Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas

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

Program Statement 5521.06 at a glance

Field	Value
Program Statement	5521.06 CN-1
Subject	Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas
Effective / current edition date	Change Notice CN-1 dated March 6, 2025, sitting in front of base Program Statement 5521.06 dated June 4, 2015, whose header carries “RULES EFFECTIVE: July 6, 2015”
Change notice	CN-1 (3/6/2025), approved by Kathleen Toomey, Associate Deputy Director. Base Program Statement approved by Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Director
Supersedes / rescinds	The base Program Statement rescinded P5521.05, Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas (06/30/97)
Governing statute	The Program Statement’s reference block names no statute. The Bureau’s custodial authority sits in 18 U.S.C. § 4042(a) — management of all federal penal institutions, safekeeping and care, and “protection, instruction, and discipline.” The cross-sex pat-search limit the policy applies comes from the PREA National Standards, which 34 U.S.C. § 30307(b) makes applicable to the Bureau “immediately upon adoption of the final rule”
Governing regulation (28 C.F.R.)	Part 552, subpart B, titled Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas — five sections, §§ 552.10 through 552.14. The Program Statement’s own reference page says: “Rules cited in this Program Statement are contained in 28 CFR §§ 552.10 through 552.14.” The pat-search rule for women runs through 28 C.F.R. § 115.15
Related BP forms	BP-A0308, Administrative Detention Order; BP-A0313, Search for Contraband: Digital, Simple Instrument, X-Ray Examination
Official PDF	PS 5521.06 CN-1 (bop.gov)

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

This Program Statement is the Bureau of Prisons’ instruction to its staff on how people in federal prison, their cells and their work areas may be searched — it sorts every search into a named type, and each type carries its own authorization level, its own limit on who may perform it, and its own paperwork. The rule that organizes all of it comes from the regulation: 28 C.F.R. § 552.10 directs that “Staff shall employ the least intrusive method of search practicable, as indicated by the type of contraband and the method of suspected introduction.”

If you want the human side of this — what a shakedown actually looks like on a housing unit, what happens to property that goes missing during one, and what your loved one can and cannot do about it — read searches, shakedowns and contraband in prison, which is the companion to this page. This page is the rule set: the five search types, who signs off on each, and which form has to exist afterward. Where a search turns into a disciplinary charge, the route continues at the inmate discipline program (PS 5270.09); where it ends with property confiscated or destroyed, it continues at inmate personal property (PS 5580.10).

The rule itself: the five search types, who authorizes each, and what must be documented

The Program Statement reproduces the regulation section by section and then adds the Bureau’s implementing instructions underneath. The table below is that structure collapsed into one place. Text in quotation marks is verbatim — either from the regulation as reproduced in the Program Statement, or from the Bureau’s implementing instructions. Everything here reflects the policy as amended by CN-1; see What changed below for the one paragraph CN-1 removed.

