or procedure must be processed according to the Program Statement Directives Management Manual.

a. Program Objectives.

• Inmates who meet the criteria for designation to a CMU are referred for redesignation.
• CMU inmates are monitored throughout three phases and redesignated when determined appropriate.
• Completion of the three phases and clear disciplinary history do not outweigh national security concerns or the Counter Terrorism Unit’s (CTU) assessment of an inmate’s threat to institution, staff, and public safety.
• Safe and orderly environments at institutions are enhanced by the operation of CMUs.
• Inmates designated to a CMU are provided due process as described in this program statement.

b. Institution Supplement. Each institution with a CMU must develop an Institution

Supplement that addresses local operations and procedures. The Institution Supplement is reviewed for legal sufficiency by Regional Counsel before implementation.

2. REFERRAL SOURCES

Referrals may come from any source, such as, but not limited to, the following:

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 3

• CTU communication monitoring and intelligence gathering.
• The Designation and Sentence Computation Center (DSCC), as part of the initial and re-designation processes.
• Individual institutions or regional offices, based upon an inmate’s behavior or activities.
• Recommendations from other law enforcement agencies or courts.

3. § 540.201 Designation criteria.

Inmates may be designated to a CMU if evidence of the following criteria exists:

(a) The inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction, or offense conduct, included association, communication, or involvement, related to international or domestic terrorism;

(b) The inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction, offense conduct, or activity while incarcerated, indicates a substantial likelihood that the inmate will encourage, coordinate, facilitate, or otherwise act in furtherance of illegal activity through communication with persons in the community;

(c) The inmate has attempted, or indicates a substantial likelihood that the inmate will contact victims of the inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction;

(d) The inmate committed prohibited activity related to misuse or abuse of approved communication methods while incarcerated; or

(e) There is any other substantiated/credible evidence of a potential threat to the safe, secure, and orderly operation of prison facilities, or protection of the public, as a result of the inmate’s communication with persons in the community.

4. § 540.202 Designation procedures.

Inmates may be designated to CMUs only according to the following procedures:

(a) Initial consideration. Initial consideration of inmates for CMU designation begins when the Bureau becomes aware of information relevant to the criteria described in § 540.201.

a. Referral. Designations to a CMU are coordinated by the CTU through a review of the

following information:

• Pre-Sentence Investigation Report (PSI/PSR).
• Judgment in a Criminal Case (J&C).
• Statement of Reasons (SOR).
• DHO reports relevant to referrals, such as communication-related misconduct.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 4

• Relevant Special Investigative Services (SIS) reports, protective custody investigations, etc.
• Correspondence (e.g., memorandums, letters) from courts, United States Attorneys’ Offices, law enforcement officials, etc., relating to the referral.
• Any additional pertinent information or intelligence related to the referral.

CTU staff may gather intelligence from sensitive information and utilize the expertise of other law enforcement and intelligence agencies during the CMU review process.

All material utilized during the review and referral process is ordinarily delivered to recipients in electronic format, except classified material that must be handled in accordance with prescribed handling procedures.

b. Review. The CTU completes the necessary CMU referral documentation, including the BP-

A0944, Notice to Inmate of Placement at a Communications Management Unit form and forwards a copy to the Office of General Counsel (OGC) for review.

c. Decision. After OGC completes its review of the referral, the packet is returned to the CTU, which then forwards it to the Assistant Director, CPD.

(b) Assistant Director authority. The Bureau’s Assistant Director, Correctional Programs Division, has authority to approve CMU designations. The Assistant Director’s decision must be based on a review of the evidence, and a conclusion that the inmate’s designation to a CMU is necessary to ensure the safety, security, and orderly operation of correctional facilities, or protection of the public.

Only the Assistant Director, or the individual appointed by the Director to serve as acting Assistant Director, CPD, has the authority to designate an inmate to a CMU. CMU designation approval authority may not be delegated below this level.

