HEAT IN US PRISONS AND JAILS
Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

By Daniel W. E. Holt
August 2015

© 2015 Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School

The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law develops legal techniques to fight climate change,
trains law students and lawyers in their use, and provides the legal profession and the public
with up-to-date resources on key topics in climate law and regulation. It works closely with the
scientists at Columbia University's Earth Institute and with a wide range of governmental, nongovernmental and academic organizations.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law
Columbia Law School
435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10027
Tel: +1 (212) 854-3287
Email: columbiaclimate@gmail.com
Web: ColumbiaClimateLaw.com
Twitter: @ColumbiaClimate
Blog: blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange
Disclaimer: This paper is the responsibility of The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law alone and does
not reflect the views of Columbia Law School or Columbia University. This paper is an academic study
provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Transmission of the
information is not intended to create, and the receipt does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship
between sender and receiver. No party should act or rely on any information contained in this White
Paper without first seeking the advice of an attorney.
About the author: Daniel Holt, M.A., J.D., was a Visiting Scholar at the Sabin Center for Climate
Change Law from 2013 to 2015. He can be reached at dholtesq@gmail.com.
Acknowledgments: I would like to thank Michael Gerrard for hosting me at the Sabin Center
and for encouraging me to undertake this project. I have learned an enormous amount from
him and am grateful for his guidance and support. Michael Burger helped me stay on track and
provided consistently valuable comments and suggestions. Others at the Sabin Center whose
friendship and intellect nurtured me include Ethan Strell, Meredith Wilensky, Teresa Parejo
Navajas, Shelley Welton, Adam Schempp, Margaret Barry, Jessica Wentz, and Jenny Klein. My
conversations with Stuart Gaffin deepened my understanding of heat and passive cooling, and
the students in his Capstone Workshop in Sustainable Development provided research
assistance. Discussions with Brett Dignam, A. T. Wall, and Marcy Kahn helped me in the early
stages as I was framing my questions and structuring my research. I am also grateful for the
assistance of Leann Bertsch and George Camp at the Association of State Correctional
Administrators. Finally, thanks to Ellen Baker for her unwavering love, faith, and support.

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This paper addresses two important but largely neglected questions: How will increased
temperatures and heat waves caused by climate change affect prisons, jails, and their staff and
inmate populations? And what can correctional departments do to prepare for greater heat and
minimize the dangers it poses?
Some 2.2 million inmates are currently incarcerated in around 1,800 prisons and jails across
the United States. Nearly half a million correctional employees work in these facilities. Indoor
environmental conditions in prisons and jails therefore have a direct impact on the health of
well over 2.5 million people.
Climate scientists forecast with a high degree of confidence that average temperatures in the
US will rise throughout this century and that heat waves will become more frequent, more
severe, and more prolonged. Extreme heat is already the most common cause of weatherrelated death in the US and it will only become a graver threat to public health in the coming
decades.
Rising temperatures and increasingly harsh extreme-heat events will jeopardize the health
of inmates and correctional officers alike, and will stress the physical plant of the correctional
sector. Adapting their systems and facilities to greater heat and the other impacts of climate
change will become an urgent challenge for correctional departments. The success or failure of
correctional adaptation efforts will be measured in human lives as well as public dollars.
Until now, the implications of climate change for corrections have been largely disregarded
by both correctional administrators and public officials working on climate adaptation policy.
This paper begins the process of connecting the discussions of climate policy and correctional
policy. It provides an overview of the correctional sector and its specific vulnerabilities to heat,
explores relevant legal issues, and offers recommendations for adaptation to address unique
challenges that climate change poses for corrections.

Key Features of the Correctional Sector
Several key features of the correctional sector shape how it will likely be affected by
increasing heat and how adapting to higher temperatures will test correctional departments:

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

i

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change



The correctional sector spans diverse jurisdictions, each with its own systems
and facilities, laws and policies. The federal government and all 50 states
operate prison systems. Nearly 3,000 individual jurisdictions, including counties,
cities, and Indian tribes, operate jails.



Correctional facilities vary greatly by size, age, architecture, and security level.
Most prisons and jails were built since the phenomenon of mass incarceration
began in the 1980s, but hundreds predate World War II, including around a
hundred built in the nineteenth century that still house inmates. Older facilities
have been added to and altered in hodgepodge fashion over the decades.



Close quarters and mass incarceration mean high population density in
correctional facilities. Overcrowding is a significant problem, with dozens of
state prisons and hundreds of jails under court orders or consent decrees to
reduce inmate populations.



Risk factors for succumbing to heat-related illness, including advanced age,
poor mental and physical health, and the use of medications, are prevalent
among the 2.2 million US inmates. The inmate population is graying, with one
in ten prisoners now 55 or older. Inmates over 50 are generally much less healthy
than their peers in the outside world. Mental illness is widespread among
inmates of all ages. Obesity, hypertension, and asthma are commonplace. Large
numbers of inmates take medications that compromise the body’s ability to
handle heat.



Heat is already causing serious harm to inmates and correctional officers.
Heatstroke and other heat-related illnesses have claimed the lives of numerous
inmates in recent years, while correctional officers in several prisons have
suffered from heat stress.

Key Legal Issues and Findings
Correctional departments that fail to protect inmates and staff from extreme heat face the
prospect of costly legal consequences. Existing policies and regulations are generally inadequate
to ensure that temperatures remain within a healthy range. This paper’s key findings include:
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

ii

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change



The US Constitution may require correctional departments to undertake
adaptation efforts to mitigate the impacts of climate change. It is now well
established that high cell temperatures can constitute Cruel and Unusual
Punishment. Federal courts have ordered correctional departments to reduce and
control temperatures in inmate housing to remedy constitutional violations.
Financial considerations do not excuse noncompliance with court-ordered
reforms where constitutional violations are found.