The search-type table

Search type	What the regulation says it is	Who may authorize it	Who may conduct it — and the same-sex rule	What must be documented
Electronic device search — § 552.11(a)	“Inspection of an inmate’s person using electronic devices (for example, metal detector, ion spectrometry device, or body imaging search device) does not require the inmate to remove clothing. The inspection may also include a search of the inmate’s clothing and personal effects.”	No individual authorization. “Staff may conduct an electronic device search of an inmate on a routine or random basis to control contraband.” The Warden “may install metal detection devices within the institution as necessary for the control of contraband”	Staff. “Opposite sex staff may operate electronic devices revealing body contours if appropriate filters are used”	The regulation and the Program Statement impose no search-specific documentation for this type
Pat search — § 552.11(b)	“Inspection of an inmate using the hands does not require the inmate to remove clothing. The inspection includes a search of the inmate’s clothing and personal effects.”	No individual authorization. “Staff may conduct a pat search of an inmate on a routine or random basis to control contraband”	Staff. Female inmates: under the PREA standard at 28 C.F.R. § 115.15(b), “male staff are not permitted to pat-search female inmates, unless exigent circumstances exist”; “Other options, such as detaining the inmate until a female staff member arrives if feasible, should be considered before an opposite sex pat search is conducted.” All inmates: “inmates will be pat searched according to the sex of the institution or housing assignment, where they are assigned”	Only for an opposite-sex pat search of a female inmate: “A memorandum will be prepared documenting an opposite sex pat search of a female inmate by a male staff member, which will be submitted to the Lieutenants’ Office and forwarded to the PREA Compliance Manager.” The memorandum “must establish the identity of all involved in the pat search; i.e., inmates, staff, and others; and the circumstances giving rise to the search”
Visual search (a strip search) — § 552.11(c)	“A visual inspection of all body surfaces and body cavities.”	No named approving official in the regulation. The predicate is the trigger: “Staff may conduct a visual search where there is reasonable belief that contraband may be concealed on the person, or a good opportunity for concealment has occurred”	“Staff of the same sex as the inmate shall make the search, except where circumstances are such that delay would mean the likely loss of contraband.” Separately: “a staff member may not perform routine visual searches of inmates of the opposite sex, such as could be required by assignment to such posts as the visiting room and receiving and discharge units”	Logged: “Any visual search shall be conducted and documented in the appropriate visual search log book.” If conducted by opposite-sex staff: “staff shall document the reasons for the opposite sex search in the inmate’s central file”
Digital or simple instrument search — § 552.11(d)	“Inspection for contraband or any other foreign item in a body cavity of an inmate by use of fingers or simple instruments, such as an otoscope, tongue blade, short nasal speculum, and simple forceps.”	“upon approval of the Warden or Acting Warden and only if the Warden or Acting Warden has reasonable belief that an inmate is concealing contraband in or on his person”	“may be conducted only by designated qualified health personnel (for example, physicians, physician assistants, and nurses).” “Persons of the opposite sex from the inmate may not observe the digital or simple instrument search.” Consent: “Staff shall solicit the inmate’s written consent prior to conducting a digital or simple instrument search. However, the inmate’s consent is not required.” Limit: “Staff may not conduct a digital or simple instrument search if it is likely to result in physical injury to the inmate”	“Staff shall document all digital and simple instrument searches and the reasons for the searches in the inmate’s central file.” Form: BP-A0313, Search for Contraband: Digital, Simple Instrument, X-Ray Examination
Medical x-ray device — for contraband — § 552.13(b)	An examination using a medical x-ray device ordered “for the purpose of determining if contraband is concealed in or on the inmate (for example: in a cast or body cavity)”	Two signatures, in this order: “the Warden, upon approval of the Regional Director, may authorize the institution physician to order a non-repetitive examination,” and only “When there exists no reasonable alternative, and an examination using a medical x-ray device is determined necessary for the security, good order, or discipline of the institution.” “The Warden and Regional Director or persons officially acting in that capacity may not redelegate the authority”	The institution physician orders it. Limit: it “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.” Consent: “Staff shall solicit the inmate’s consent prior to an examination using a medical x-ray device. However, the inmate’s consent is not required”	“Staff shall place documentation of the examination and the reasons for the examination in the inmate’s central file and medical file.” Form BP-A0313; “A copy of the completed BP-A0313 shall be forwarded to the Regional Director who authorized the search”
Major instrument or surgical intrusion — § 552.13(a)	Use of “a major instrument (including anoscope or vaginal speculum) or surgical intrusion”	“The institution physician may authorize” it — “for medical reasons only, with the inmate’s consent”	The institution physician. There is no contraband-search version of this authority: “The use of a fluoroscope, major instrument, or surgical intrusion may be authorized only for medical reasons. The inmate’s consent is needed prior to this use”	Medical documentation
Search of housing and work areas — § 552.14	Search of “an inmate’s housing and work area, and personal items contained within those areas”	None required: “Staff may search an inmate’s housing and work area, and personal items contained within those areas, without notice to or prior approval from the inmate and without the inmate’s presence”	Staff. Obligation after: “Staff conducting the search shall leave the housing or work area as nearly as practicable in its original order”	“Staff shall maintain written documentation of each housing unit search within the individual housing unit.” Work areas “shall be searched each work day by shop supervisors”; “Documentation of daily searches is not required,” but “The Captain shall maintain documentation of search team inspections”

Source: PS 5521.06 at pp. 3–14, reproducing 28 C.F.R. §§ 552.10–552.14. Regulation text independently verified against the current C.F.R. (source date 2026-08-06).