Approval or denial by the Assistant Director, Correctional Programs Division (CPD) is reported to the CTU. The CTU then notifies a designator at the DSCC, who notes the decision in the applicable Bureau inmate management system on the inmate’s central inmate monitoring (CIM) clearance and separatee data and loads the initial designation or redesignation. Once the designation is loaded into the applicable Bureau inmate management system, movement of the inmate through the prisoner transportation process can be initiated.

d. Notice to CMU Inmates. Upon arrival at the designated CMU, inmates are provided the BP-

A0944, Notice to Inmate of Placement at a Communications Management Unit, from the Warden as follows:

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 5

(c) Written notice. Upon arrival at the designated CMU, inmates will receive written notice from the facility’s Warden explaining that:

(1) Designation to a CMU allows greater Bureau staff management of communication with persons in the community through complete monitoring of telephone use, written correspondence, and visiting. The volume, frequency, and methods of CMU inmate contact with persons in the community may be limited as necessary to achieve the goal of total monitoring, consistent with this subpart;

(2) General conditions of confinement in the CMU may also be limited as necessary to provide greater management of communications;

(3) Designation to the CMU is not punitive and, by itself, has no effect on the length of the inmate’s incarceration. Inmates in CMUs continue to earn sentence credit in accordance with the law and Bureau policy;

(4) Designation to the CMU follows the Assistant Director’s decision that such placement is necessary for the safe, secure, and orderly operation of Bureau institutions, or protection of the public. The inmate will be provided an explanation of the decision in sufficient detail, unless the Assistant Director determines that providing specific information would jeopardize the safety, security, and orderly operation of correctional facilities, or protection of the public;

(5) Continued designation to the CMU will be reviewed regularly by the inmate’s Unit Team under circumstances providing the inmate notice and an opportunity to be heard, in accordance with the Bureau’s policy on Classification and Program Review of Inmates;

(6) The inmate may challenge the CMU designation decision, and any aspect of confinement therein, through the Bureau’s administrative remedy program.

5. CENTRAL INMATE MONITORING (CIM) ASSIGNMENTS

CIM assignments regarding CMU candidates are finalized before designation. This ensures the most appropriate placement of each CMU inmate. Inmates who are CIM separatees for any reason may not be housed in the same CMU.

6. CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT

The minimum conditions of confinement for CMU inmates will meet or exceed standards for healthy and humane treatment and will be in accordance with applicable Bureau policies. These conditions include, but are not limited to, the specific conditions detailed below.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 6

a. Environment. Living quarters are well ventilated, adequately lit, appropriately heated, and maintained in a sanitary condition.

b. Cell Assignments. Living quarters ordinarily house only the number of occupants for which

they are designed. The Warden, however, may authorize additional occupants if adequate standards can be maintained. The unit contains cells dedicated to segregated housing for inmates being placed in administrative detention or disciplinary segregation status. Cells that meet the definition of restrictive housing will follow the requirements for the Program Statement Special Housing Units.

c. Bedding. Inmates receive a mattress with a built-in pillow and linens for sleeping. They have opportunities to exchange linens. The frequency of the exchange of linens must be detailed in the Institution Supplement.

d. Clothing. Inmates receive adequate institution clothing, including footwear. They have

opportunities to exchange clothing or have it washed. Procedures and the frequency of the exchange or washing of clothing must be detailed in the Institution Supplement. Inmates transferring to and housed within the CMU are not to exceed the amount of clothing in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Personal Property unless otherwise approved by the Warden for religious and/or medical purposes or due to disciplinary/administrative status. In the case of religious and/or medical exceptions, the inmate must post the Warden’s signed memorandum clearly indicating the additional authorized items.