Inmates with disabilities that make them more susceptible to heat stress may
have viable claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Litigants have
pushed courts to recognize impaired thermoregulation—the ability to regulate
body temperature—as a disability under the ADA.



The US Department of Justice has shown an interest in excessive cell
temperatures and has legal tools to protect inmates from extreme heat. DOJ
recently filed an amicus brief in support of inmates claiming that extreme heat
subjected them to Cruel and Unusual Punishment. The Civil Rights of
Institutionalized Persons Act empowers DOJ to investigate conditions of
confinement that may violate the constitution and to initiate legal action to
remedy any violations.



Correctional officers have legal protections against workplace hazards such as
extreme heat. COs exposed to extreme temperatures can turn to occupational
safety and health laws. COs with disabilities that put them at greater risk of heat
illness can demand reasonable accommodations under the ADA.



Many jurisdictions have some policies or regulations governing temperatures
in inmate housing but many do not. Existing policies and regulations vary
widely. A compilation is provided as an appendix to this paper.



The Federal Bureau of Prisons is required by executive order to conduct
climate change adaptation planning but little is required in other jurisdictions.
Adaptation planning by DOJ encompasses the federal prison system. To date, no
comparable requirements exist at state or local levels.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

iii

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Key Recommendations
Like all sectors of government, corrections must begin to prepare for the impacts of climate
change. Adaptation in corrections will involve surmounting some special challenges, including
substantial security issues, atypical buildings with unusually high population density,
uncertainty about future inmate numbers, and societal animosity toward inmates. This paper
offers a number of recommendations to address these particular challenges, as well as more
generic adaptation needs, including:


Reduce the size of the incarcerated population. The looming challenge of
adapting to the impacts of climate change dovetails with recent mainstream
efforts to shift from mass incarceration toward more effective and less costly
strategies to reduce crime and recidivism. Bringing down inmate numbers would
advance adaptation by reducing security problems, lowering population
densities, easing pressures on correctional budgets, and making it possible to
retire problematic facilities.



Reduce inmates’ and correctional officers’ susceptibility to heat stress.
Acclimatizing inmates and COs to higher temperatures will reduce the
likelihood of their succumbing to heat-related illness. As a short-term measure,
heat-sensitive inmates should receive priority for housing in units where healthy
temperatures can be maintained. Separate geriatric housing would also help
address the greater overall health care needs of older inmates.



Phase out the most vulnerable facilities. Adaptation needs should factor into
decisions about closing obsolete or problematic facilities, and those that cannot
be adapted at reasonable cost should be retired.



Retrofit adaptable facilities by maximizing passive cooling. Proven passivecooling solutions should be favored over mechanical air conditioning in order to
capitalize on energy savings and minimize greenhouse gas emissions. Cool roofs,
green roofs and walls, awnings, and advanced thermal windows are costeffective options for cooling that can significantly reduce the need for air
conditioning.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

iv

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change



Build new sustainable, adapted, and resilient facilities. The location, design,
and construction of all new facilities should take into account future
temperatures as well as other impacts of climate change. As part of this,
environmental impact analyses should incorporate not only current climate
conditions but foreseeable future conditions for the entire projected useful life of
a facility.



Require adequate cooling of private facilities. Future contracts with private
entities that operate prisons or jails, and renewal of existing contracts, should
require that healthy indoor temperatures be maintained.



Collaborate and cooperate. Adaptation should not and cannot be an isolated
effort. Correctional departments should work with one another, with other
public agencies, and with private partners to share best practices and to take
advantage of the considerable progress that has been made in some quarters.

The most important recommendation is to start now; the hour is already late. Adaptation,
like climate change itself, is a long-term process, not an isolated event. If correctional
departments put off beginning their adaptation efforts because of uncertainties about the details
of specific climate impacts or apprehensiveness about the complexity of adapting, the task will
only become more difficult and costly.
Adapting corrections to heat and other impacts of climate change is not a task for
correctional departments alone. Just as correctional administrators should begin educating
themselves about climate change and how it will affect their departments, so should
policymakers, academics, and others who are already working on adaptation widen their
compass to include corrections. This paper aims to help both efforts.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

v

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

[This page intentionally left blank]

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

vi

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

CONTENTS
1

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1

2

Overview of the Correctional Sector ............................................................................................... 7
2.1

Jurisdictions and Administration ............................................................................................... 8

2.2

Existing Facilities .......................................................................................................................... 9

2.2.1

2.2.1.1

Prisons .............................................................................................................................................9

2.2.1.2

Jails ................................................................................................................................................. 10

2.2.2

Overcrowding and Facilities Under Court Orders or Consent Decrees ...................... 11

2.2.3

Age of Facilities .................................................................................................................... 13

2.2.4

Building Materials and Technologies ............................................................................... 14

2.2.5

Expenditures on Construction and Maintenance............................................................ 15

2.3

Inmate Populations..................................................................................................................... 16

2.3.1

Location and Jurisdiction.................................................................................................... 17

2.3.2

Reasons for Incarceration ................................................................................................... 18

2.3.3

Prevalence of Risk Factors for Heat-Related Illness Among Inmates .......................... 18

2.4

3

Number and Types of Facilities ........................................................................................... 9

2.3.3.1

Age ................................................................................................................................................. 19

2.3.3.2

Mental Health ............................................................................................................................... 22

2.3.3.3

Physical Health............................................................................................................................. 22

2.3.3.4

Drug Use ....................................................................................................................................... 26

Correctional Staff Population .................................................................................................... 28

2.4.1

Size ......................................................................................................................................... 28

2.4.2

Health .................................................................................................................................... 29

2.5

Correctional Reforms ................................................................................................................. 31