When a visual search is authorized without any individual suspicion

The regulation names situations that are, by themselves, enough. This is the list people most often ask about, because it explains why a strip search follows an ordinary visit:

• “placement in a special housing unit (see 28 CFR part 541, subpart B)”
• “leaving the institution”
• “re-entry into an institution after contact with the public (after a community trip, court transfer, or after a ‘contact’ visit in a visiting room)”

The Program Statement adds four more of its own, and one blanket rule: “Except in minimum security institutions, inmates must undergo a visual search when leaving the institution, for whatever reason (even when being released).” Its examples of other situations requiring visual searches are: “Processing an inmate into an institution through Receiving and Discharge”; “Placing an inmate in the Control Unit”; and “Conducting periodic visual searches of inmates returning from outside work details.” Whichever the trigger, the regulation adds: “The visual search shall be made in a manner designed to assure as much privacy to the inmate as practicable.”

Source: PS 5521.06 at pp. 6–7; 28 C.F.R. § 552.11(c)(1).

Dry cell (“close observation”) — the sixth thing that is not on the search table

Dry-cell status is not a search type; it is what the Bureau does when it believes someone has swallowed contraband or concealed it internally and the searches above will not work. It is governed by 28 C.F.R. § 552.12, and it carries the tightest time markers in the whole subpart.

Element	The rule
Predicate	“When there is reasonable belief that an inmate has ingested contraband or concealed contraband in a body cavity and the methods of search specified in § 552.11 are inappropriate or likely to result in physical injury to the inmate”
Who authorizes	“the Warden or designee may authorize the placement.” During regular duty hours, “The Warden or designee may authorize dry cell status.” At other times, “The Warden’s designee, ordinarily the Operations Lieutenant, in consultation with the Duty Officer and Administrative Duty Officer, may authorize dry cell status”
Who ends it	“Ordinarily, the Captain, in consultation with qualified health personnel, shall determine when termination is appropriate”
Three-day review	“The status of an inmate under close observation for as long as three days must be reviewed by the Segregation Review Official … and the initial SRO review conducted within three work days shall be a formal hearing.” The Program Statement underlines the difference: for administrative detention the SRO conducts a record review, “however, for an inmate in dry cell status, a formal in-person hearing is required”
Seven-day limit	“Maintaining an inmate under close observation beyond seven days requires approval of the Warden, who makes this decision in consultation with the Captain and qualified health personnel”
Supervision	“The supervising staff member shall be the same sex as the inmate and shall maintain complete and constant visual supervision of the inmate”
Urine samples	“The inmate shall be required to provide a urine sample within two hours of placement under close observation … A second urine sample is required prior to releasing the inmate from close observation”
Property	“The inmate ordinarily may not be allowed personal property while under close observation status, except legal and personal mail and a reasonable amount of legal materials when requested. Personal hygiene items will be controlled by staff”
Conditions	“The light will be kept on at all times”; “No inmate under close observation status may be allowed to come into contact with another inmate”; “The inmate is to be served the same meals as those served to the general population unless medically contraindicated”; “the inmate ordinarily may not be permitted recreation outside of the cell”
Paperwork	Notification of conditions is documented “through the Administrative Detention Order form (BP-A0308)”; “A daily log and Special Housing Unit Record shall be maintained on each inmate in dry cell status”

Source: PS 5521.06 at pp. 7–11; 28 C.F.R. § 552.12.