e. Personal Hygiene. Inmates have access to a wash basin and toilet. They receive personal

hygiene items and have access to showers daily. Additionally, inmates will have access to hair care services. Procedures and the frequency of hair care services must be detailed in the Institution Supplement. Inmates transferring to and housed within the CMU are only authorized to possess the amount of personal hygiene items listed in the Program Statement Inmate Personal Property, unless otherwise approved by the Warden for religious and/or medical purposes, or due to disciplinary or administrative status. In the case of religious and/or medical exceptions, the inmate must post a memorandum signed by the Warden, clearly indicating the additional authorized items.

f. Meals. Inmates receive nutritionally adequate meals provided by the institution. These meals will be the same as those served to the general population in accordance with the national menu.

g. Education/Recreation. Inmates have access to library services per 28 C.F.R. part 544, and

the Program Statements Education, Training, and Leisure Time Program Standards and Recreation Programs, Inmate.

Inmates are ordinarily permitted to leave their cells daily for recreation during regular institution hours of operation as directed by the Warden, except during counts. Ordinarily, outdoor exercise

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 7

areas are available for inmate use, weather and resources permitting. These areas will be available to inmates unless compelling security or safety reasons dictate otherwise. Inmates are provided various passive and active recreational activities, as well as hobby craft opportunities, in accordance with institution procedures. Televisions are available in unit common areas. All electronic devices that are available to inmates must not have the ability to connect to the internet or transmit communications via unmonitored wireless capabilities.

h. Personal Property. While housed in the CMU, an inmate can receive up to five publications

at a time and can maintain possession of five publications in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Personal Property. The Warden may approve an increased or decreased number of publications for religious purposes or due to disciplinary/administrative status. In case of religious exceptions, the inmate must post a memorandum drafted by Chaplaincy Services and signed by the Warden, clearly indicating the additional authorized items.

Property will be searched for contraband in compliance with the Program Statement Inmate Personal Property. Prior to mailing out excess property, all CMU inmate property must be searched by an Intelligence Research Specialist or authorized staff, as designated by the CTU. Excess property will be mailed at the inmate’s expense. Additional procedures governing excess property will be in accordance with local CMU Institution Supplements.

i. Commissary. Inmates have access to the commissary like those housed in general population,

as determined by the Warden.

j. Legal Activities. Inmates may perform legal activities in accordance with 28 C.F.R. part 543, and the Program Statement Legal Activities, Inmate. The use of assistants by attorneys to perform legal tasks, as provided in the Program Statement Legal Activities, Inmate, applies to inmates in the CMU.

k. Religion. Inmates may pursue religious beliefs and practices in accordance with 28 C.F.R. § 548 and the Program Statement Religious Beliefs and Practices.

l. Medical Care. Health Services staff provide sick call in the unit. Medications will also be delivered and administered in the unit. Specialized services may be provided in the institution’s Health Services Department, under conditions that ensure inmates’ lack of contact with non-CMU inmates. Emergency medical care is available either at the institution or from the community.

m. Mental Health Care. Inmates housed in the CMU have the same access to Psychology

Services as those housed in general population. Generally, however, services will only be provided in the CMU. Specialized services may be provided in the institution’s suicide watch area or psychological observation area under conditions that ensure inmates’ lack of contact with

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 8

non-CMU inmates. For newly committed inmates, a Psychology Services initial intake screening is completed in accordance with the Program Statement Psychology Services Manual.

n. Sanitation. CMU inmates are responsible for sanitation in their living areas.

o. Work Assignments. Work assignments include orderlies for unit sanitation, food service,

recreation, and other work duties and assignments appropriate for the unit as assigned. These work assignments are assigned by Unit Management.

7. ADMISSION AND ORIENTATION (A&O)/CLASSIFICATION AND REVIEWS

Inmates will participate in an institution A&O program as outlined in the Program Statement Admission and Orientation Program. Additionally, CMU inmates must participate in a CMU-specific A&O program on the unit. Classification and inmate program reviews of CMU inmates are conducted in accordance with the Program Statement Unit Management and Inmate Program Review.