2.6

Structural Vulnerabilities to Extreme Heat ............................................................................. 32

Heat, Corrections, and the Law ...................................................................................................... 33
3.1

Inmate Litigation......................................................................................................................... 33

3.1.1

Constitutional Claims.......................................................................................................... 33

3.1.1.1

Example 1: Mississippi State Penitentiary in Parchman, Unit 32 .......................................... 37
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

vii

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

3.1.1.2

3.1.2

4

Claims Under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act ......... 50

3.2

The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act .................................................................. 53

3.3

Legal Action by Correctional Officers ..................................................................................... 54

3.4

Policies and Regulations Concerning Heat and Climate Control in Corrections .............. 59

3.5

Mandated Adaptation Efforts ................................................................................................... 62

3.6

The Legal Context for Adaptation............................................................................................ 64

Adaptation Challenges and Options ............................................................................................ 65
4.1

The Basics of Adaptation ........................................................................................................... 66

4.2

Special Challenges for Corrections........................................................................................... 69

4.2.1

Security .................................................................................................................................. 69

4.2.2

Unique Buildings ................................................................................................................. 71

4.2.3

Unstable Population Size .................................................................................................... 72

4.2.4

Unpopular Constituency .................................................................................................... 72

4.3

Options ......................................................................................................................................... 73

4.3.1

Reduce the Size of the Incarcerated Population .............................................................. 73

4.3.2

Reduce Inmates’ and Correctional Officers’ Susceptibility to Heat Stress .................. 75

4.3.2.1

Acclimatize Inmates and Correctional Officers to Heat ......................................................... 75

4.3.2.2

Segregate Inmates Based on Heat Sensitivity .......................................................................... 77

4.3.3

Phase Out the Most Vulnerable Facilities......................................................................... 78

4.3.4

Retrofit Adaptable Facilities by Maximizing Passive Cooling ...................................... 79

4.3.5

Build New Sustainable, Adapted, and Resilient Facilities ............................................. 83

4.3.6

Require Adequate Cooling of Private Facilities .............................................................. 85

4.3.7

Collaborate and Cooperate ................................................................................................. 85

4.4
5

Example 2: Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola, Death Row........................................... 42

Adaptation Planning by the Federal Bureau of Prisons ........................................................ 86

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 89

Appendix: Policies and Regulations Concerning Heat and Climate Control in Corrections... 91

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

viii

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

1

INTRODUCTION

To meet the challenges of climate change, all government institutions must take steps to
reduce their carbon footprints and to adapt their facilities and practices to increasing
temperatures, rising sea levels, more erratic and extreme weather, and a host of other impacts.
While the correctional sector has begun to promote sustainability through energy efficiency,
thereby contributing to the effort to mitigate the causes of climate change, it has paid little
attention to the adaptation side of the equation. As a result, correctional departments across the
country are largely unprepared for the operational difficulties they will face as our climate
continues to change. Fortunately, climate change has not yet reached a pace that makes
adaptation impossible. By thoroughly evaluating their vulnerabilities, identifying practical
adaptive measures to address those vulnerabilities, and implementing those solutions before
finding themselves in crisis, correctional departments can successfully meet the adaptation
challenge without compromising public safety or the health of inmates and correctional
workers.
In some respects, correctional departments are no different from other public agencies when
it comes to climate change adaptation. Like other departments, corrections has buildings that
may be vulnerable to flooding from rising seas and more severe storms. It relies on energy,
water, and other essentials that are likely to become scarcer, more costly, and subject to
disruption. Its employees’ health must be guaranteed as temperatures rise and heat waves
become more frequent, longer, and more severe. Government agencies of all kinds may solve
these and other challenges in similar ways, and opportunities to share best practices abound.
But corrections also has exceptional characteristics that set it apart from the rest of the public
sector. Correctional departments have large full-time residential populations and are
responsible under the Constitution for those populations’ basic needs: food, water, shelter,
health, safety. They also must ensure public safety by guaranteeing that those in their custody
remain in their custody. Security is a paramount concern that shapes every decision and
practice by correctional administrators and employees alike. Security considerations limit the
range of available emergency measures and make options such as evacuation exceptionally
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

1

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

difficult. These idiosyncratic features shape the correctional sector’s specific vulnerabilities in
the face of climate change and the adaptive solutions needed to address those vulnerabilities.1
This paper focuses on adaptation of adult correctional facilities to handle increasingly severe
heat waves and rising average summer temperatures. Many correctional systems already
struggle to keep inmates and employees adequately cool in the summer, a task made all the
more difficult by the high rates of physical and mental health problems among the inmate
population. Some correctional departments, such as those in Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana,
already feel the pressure of inmate litigation because of their inability to maintain livable
environments throughout the summer months. Without adaptation, these and other
correctional systems are in danger of being entirely overwhelmed as climate change progresses.
In other places, where handling summertime heat has not historically been so serious a
problem, previously adequate equipment and systems will fail. There, too, correctional systems
will have to take adaptive measures to adjust to the objective reality of the changing climate.
With 1 out of every 110 adult residents of the United States incarcerated in a prison or jail at the
end of 2013, for a total of over two million inmates, the stakes in human welfare are enormous.2
When correctional facilities are unable to maintain healthy interior temperatures and
humidity levels during the summer months, even healthy inmates and correctional staff can
suffer heat stress, including heat edema, heat syncope, heat cramps, heat exhaustion, and
heatstroke, a potentially fatal condition.3 Several factors can increase the risk of death or serious
harm from extreme heat, including age and underlying health. A person’s capacity to adjust to
To a large extent, the exceptional features of adult corrections apply to the juvenile-justice sector as well.
Since the two systems are administratively and legally distinct in most jurisdictions, this paper does not
cover juvenile justice directly, though some of its content does apply to that sector. As of late 2011, nearly
69,000 individuals 21 or younger were being held state juvenile facilities. See OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE &
DELINQUENCY PREVENTION, NCJ 246826, JUVENILES IN RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT, 2011, at 3 (2014), ojjdp.gov
/pubs/246826.pdf.
2 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248479, CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 2013, at 4
tbl.2 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus13.pdf.
3 For a brief overview of how excess heat affects the body and of factors that increase the risk of adverse
health effects from heat, see, e.g., Shakoor Hajat et al., Health Effects of Hot Weather: From Awareness of Risk
Factors to Effective Health Protection, 375 LANCET 856–57 (2010). It bears noting that research on the health
effects of excess heat has focused primarily on mortality as opposed to morbidity. See Katherine Marmon,
How Does a Heat Wave Affect the Human Body?, SCI. AM. (July 23, 2010), scientificamerican.com/article/heatwave-health.
1