What the search policy means for you

If you are the person inside: know which search you are given

Know which search you are being given, because the paperwork trail is different for each one and the paperwork is what an advocate later works from. A pat search and a metal-detector sweep generate nothing. A visual search should appear in the unit’s visual search log book, and if opposite-sex staff conducted it, the reasons are supposed to be written into your central file. A digital or simple instrument search and an x-ray for contraband each require a signed BP-A0313 and a Warden’s approval — the x-ray also requires the Regional Director’s, and neither official is permitted to hand that decision to anyone below them.

If you believe a search was conducted outside these limits, the request is for the record, not for an argument. Ask in writing, by cop-out (BP-A0148), for the date and time of the search, the type recorded, the staff who conducted it, the log-book entry, and any BP-A0313. Do that quickly: the deadline for the formal step that follows informal resolution is short — 28 C.F.R. § 542.14 sets 20 calendar days from the date the basis for the complaint occurred to file the BP-9. Keep your own copy of everything you send.

If your cell was tossed and your property is gone or broken, that is a separate track with its own form and its own clock. It runs through inmate personal property (PS 5580.10) and the property-claim route described there.

If you are a family member: understanding a strip search account

You are usually reading this because someone told you about a strip search after a visit, or a shakedown that left the cell wrecked, and you want to know whether that is allowed. Two honest answers. First: a visual search after a contact visit is expressly contemplated by the regulation — § 552.11(c)(1) names “re-entry into an institution after contact with the public … after a ‘contact’ visit in a visiting room” as a situation that by itself justifies one. It is not evidence that your loved one is suspected of anything. Second: a search of the cell requires no notice, no approval and no one present — § 552.14(a) says so in terms.

What is not unlimited is the manner. The regulation directs staff to use “the least intrusive method of search practicable,” to make a visual search “in a manner designed to assure as much privacy to the inmate as practicable,” and to “leave the housing or work area as nearly as practicable in its original order.” Those are the standards a complaint is measured against. You cannot file for your loved one — 28 C.F.R. § 542.10 provides that “An inmate may not submit a Request or Appeal on behalf of another inmate,” and the same principle keeps family off the form. What you can do is help build the record: write down dates, times and names while they are fresh, and keep the letters and emails in which your loved one described what happened.

If you are counsel: searches

The useful move on a search issue is almost never the search itself; it is the documentation the policy says should exist. Ask for it by name and by date: the visual search log book for the unit and shift; the central-file entry required by § 552.11(c)(2) whenever opposite-sex staff conducted a visual search; the BP-A0313 for any digital, simple-instrument or x-ray search; the Regional Director’s approval for a contraband x-ray, which under § 552.13(b)(1) cannot be redelegated; and, for a female client pat-searched by a male officer, the memorandum the Program Statement directs be sent to the Lieutenants’ Office and forwarded to the PREA Compliance Manager.

Keep the authority hierarchy straight in any filing. The regulation binds; the Program Statement is the Bureau’s instruction for applying it, and a court will treat the two differently. Note also that the same-sex requirement in the regulation attaches to the visual search, not the pat search — the pat-search limit for women comes from the PREA standard at 28 C.F.R. § 115.15(b), which the Program Statement quotes and applies. On the constitutional side, the framework remains Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979): “The test of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application. In each case it requires a balancing of the need for the particular search against the invasion of personal rights that the search entails. Courts must consider the scope of the particular intrusion, the manner in which it is conducted, the justification for initiating it, and the place in which it is conducted.” The same opinion supplies the counterweight: “Prison administrators therefore should be accorded wide-ranging deference in the adoption and execution of policies and practices that in their judgment are needed to preserve internal order and discipline and to maintain institutional security.” How that balance comes out on a given record is fact-specific, and the courts of appeals have not resolved it uniformly. Exhaustion is the gate — see administrative remedy program (PS 1330.18).