8. PHASES OF THE CMU

The CMU operates in three phases restricting the various forms of communication between CMU inmates and persons in the community. The communication restrictions in each phase of the CMU are follows:

Communication Type Phase 1 Restrictions Phase 2 Restrictions Phase 3 Restrictions Telephone calls Total of 3 (15 minute) connected calls per month Total of 1 (15 minute) connected call per week Total of 2 (15 minute) connected calls per week

Electronic Messaging No limits unless otherwise restricted, to and from the allowed 10 contacts No limits unless otherwise restricted, to and from the allowed 20 contacts Limited to current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual

Social Postal Mail Unless otherwise restricted, limited to a maximum of 10 approved social contacts Unless otherwise restricted, limited to a maximum of 20 approved social contacts Limited to current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual Legal Mail/Calls No limits unless otherwise restricted No limits unless otherwise restricted No limits unless otherwise restricted Visits May be limited as outlined in § 540.205 Visiting limitations May be limited as outlined in § 540.205 Visiting limitations May be limited as outlined in § 540.205 Visiting limitations

Approved Community Contacts

10 per inmate

20 per inmate Limited to current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual

Inmates designated to the CMU will typically enter Phase 1. Progression or regression through the phases of the CMU is typically initiated by Unit Management during the inmate’s scheduled program reviews. The recommendation to progress or regress the inmate into the different phases

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 9

is reviewed in collaboration with Intelligence Research Specialists, CTU and relevant department heads, with the Warden making the final determination. Progression or regression is determined by the inmate’s conduct, programming, adherence to the phase allowances, and sound correctional judgement.

9. CONTACT WITH PERSONS IN THE COMMUNITY

Contact between CMU inmates and people in the community shall be limited as outlined below in three progressive phases to ensure appropriate use of approved communications by the inmate. Privileged attorney-client communications are not monitored, consistent with the Program Statements Legal Activities, Inmate and Visiting Regulations.

§ 540.203 Written correspondence limitations.

(a) General correspondence. General written correspondence as defined by this part, may be limited to six pieces of paper (not larger than 8.5 x 11 inches), double-sided writing permitted, once per calendar week, to and from a single recipient at the discretion of the Warden, except as stated in (c) below. This correspondence is subject to staff inspection for contraband and for content.

Incoming and outgoing written general correspondence must be reviewed by CTU staff before delivery to the inmate or further processing to the post office. All correspondence in foreign languages must be translated before delivery to the inmate or further processing to the post office.

For the purposes of communication management, unless otherwise restricted, in Phase 1, CMU inmates will be permitted 10 community social contacts, which will be vetted and pre-approved by CTU. Extenuating circumstances will be reviewed on an individual basis by Unit Management, Intelligence Research Specialists, and the CTU, with final approval being at Warden’s discretion.

Postal mail correspondence will be limited to six pieces of paper as outlined in section (a) General Correspondence, to and from a single recipient. Procedures related to correspondence must also be in accordance with the Program Statement Correspondence. The page limits apply in all three phases.

In Phase 2 progression CMU inmates will be permitted a maximum of 20 social, community contacts, which will be vetted and pre-approved by CTU, unless otherwise restricted.

Phase 3 progression will ensure the CMU inmate social community contacts are limited to the current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 10

Manual, which will continue to be vetted and pre-approved by CTU unless otherwise restricted.

(b) Special mail.

(1) Special mail, as defined in this part, is limited to privileged communication with the inmate’s attorney.

(2) All such correspondence is subject to staff inspection in the inmate’s presence for contraband and to ensure its qualification as privileged communication with the inmate’s attorney. Inmates may not seal such outgoing mail before giving it to staff for processing. After inspection for contraband, the inmate must then seal the approved outgoing mail material in the presence of staff and immediately give the sealed material to the observing staff for further processing.