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

2

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

changes in temperature diminishes with age. Heat can exacerbate chronic conditions such as
respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses. Obesity places one at greater risk. Numerous common
medications, including many frequently used to treat mental health problems, make one more
susceptible to heat stress. These and other factors that increase the health risks of high heat
affect the inmate population and, to a lesser degree, the population of correctional workers.
Another common consequence of heat in prisons has implications for both health and
security, of inmates and correctional officers alike: the potential for increased violence. Fighting
among inmates and assault incidents may increase when high temperatures cut tempers short.4
As shown below, the most recent and best analyses predict significant increases in average
summer temperatures in the coming decades as well as more common, severe, and protracted
heat waves. Since 1895, average temperatures in the United States have increased by 1.3 to 1.9°F,
with most of that increase occurring since 1970.5 The first decade of this century was the
warmest on record, 2014 was the warmest single year on record, and the nation’s climate is only
expected to become warmer.6

See, e.g., Clara Crowder, Few Beat the Heat in State Prisons, BIRMINGHAM NEWS, Aug. 28, 2005, at 17, 2005
WLNR 24090809 (quoting Alabama warden saying that “incidents of fights and assaults go up
dramatically in summer months” and that, “When they’re all in, and it’s hot, one guy will ‘disrespect’
another guy and they’ll have a fistfight.”); Jimmy Nesbitt, Air-Conditioned Jail “Not a Reward,” COURIER &
PRESS (Evansville, Ill.), Aug. 4, 2006, at B3, 2006 WLNR 27279592 (quoting county sheriff describing new
air conditioning system as an “asset” that reduces likelihood of fighting among inmates). There is
considerable evidence that hot weather can trigger increases in violent behavior outside the correctional
context, though the relationship between heat and violence is complex. See, e.g., Solomon M. Hsiang et al.,
Quantifying the Influence of Climate on Human Conflict, 341 SCI. 1235367 (2013), sciencemag.org/content/341
/6151/1235367.full.pdf; (reporting results of meta-analysis: “for each one standard deviation (1σ) change
in climate toward warmer temperatures . . . , median estimates indicate that the frequency of
interpersonal violence rises 4% and the frequency of intergroup conflict rises 14%. Because locations
throughout the inhabited world are expected to warm 2σ to 4σ by 2050, amplified rates of human conflict
could represent a large and critical impact of anthropogenic climate change.”); Craig A. Anderson & Matt
DeLisi, Implications of Global Climate Change for Violence in Developed and Developing Countries, in THE
PSYCHOLOGY OF SOCIAL CONFLICT AND AGGRESSION 249, 250–56 (Joseph P. Forgas et al. eds. 2011)
(analyzing relationship between heat and aggression).
5 J. Walsh et al., Chapter 2: Our Changing Climate, in CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES: THE
THIRD NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 28 (Jerry M. Melillo et al. eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 2014), nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
6 Id.; State of the Climate: Global Analysis for Annual 2014, NOAA NAT’L CTRS. ENVTL. INFO. (Jan. 2015),
ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201413.
4

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

3

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Average temperatures are expected to rise 2 to 4°F in most areas of the country during the
next few decades.7 Temperature increases of anywhere between 3 and 10°F are possible by the
end of the century, depending on global emissions of greenhouse gases.8 States in the upper
Midwest and Alaska may see rises of 10 to 15°F by 2099 if emissions continue to increase.9
Regardless of how much warming takes place, it will be neither uniform nor smooth across the
country, given natural climate variations and our diverse geography.10
Climate change affects not only average summertime temperatures but also the frequency,
severity, and duration of heat waves.11 Heat waves are more frequent and intense than they
used to be, especially in the western states, and the trend is expected to continue.12 In the first
decade of this century, heat waves in western regions broke historical records.13 In 2011 and
2012, the country experienced almost three times the long-term average number of intense heat
waves.14 Those summers were the hottest on record in several states.15 New records were set for
both hottest daytime maximum temperatures and warmest nighttime minimum temperatures,
part of an increasing trend in persistently high nighttime temperatures that prolong heat waves
and amplify their health impacts.16

J. Walsh et al., Chapter 2: Our Changing Climate, in CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES: THE
THIRD NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 29 (Jerry M. Melillo et al. eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 2014), nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
8 Id.
9 Id. at 30, figure 2.9.
10 Id. at 28.
11 See, e.g., CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION, CLIMATE CHANGE AND EXTREME HEAT EVENTS 8–9
(n.d.), cdc.gov/climateandhealth/pubs/ClimateChangeandExtremeHeatEvents.pdf.
12 J. Walsh et al., Chapter 2: Our Changing Climate, in CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES: THE
THIRD NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 38 (Jerry M. Melillo et al. eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 2014), nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
13 Id.
14 J. Walsh et al., Appendix 3: Climate Science Supplement, in CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED
STATES: THE THIRD NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 770 (Jerry M. Melillo et al. eds., U.S. Global Change
Research Program, 2014), nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
15 J. Walsh et al., Chapter 2: Our Changing Climate, in CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES: THE
THIRD NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 38 (Jerry M. Melillo et al. eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 2014), nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
16 Id. See also Katherine Harmon, How Does a Heat Wave Affect the Human Body?, SCI. AM. (July 23, 2010),
scientificamerican.com/article/heat-wave-health (noting that deaths during heat waves increase when
temperatures remain high overnight).
7