What changed in the 2025 search change notice

The current edition is a 2015 Program Statement with a 2025 Change Notice bolted to the front, and the Change Notice does one substantive thing. The base Program Statement, dated June 4, 2015 and approved by then-Director Charles E. Samuels, Jr., carries “RULES EFFECTIVE: July 6, 2015” and rescinded P5521.05, Searches of Housing Units, Inmates, and Inmate Work Areas (06/30/97) — an eighteen-year-old policy. Its own summary of changes lists four items: “Included updated regulation language concerning electronic searches and x-rays”; “Added language clarifying cross-gender use of electronic search equipment”; “Added language concerning cross-gender pat searches of female offenders”; and “Added language concerning pat searches of transgender inmates.”

CN-1, dated March 6, 2025 and approved by Associate Deputy Director Kathleen Toomey, removes the last of those four. The Change Notice states that it “removes language to ensure consistency with Executive Orders issued by the Executive Office of the President of the United States,” and that “Throughout this CN the term ‘gender’ has been replaced with ‘sex’ and the term ‘cross-gender’ has been replaced with ‘opposite sex.'” The deleted paragraph is the transgender pat-search exception — the provision that had allowed a transgender inmate to request, and the Warden to pre-authorize after consultation with Health Services, Psychology Services, Unit Management and Correctional Services, a specifically described exception such as “pat search only by female staff,” recorded in SENTRY and carried on a personal identifier. In its place CN-1 substitutes a single flat sentence: “(2) Inmates. For purposes of pat searching, inmates will be pat searched according to the sex of the institution or housing assignment, where they are assigned.” The corresponding bullet in the summary of changes — “Added language concerning pat searches of transgender inmates” — is struck as well.

A caution for anyone quoting the PDF. The Change Notice marks additions with a highlight and deletions with a strikethrough, and the posted PDF carries both versions of every amended passage. Page 5 and page 6 of the posted document still display the deleted transgender paragraph, and phrases read as “Cross-gender Opposite sex” where the first two words are struck. Anyone reproducing text from those pages without resolving the strikethrough will publish language the Bureau removed in March 2025. The transcription above gives the operative post-CN-1 text.

One divergence worth naming. 28 C.F.R. § 552.12(a) — the dry-cell rule — directs that a close-observation status of as long as three days “must be reviewed by the Segregation Review Official according to the provisions in § 541.22(c) of this chapter.” That cross-reference no longer lands. Verified against the current C.F.R.: § 541.22 is now titled “Status when placed in the SHU,” it has only subsections (a) and (b), and it contains no Segregation Review Official review provisions at all. The review intervals moved to § 541.26, “Review of placement in the SHU,” when the Bureau rewrote part 541 in 2010–2011. Section 552.12 was last touched in 1991 and was never conformed. The practical content is unchanged — a three-work-day review still exists, and for dry cell it must be a formal hearing rather than a record review — but the citation in the regulation points at a subsection that does not exist. See special housing units (PS 5270.12) for the current review architecture.

Where people get stuck when property goes missing after a search

“They searched my cell and my property is gone”

This is the single most common search complaint, and it is not a search problem — it is a property problem, with a different form and a different deadline. A cell search itself requires no notice and no presence under § 552.14(a). What the Bureau owes afterward is an inventory of anything seized and a chance to prove ownership. Under PS 5580.10, “Staff shall provide the inmate with a copy of the inventory as soon as practicable,” the inmate “shall have seven days following receipt of the inventory to provide staff with evidence of ownership,” and “Ordinarily, property is held for thirty days before it is destroyed.”

The route: ask for the inventory by cop-out; if the item was destroyed or is simply missing, the money claim is a small claim under 31 U.S.C. § 3723, filed on form BP-A0943 at the Regional Office, with a one-year deadline and a $1,000 settlement ceiling. Details are on inmate personal property (PS 5580.10) and inmate property claims (PS 5581.01). A disagreement about whether an item was contraband at all runs the other way — through the administrative remedy program, and the Program Statement expressly holds property during an appeal: “If the inmate appeals, the property is held until the appeal process is completed.”