(c) Frequency and volume limitations. Unless the quantity to be processed becomes unreasonable or the inmate abuses or violates these regulations, there is no frequency or volume limitation on written correspondence with the following entities:

(1) U.S. courts;

(2) Federal judges;

(3) U.S. Attorney’s Offices;

(4) Members of U.S. Congress;

(5) The Bureau of Prisons;

(6) Other federal law enforcement entities; or

(7) The inmate’s attorney (privileged communications only).

Only privileged communication with the inmate’s attorney will be handled as special mail. All other types of correspondence do not receive special handling and will be treated as general correspondence. This includes, but is not limited to, media representatives and those entities listed above in this Section.

In all three phases, Legal and court contacts will not be limited unless otherwise restricted. Legal calls will not be limited unless other restrictions are in place.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 11

Digital legal materials will be maintained by staff as outlined in the CMU Institutional Supplement. The supplement will provide additional guidance referencing storage and accountability methods; as authorized by the Warden and CTU/ICTB.

(d) Electronic messaging may be limited to two messages, per calendar week, to and from a single recipient at the discretion of the Warden.

CMU inmates are permitted electronic messaging where available. Unless otherwise restricted, Phase 1 of the CMU, electronic communications will be limited to and from the inmate’s 10 approved contacts. Phase 2 will be limited to and from the inmate’s 20 approved contacts. In Phase 3, unless otherwise restricted, CMU inmates will be limited to the current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual.

Additionally, the policy on TRULINCS electronic messaging applies to inmates in the CMU.

Incoming and outgoing electronic messaging must be reviewed by CTU staff before delivery to the inmate or further processing to the electronic post office. All correspondence in foreign languages must be translated before delivery to the inmate or further processing to the electronic post office.

§ 540.204 Telephone communication limitations.

(a) Monitored telephone communication may be limited to immediate family members only. The frequency and duration of telephone communication may also be limited to three connected calls per calendar month, lasting no longer than 15 minutes. The Warden may require such communication to be in English, or translated by an approved interpreter.

Telephone communications between inmates and people in the community, except properly placed, unmonitored legal calls are:

• Conducted using monitored inmate telephone system (ITS) phone lines.
• Ordinarily live monitored by CTU staff.
• Subject to recording.
• Translated for foreign language conversations.

Unless otherwise restricted, Phase 1 CMU inmates will be limited in frequency of calls to a total of three 15-minute connected calls per calendar month. Phase 2 CMU inmates will progress to a total of one connected 15-minute call per week. Phase 3 inmates will be allowed a total of two 15-minute connected telephone calls per week, limited to the current number of active contacts as outlined in the Program Statement Trust Fund/Deposit Manual.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 12

Calls may be made Monday through Friday, except holidays, between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., local time. On weekends and holidays, telephone calls may be placed between 8:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m., local time. Inmate telephone communications must be in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Telephone Regulations.

(b) Unmonitored telephone communication is limited to privileged communication with the inmate’s attorney. Unmonitored privileged telephone communication with the inmate’s attorney is permitted as necessary in furtherance of active litigation, after establishing that communication with the verified attorney by confidential correspondence or visiting, or monitored telephone use, is not adequate due to an urgent or impending deadline. § 540.205 Visiting limitations. (a) Regular visiting may be limited to immediate family members. The frequency and duration of regular visiting may also be limited to four one-hour visits each calendar month. The number of visitors permitted during any visit is within the Warden’s discretion. Such visits must occur through no-contact visiting facilities. (1) Regular visits may be simultaneously monitored and recorded, both visually and auditorily, either in person or electronically.

(2) The Warden may require such visits to be conducted in English, or simultaneously translated by an approved interpreter.

(b) Attorney visiting is limited to attorney-client privileged communication as provided in this part. These visits may be visually, but not auditorily, monitored. Regulations and policies previously established under 28 CFR part 543 are applicable.

(c) For convicted inmates (as defined in 28 CFR part 551), regulations and policies previously established under 28 CFR part 543 are applicable.