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

4

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

In the coming decades, record-setting heat waves will become increasingly likely and the
annual number of extremely hot days is expected to keep growing. What were once rare
summertime temperature extremes are projected to become commonplace, while extreme-heat
days previously seen only once in a two-decade period are likely to occur once every two or
three years by the end of the century.17
Extreme heat is already the most common cause of weather-related death in the US, killing
more people each year than hurricanes, lightning, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes
combined.18 The number of heat-related deaths is rising and the risk of death or illness due to
extreme heat is one of the key dangers that climate change poses.19 By the middle of the century,
annual deaths attributable to extreme-heat events may well double.20 While it is impossible to
predict how many inmates and correctional staff will suffer or die from the heat, there is no
doubt that these outcomes will become more frequent unless correctional systems take
appropriate steps to adapt their facilities to handle increased cooling needs.

J. Walsh et al., Chapter 2: Our Changing Climate, in CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES: THE
THIRD NATIONAL CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 39 (Jerry M. Melillo et al. eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 2014), nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
18 Ctrs. for Disease Control & Prevention, Extreme Heat, NAT’L ENVTL. PUB. HEALTH TRACKING,
ephtracking.cdc.gov/showClimateChangeExtremeHeat.action (last updated July 1, 2014). Because heatrelated deaths are very often attributed to causes such as cardiac arrest, the actual incidence of death due
to heat is probably greater than mortality statistics indicate. See Ekta Choudhary & Ambarish
Vaidyanathan, Heat Stress Illness Hospitalizations: Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, 20 States,
2001–2010, 63 MORBIDITY & MORTALITY WKLY. REP. SURVEILLANCE SUMMARIES, Dec. 12, 2014, at 1, cdc.gov
/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6313.pdf; Jonathan A. Patz et al., Climate Change: Challenges and Opportunities for Global
Health, 312 JAMA 1565, 1567 (2014).
19 Ctrs. for Disease Control & Prevention, Extreme Heat, NAT’L ENVTL. PUB. HEALTH TRACKING,
ephtracking.cdc.gov/showClimateChangeExtremeHeat.action (last updated July 1, 2014);
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Summary for Policymakers, in CLIMATE CHANGE 2014:
IMPACTS, ADAPTATION, AND VULNERABILITY. PART A: GLOBAL AND SECTORAL ASPECTS. CONTRIBUTION OF
WORKING GROUP II TO THE FIFTH ASSESSMENT REPORT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE
CHANGE 14 (Christopher B. Field et al. eds., IPCC 2014), ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads
/WG2AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf.
20 See PETER ALTMAN, NAT’L RES. DEF. COUNCIL, KILLER SUMMER HEAT: PROJECTED DEATH TOLL FROM
RISING TEMPERATURES IN AMERICA DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE 4–5 tbl.2 (2012), nrdc.org/globalwarming
/killer-heat/files/killer-summer-heat-report.pdf (presenting projections for the 40 largest U.S. cities
previously published in Scott Greene et al., An Examination of Climate Change on Extreme Heat Events and
Climate-Mortality Relationships in Large U.S. Cities, 3 WEATHER, CLIMATE, & SOC’Y, 281–92 (2011)).
17

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

5

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

The implications for corrections of increasing temperatures associated with climate change
are not limited to the direct impact of heat on human health. As temperatures rise and the
climate changes, food and water supplies will be put at risk. Peak energy use during heat waves
will likely cause more frequent brownouts and blackouts. Buildings, paved surfaces, and
mechanical systems are all vulnerable to damage from high heat. And these and other impacts
will be compounded by other effects of climate change, such as flooding.
This paper offers the first systematic analysis of the correctional sector’s structural and legal
vulnerabilities to high temperatures caused by climate change. Section 1 presents an overview
of the correctional sector. It emphasizes those characteristics that shape the sector’s particular
vulnerabilities to harm from rising temperatures. Legal dimensions of the problem posed by
increased heat are the topic of Section 2. It begins with a discussion of constitutional claims that
inmates may bring against correctional departments that fail to protect them from extreme heat.
The correctional sector may be alone in facing the prospect of viable constitutional litigation if it
does not effectively adapt to the changing climate. After examining constitutional issues,
Section 2 turns to other inmate claims and possibilities for legal action by correctional officers. It
concludes with a look at existing correctional policies and regulations concerned with heat and
climate control. Section 3 is concerned with how corrections can adapt to the rising
temperatures of the twenty-first century. It begins with an overview of the basics of adaptation
before identifying and discussing exceptional challenges that make adaptation in the
correctional sector different. It then turns to options for meeting those challenges,
recommending cost-effective strategies and tactics that can make adaptation successful.
There is much that lies beyond the scope of this paper. Impacts of climate change other than
heat, such as flooding from sea-level rise and major storms, present substantial challenges for
the correctional sector and will have to be included in comprehensive vulnerability assessments
and adaptation efforts. Many of the effects of climate change on corrections will equally affect
other detention and confinement systems, including juvenile justice and immigration, requiring
those systems to undertake adaptation efforts of their own. These and other issues are
important topics for further research and analysis.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