“A male officer pat-searched me and I am a woman”

The Program Statement treats this as a reportable event, not a judgment call. Quoting 28 C.F.R. § 115.15(b), it states that “male staff are not permitted to pat-search female inmates, unless exigent circumstances exist,” and defines the exception through § 115.5 as “any set of temporary and unforeseen circumstances that require immediate action in order to combat a threat to the security or institutional order of a facility.” It then instructs that “Other options, such as detaining the inmate until a female staff member arrives if feasible, should be considered” first, and that a memorandum must go to the Lieutenants’ Office and be forwarded to the PREA Compliance Manager — the policy’s own stated reason being that “All opposite sex pat searches of a female inmate by a male staff member must be reported to protect staff from unfounded allegations.”

Ask, in writing, whether that memorandum exists and what exigent circumstance it records. If the search was conducted in a way that was sexual rather than security-driven, that is a different subject entirely and belongs on the PREA track, not the search track — see PREA and sexual abuse prevention (PS 5333.01), which sets out every route for reporting, including reporting to an office outside the Bureau.

“They x-rayed him for contraband — can they do that without consent?”

Yes, and the honest answer is uncomfortable. Section 552.13(b)(2) provides that “Staff shall solicit the inmate’s consent prior to an examination using a medical x-ray device. However, the inmate’s consent is not required.” The same is true of a digital or simple instrument search under § 552.11(d)(1).

What is limited is who may say yes. A contraband x-ray needs the Warden’s authorization and the Regional Director’s approval; it must be “non-repetitive”; it is available only “When there exists no reasonable alternative”; and the authority “may not be redelegated.” The Program Statement adds that a copy of the completed BP-A0313 goes to the Regional Director who authorized it. That is a short, checkable list of documents, and their absence is the substance of any challenge. Route it as a cop-out first, then a BP-9 within the 20 calendar days set by § 542.14, then BP-10 within 20 days of the Warden’s response and BP-11 within 30 days of the Regional Director’s, per § 542.15.

“He has been in a dry cell for days and nobody will tell me anything”

Dry-cell status has firm markers, and they are the questions to ask. A status of as long as three days “must be reviewed by the Segregation Review Official,” and for dry cell that initial review, conducted within three work days, “shall be a formal hearing” the person attends — not a paper review. Continuing past seven days “requires approval of the Warden, who makes this decision in consultation with the Captain and qualified health personnel.” A daily log and a Special Housing Unit Record are to be kept. The person is entitled to legal and personal mail and “a reasonable amount of legal materials when requested,” and to the same meals as general population “unless medically contraindicated.”

If the seven-day mark has passed, the question is simply whether the Warden’s approval exists and when it was given. Because this sits at the intersection of restrictive housing and medical judgment, it is also the situation where a call is worth more than a form — the firm handles restrictive-housing and medical-care advocacy directly.

Related BOP policy on searches and contraband

Page	What it covers
Searches, shakedowns and contraband in prison	The companion page: what a shakedown looks like from the inside, and how families should read what they are told
Inmate personal property (PS 5580.10)	What may be kept, the container and value limits, and what happens to confiscated property
Inmate property claims (PS 5581.01)	The small-claims route for property lost or damaged in a search — form, deadline and ceiling
Inmate discipline program (PS 5270.09)	Where a search that finds contraband turns into an incident report and a sanction
Special housing units (PS 5270.12)	The review architecture that § 552.12 cross-references, and the current SHU intervals
Whole body imaging (PS 5522.03)	The body-scanner program specifically, as distinct from the electronic-device rule here
Searching, detaining, or arresting visitors (PS 5510.15)	The separate rule set that applies to you when you walk into a visiting room
PREA and sexual abuse prevention (PS 5333.01)	Where a search becomes an allegation of sexual abuse, and every route for reporting it
Administrative remedy program (PS 1330.18)	BP-8 through BP-11, the deadlines, and what constructive denial means
Federal prison consulting services	How the firm works a Bureau-facing problem — records, advocacy letters and administrative remedies

Frequently Asked Questions About Searches of Inmates and Housing

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