Visiting between inmates and persons in the community except properly scheduled, unmonitored legal visits is:

• conducted using non-contact facilities (e.g., secure partitioned rooms, telephone voice contact),
• ordinarily live monitored by CTU staff,
• subject to recording, and
• translated for foreign language conversations.

In all three phases, unless otherwise restricted, inmates will ordinarily be allowed up to eight hours, but no less than four of visiting time per month. Visits may be scheduled in increments of up to four hours at the discretion of the institution. No single visit (visiting day) may be

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 13

scheduled for a period longer than four hours. Visits will be permitted in accordance with the institution supplement, during regular institution visiting hours.

10. REDESIGNATION

For an inmate to be considered for redesignation from the CMU, the inmate must ordinarily be in Phase 3. Progression through the three phases with clear conduct does not outweigh other contributing factors that support continued placement in the CMU. Based on exigent circumstances, Unit Management, in consultation with the Intelligence Research Specialists and relevant Department Heads, may review the inmate’s conduct for redesignation consideration prior to Phase 3.

Phase Progression Review will be conducted in connection with Unit Management’s regularly scheduled program reviews. Unit Management and Intelligence Research Specialist staff, in conjunction with the CTU, will review the inmate’s conduct and communications in a manner consistent with sound correctional judgement and security management practices to determine the inmate’s eligibility for phase progression. Any misconduct to include, but not limited to disciplinary or communication management infractions, will result in review of phase progression and consideration for phase regression to Phase 1. An inmate’s phase status is not part of the inmate disciplinary process. All CMU inmates are provided the same disciplinary process as described in the Program Statement Inmate Discipline Program.

An inmate ordinarily will not be considered for redesignation until Unit Management has conducted at least one program review of the inmate in Phase 3. Unit Management, in connection with the Intelligence Research Specialists and relevant Department Heads, may review the inmate’s conduct for redesignation consideration prior to submitting the redesignation rationale to the Warden. Once reviewed and approved by the Warden, the redesignation packet will be submitted for review by the CTU with final approving authority being the Assistant Director, CPD.

Redesignation Criteria. Reviews for continuing CMU designation are done in a manner consistent with sound correctional judgment and security threat management practices. Unit Management staff, the Intelligence Research Specialist(s) and relevant Department Heads, in conjunction with the CTU, review the status of an inmate in a CMU to determine the inmate’s readiness for transfer. The decision to transfer reflects Unit Management and the CTU’s judgement the inmate can function in another facility in a way he/she is not likely to be a threat to others, or to the institution’s orderly operation. CTU staff may gather intelligence from sensitive information and utilize the expertise of other law enforcement and intelligence agencies during the review process.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 14

In determining whether continued CMU placement is necessary, Unit Management and Intelligence Research Specialists will consider whether the original reasons for CMU placement still exist, including whether:

• The inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction, or offense conduct, included association, communication, or involvement, related to international or domestic terrorism.
• The inmate’s current offense(s) of conviction, offense conduct, or activity while incarcerated, indicates a propensity to encourage, coordinate, facilitate, or otherwise act in furtherance of illegal activity through communication with persons in the community.
• The inmate has attempted, or indicates a propensity, to contact victims of their current offense(s) of conviction.
• Continued engagement in the behaviors/activities which were the supporting rationale for CMU placement
• The inmate committed prohibited activity to include, but not limited to, misuse/abuse of approved communication methods while incarcerated.
• There is any other evidence of a potential threat to the safe, secure, and orderly operation of prison facilities, or protection of the public, as a result of the inmate’s unmonitored communication with persons in the community.

Additional information to be considered includes whether the inmate can safely function in a less restrictive unit without posing a safety and security risk to institutions, staff, other inmates, themselves, or the public. Ultimately, it must be a staff member’s assessment the inmate does not require the degree of monitoring and controls afforded at a CMU.

Unit Management staff will forward recommendations to the Warden. With the concurrence of the Warden, recommendations are then forwarded to the CTU for review of individual inmate cases. The CTU forwards the recommendation to the Assistant Director, CPD.