6

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Adapting correctional systems to the ongoing changes in climate presents an unprecedented
challenge. While informed predictions can be made about future objective conditions, much will
remain unknown as the decades unfold. As the physical world continues to change, our
institutions and systems will change as well. There is no fixed endpoint.21 Designing and
implementing policy in the face of uncertainty will be difficult and sometimes profoundly
uncomfortable. But it will also offer unique opportunities to think beyond maintaining and
shoring up vulnerable facilities and systems, to think about how to build a future correctional
sector that is not only flexible, resilient, and adapted to climate change, but also more effective
and successful at fulfilling its mission than it is at present. These opportunities dovetail with
recent efforts to reform corrections, such as shifting spending toward preventing recidivism,
that have so far been driven largely by fiscal concerns.
Correctional departments should begin thinking strategically about adaptation, zeroing in
on an approach or philosophy to guide them as they select among specific adaptation options.
Such strategic thinking should include a recognition that appropriate options for the near term
may be unsuitable for the long term. Departments should be wary of taking actions that
unnecessarily limit their future options.

2

OVERVIEW OF THE CORRECTIONAL SECTOR

To some extent it is illusory to speak of the correctional sector in the United States, simply
because it is so diverse. In addition to the federal system, each of the 50 states has its own
correctional system for adults who have been convicted of crimes. Most states have separate
local jail systems for inmates who are awaiting trial or who are serving brief sentences.22 Some

While the climate has never been and never will be fixed or static, the twenty-first century promises to
be more transitional and the twenty-second may be more stable. Conceptualizing this century as a bridge
to the next may make it easier to undertake adaptation planning.
22 In this paper, consistent with typical criminal justice parlance, the word “prison” refers to a correctional
facility housing predominantly sentenced inmates serving terms of more than a year, typically for felony
convictions. The word “jail” refers to a detention center housing predominantly individuals who have
been arrested but not yet tried, who are in transit between court appearances or between facilities, or who
are serving sentences of less than a year, typically for misdemeanor violations. See, e.g., LARRY E.
21

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

7

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

facilities are publicly administered, others are privately run. This section provides only a brief
overview of the correctional sector.

2.1 Jurisdictions and Administration
The federal prison system is operated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), an agency of
the Department of Justice, which is responsible for the custody of all adults convicted of a
federal crime.23 The BOP operates 121 institutions of its own and also houses inmates in contract
facilities operated by private corporations.24 There are federal institutions in most of the 50
states as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.25
All 50 states have their own prison systems, run by correctional departments. Twenty-nine
states use privately operated contract prisons as well as state-run institutions.26 All but six states
have administratively separate local jail systems as well.27 These diverse systems are run by
cities, counties, and other local government entities. A total of 2,859 distinct jail jurisdictions
existed as of 2006.28 Numerous Indian nations have their own jails, some operated by tribal
authorities, others by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.29

SULLIVAN, ED., THE SAGE GLOSSARY OF THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES 275 (“jail”), 403–404
(“prison”) (2009).
23 The US Marshals Service has custody of people charged with federal crimes until they are convicted
and transferred to BOP or acquitted and released. The Marshals Service does not operate detention
facilities of its own but contracts with states and localities for jail space. See Defendant & Prisoner Custody
& Detention, U.S. MARSHALS SERV., usmarshals.gov/prisoner/detention.htm (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
24 Fed. Prisons, FED. BUREAU OF PRISONS, bop.gov/about/facilities/federal_prisons.jsp (last visited Aug. 1,
2015); Contract Prisons, FED. BUREAU OF PRISONS, bop.gov/about/facilities/contract_facilities.jsp (last visited
Aug. 1, 2015).
25 Map of Our Locations, FED. BUREAU OF PRISONS, bop.gov/locations/map.jsp (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
26 At the end of 2013, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia,
Hawai‘i, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico,
North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas,
Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming had inmates housed in private prisons. See BUREAU OF JUSTICE
STATISTICS, NCJ 247282, PRISONERS IN 2013, at 14 tbl.12 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p13.pdf.
27 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai‘i, Rhode Island, and Vermont have integrated prison-jail
systems.
28 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 230188, CENSUS OF JAIL FACILITIES, 2006, at 3 tbl.1 (2011), bjs.gov
/content/pub/pdf/cjf06.pdf.
29 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247017, JAILS IN INDIAN COUNTRY, 2013, at 8 (2014), bjs.gov/content
/pub/pdf/jic13.pdf.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

8

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

2.2 Existing Facilities
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), part of the US Department of Justice, periodically
conducts a Census of State and Federal Adult Correctional Facilities and a separate Census of
Jails. Unfortunately, neither has been updated recently. The latest census of Census of State and
Federal Adult Correctional Facilities is from 2005 and the most recent Census of Jails is from
2006.30 The BJS Annual Survey of Jails in Indian Country, however, does provide more current
information about that small subsection of the corrections world.31
2.2.1
2.2.1.1

Number and Types of Facilities
Prisons

As of December 2005, there were 1,719 state and 102 federal correctional facilities of various
types in operation, for a total of 1,821.32 This number included private and local facilities
operating under contract with federal or state correctional authorities.33 It included not only
prisons but also prison farms; reception, diagnostic, and classification centers; facilities
primarily for people returned to custody for reasons such as parole violations; road, forestry,
and conservation camps; youthful offender facilities (except in California); vocational training
facilities; drug and alcohol treatment facilities; and state-operated local detention facilities in
those states that operate combined prison and jail systems.34

See Census of State & Federal Adult Correctional Facilities, BUREAU OF JUST. STAT., bjs.gov
/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=255 (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Census of Jails, BUREAU OF JUST. STAT., bjs.gov
/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=254 (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
31 See Jails in Indian Country, BUREAU OF JUST. STAT., bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=276 (last visited
Aug. 1, 2015).
32 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 222182, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES,
2005, at 2 tbl.1 (2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf.
33 Id. at 1 (2008).
34 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL ADULT CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES, 2005:
CODEBOOK 5 (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, n.d.), icpsr.umich.edu
/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/24642. The census excluded private facilities not primarily for state or federal
inmates; military facilities; Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities; Bureau of Indian Affairs
facilities; facilities operated by or for local government; facilities operated by the Marshals Service;
hospital wings and wards reserved for state prisoners; and facilities that held only juveniles.
30

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

9

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

State and federal authorities directly operated 1,406 facilities and private corporations
operated another 415.35 Private facilities were generally small: 346 of the 415 private facilities
had average daily populations of fewer than 500 inmates and only 2 had average daily
populations of more than 2,500.36 More than 80 percent of private facilities operating under
federal contract had an average daily population of fewer than 100 inmates.37
More than half of all facilities were minimum-security, just over a quarter were mediumsecurity, and a fifth were maximum security.38 Minimum-security facilities tended to be much
smaller than the others, holding an average of 319 inmates, compared to 1,261 for mediumsecurity and 1,379 for maximum-security.39
2.2.1.2

Jails

There were 3,283 jail facilities in operation at the end of 2006, 94 fewer than in 1999.40 All but
49 were run by local authorities; private or public entities under contract to local governments
operated 37 facilities and the BOP operated another 12.41
Jails tended to be small. Jail jurisdictions holding fewer than 50 inmates accounted for
almost 40 percent of all jurisdictions and those holding fewer than 100 made up fully 59
percent.42 A number of jurisdictions had recently consolidated small neighboring local jails into
larger regional jails. There were at least 63 regional jails in 17 states in 2006, up from to 42
regional jails in 14 states in 1999.43 Two large jail jurisdictions, one in New York, the other in
California, held at least 10,000 inmates apiece.44 Even though most jurisdictions had small
inmate populations, the limited number of large jurisdictions housed the majority of inmates.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 222182, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES,
2005, at 2 tbl.1 (2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf.
36 Id. at app. tbl.3.
37 Id. at 4.
38 Id. at 3.
39 See id. at 19 app. tbl.11.
40 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 230188, CENSUS OF JAIL FACILITIES, 2006, at 1, 4 (2011), bjs.gov/content
/pub/pdf/cjf06.pdf. The census counted 2,860 individual jail jurisdictions. Id. at 1.
41 See id. at 2, 3 tbl.1.
42 See id. at 14.
43 Id. at 4.
44 See id. at 14.
35

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

10

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Jail jurisdictions with populations of 1,000 or more made up only 5 percent of all jurisdictions
but held half the nation’s jail population.45
The 2013 Annual Survey of Jails in Indian Country identified 79 such facilities, fully 21 of
which had been built in the nine-year period from 2004 to 2013.46 Jails in Indian country held an
average of 29 inmates but the 18 facilities with a capacity of more than 50 inmates held just over
half of all inmates.47
2.2.2

Overcrowding and Facilities Under Court Orders or Consent Decrees

Because human beings are sources of heat and humidity, the number of people in a given
enclosed space has a direct impact on the thermal conditions in that space.48 Therefore,
overcrowding of correctional facilities is an impediment to maintaining a tolerable interior
environment. As external temperatures rise, overcrowding will become a bigger problem.
The 2005 Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities found that a total of 44 facilities
(21 public, 23 private, all of them state facilities) were under court order or consent decree to
limit inmate populations.49 The 2006 Census of Jails revealed widespread overcrowding as well,
as evidenced by the finding that 204 jail jurisdictions were under court orders or consent
decrees to limit their inmate populations.50

See id. at 18.
BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247017, JAILS IN INDIAN COUNTRY, 2013, at 1 (2014), bjs.gov/content
/pub/pdf/jic13.pdf.
47 Id. at 1, 3 tbl.3.
48 See, e.g., 1997 ASHRAE FUNDAMENTALS HANDBOOK 28.7 (1997) (noting that “heat and moisture . . . given
off by human beings” often “constitute a large fraction of the total [cooling] load” of an air-conditioning
system); CORKY BINGGELI, BUILDING SYSTEMS FOR INTERIOR DESIGNERS 22 (2009) (quantifying heat
production of human body, ranging from 70 to 870 watts, depending on activity level).
49 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 222182, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES,
2005, at app. tbl.6 (2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf. The census also found that 218 facilities
(189 state, 1 federal, and 28 private) were under court orders or consent decrees because of specific
conditions of confinement. Id. Some facilities were under court orders or consent decrees both to limit
population and for specific conditions of confinement. See id.
50 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 230188, CENSUS OF JAILS, 2006, at 13 tbl.7 (2011), bjs.gov/content/pub
/pdf/cjf06.pdf. The census also found that 165 state jail jurisdictions were under court orders or consent
decrees for specific conditions of confinement. Id. Most jail jurisdictions under court orders or consent
decrees for specific conditions were also under court orders or consent decrees to limit populations. See
id.
45
46