Only the Assistant Director, CPD, or the individual appointed by the Director to serve as acting Assistant Director, CPD has the authority to redesignate an inmate from CMU. CMU redesignation approval authority may not be delegated below this level.

All material utilized during the review and referral process is ordinarily delivered to recipients in electronic format, except classified material that must be handled in accordance with the prescribed handling procedures.

Inmates denied redesignation from a CMU are notified in writing by Unit Management of the reason(s) for continued CMU designation. Inmates not satisfied with the redesignation decision, or any other aspect of confinement in the CMU, can appeal the decision or situation in accordance with the Program Statement Administrative Remedy Program. Unit Management staff provide the necessary form(s) to the inmate.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 15

Once redesignation from a CMU is approved, CTU staff prepare a referral packet for the DSCC. The packet contains:

• Request for Redesignation Memorandum (drafted by the CTU).
• Approval memorandum signed by the Assistant Director, CPD.

Inmates approved for transfer from a CMU are ordinarily redesignated to the general population in the institution where the CMU is located, for a period of no less than six months. This is accomplished as a step-down process from the CMU if they meet security and custody classification requirements for a medium security facility.

Inmates requiring placement in a high security institution are ordinarily redesignated to an appropriate facility for no less than 6 months, as a step-down process from the CMU.

Approval or denial by the Assistant Director, CPD, is reported to the CTU. The CTU then notifies a Designator at the DSCC, who notes the decision in the applicable Bureau inmate management system on the inmate’s “CIM Clearance and Separatee Data,” and loads the initial designation or redesignation.

During the initial six-month step-down period, the inmate’s communications continue to be monitored by the CTU.

Should the inmate continue to program appropriately after transfer from a CMU, they can be considered eligible for transfer to another appropriate security level facility.

11. INMATE APPEAL OF TRANSFER TO A CMU

Inmates may appeal their transfer to a CMU through the Bureau’s Administrative Remedy Program. See the Program Statement Administrative Remedy Program for additional information.

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 16

REFERENCES

Program Statements Directives Management Manual Legal Activities, Inmate Administrative Remedy Program Inmate Telephone Regulations Correspondence Visiting Regulations Inmate Discipline Program Special Housing Units Admission and Orientation Program Education, Training and Leisure Time Program Standards Psychology Services Manual Unit Management and Inmate Program Review Religious Beliefs and Practices Recreation Programs, Inmate Inmate Personal Property

Federal Regulations 28 C.F.R. part 501 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.200 – 540.205 28 C.F.R. part 543 28 C.F.R. part 544 28 C.F.R. part 548 28 C.F.R. part 551

Bureau Forms Prescribed by 5214.05 BP-0944 Notice to Inmate of Placement at a Communications Management Unit

ACA Standards Performance -Based Standards and Expected Practices for Adult Correctional Facilities (5 th Edition): 5-ACI-5A-03, 5-ACI-5A-04, 5-ACI-5A-05, 5-ACI-5B-01, 5-ACI-5B-02, 5-ACI- 5A-5B-03, 5-ACI-5B-05, 5E-04, 5-ACI5B-07, 5-ACI-5B-11 Performance -Based Standards and Expected Practices for Adult Local Detention Centers (5th Edition): 5-ALDF-2A-26, 5-ALDF-2A-28, 5-ALDF-2A-29, 5-ALDF-5A-01 American Correctional Association Standards for Administration of Correctional Agencies, 2nd Edition: 2-CO-4B-03, 2-CO-4B-04, 2-C0-4E-01, 2-CO-4F-01

5214.05 2/26/2026 Federal Regulations from 28 CFR: this type. Implementing instructions: this type. 17

Records Retention Requirements Requirements and retention guidance for records and information applicable to this program are available in the Records and Information Disposition Schedule (RIDS) on the Bureau’s intranet site.

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