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

11

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Overcrowding in California prisons, once the worst in the nation, reached a high of 199
percent of design capacity in 2007.51 The state is under court orders to reduce overcrowding to
137.5 percent of design capacity by February 2016.52 At the end of 2013, as a result of a variety of
measures, including housing prisoners in local jails and modifying sentencing laws,
overcrowding stood at 142.7 percent of design capacity.53
At the end of 2013, the inmate populations in at least 18 states, as well as in the federal
system, exceeded the capacity of their prison facilities.54 Federal prisons were at 133.1 percent of
their rated capacity.55 The states with the most overcrowded prisons were Illinois, at 151.7
percent, North Dakota at 150.5 percent, and California at 142.7 percent.56 The states with the
least crowding were New Mexico (50.9 percent), Mississippi (60.7 percent), and Tennessee (70.3
percent).57
In considering data on overcrowding, it is important to bear in mind that the rated capacity
of a facility is often greater (but rarely less) than its original design capacity.58 Thus, the total
rated capacity of all state facilities counted in the 2005 Census of State and Federal Correctional
Facilities was 1,182,784 but their design capacity was 963,404.59 This increase from design
capacity to rated capacity of more than 200,000 inmates partly reflects renovations and other

BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247282, PRISONERS IN 2013, at 12 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf
/p13.pdf.
52 Id.
53 Id.
54 See id. at 31 app. tbl.1. States reported facilities’ “rated capacity,” “operational capacity,” “design
capacity,” or some combination of these measures. Where a state reported more than one measure, the
Bureau of Justice Statistics compared the jurisdiction’s custody population with the lowest and highest
measures reported. The custody population exceeded the highest reported capacity in 18 states and
exceeded the lowest reported capacity in 27 states. See id.
55 Id.
56 See id. Illinois prisons were at 151.7 percent of rated or operational capacity and at 172.6 percent of
design capacity. North Dakota prisons were at 150.5 percent of rated or design capacity and at 158.5
percent of operational capacity. California’s prisons were at 142.7 percent of design capacity. See id.
57 See id.
58 A facility’s “rated capacity” is the number of beds or inmates assigned to it by a rating official. Its
“design capacity” is number of inmates originally intended by the planners or architects who designed it.
See Terms & Definitions: Corrections, BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tdtp&tid=1 (last
revised Sept. 15, 2014).
59 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 222182, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES,
2005, at app. tbl.4 (2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf.
51

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

12

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

physical changes to facilities. But it also reflects “double bunking” to increase capacity by
housing two inmates in spaces originally designed for one. For example, the Bureau of Prisons
originally calculated the rated capacity of its facilities based on the assumption that cells would
have single occupants and dormitory spaces would have single beds, with double bunking used
only on a temporary basis when necessary.60 In the late twentieth century, however, the BOP
recalculated the rated capacity of its existing facilities, now assuming double bunking in 100
percent of minimum- and low-security facilities, 50 percent of medium security facilities, and 25
percent of high-security facilities.61
2.2.3

Age of Facilities

Sixty-nine of the facilities identified in the 2005 Census of State and Federal Correctional
Facilities were built in the nineteenth century, with the oldest, the Metropolitan Transition
Center in Baltimore, dating from 1811.62 In August 2006, high temperatures killed one inmate
and contributed to the death of another at the Indiana State Prison, which was built in 1860 and
lacks air conditioning.63 The oldest jail identified in the 2006 Census of Jails was the Bayou
Dorcheat Correction Center in Minden, Louisiana, built in 1800, one of 34 from before the
twentieth century.64 A total of 307 prison facilities and 153 jails constructed before the end of the

See Scott Higgins, Responding to a Fourfold Increase in Population: The Experience of the Federal Bureau of
Prisons, in PRISON ARCHITECTURE: POLICY, DESIGN AND EXPERIENCE 85, 86–87 (Leslie Fairweather & Seán
McConville eds., 2000).
61 See id. at 85, 87. Unfortunately, the Bureau of Prisons did not report data on the design capacity of its
facilities to the Bureau of Justice Statistics for at least the last two censuses of correctional facilities. See
BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 222182, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES, 2005,
at app. tbl.4 note a (2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf.
62 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, ICPSR 24642, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL ADULT CORRECTIONAL
FACILITIES, DATASET DS1, available at icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/studies/24642.
63 See Coroner: Heat Contributed to 2 State Prison Inmates’ Deaths, S. BEND TRIB. (Ind.) (Aug. 3, 2006),
articles.southbendtribune.com/2006-08-03/news/26957886_1_maximum-security-prison-prison-officialscooling-centers; Cheryl Jackson, Intense Heat Affects Inmates at Prison, S. BEND TRIB. (Ind.) (Aug. 2, 2006),
articles.southbendtribune.com/2006-08-02/news/26943153_1_prison-deaths-prison-employees-indianastate-prison; Jon Seidel, Heat Contributes to Inmates’ Deaths, MERRILLVILLE POST-TRIB. (Ind.), Aug. 3, 2006,
at A1, highbeam.com/doc/1N1-113B189B9C6C7D40.html.
64 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, ICPSR 26602, CENSUS OF JAIL FACILITIES, DATASET DS1, available at
icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/studies/26602.
60

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

13

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Second World War were still in use in 2005 and 2006, respectively. 65 The majority of both
prisons and jails, however, were built since 1980.66
2.2.4

Building Materials and Technologies

Historically, prisons were built to last, using stone, brick, cement, and other heavy, durable
building materials.67 As facilities aged, they were often simply added to in haphazard fashion,
sometimes creating a sort of three-dimensional collage of building materials and construction
techniques.68 For most of the twentieth century, prison architecture tended toward monolithic,
high-capacity, high-security buildings.69 Prison exteriors were typically “large expanses of hard
material,” with windows “small and few.”70
The explosive growth in the US prison population in the last quarter of the twentieth
century led to changes in prison construction techniques and materials. Less costly materials
and less time-consuming techniques began to be used, and both the Bureau of Prisons and
several states looked toward standardizing building plans.71 At the same time, the difficulties in
managing inmates in massive housing tiers led to construction of low- and medium-security
See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, ICPSR 24642, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL ADULT CORRECTIONAL
FACILITIES, DATASET DS1, available at icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/studies/24642; BUREAU OF JUSTICE
STATISTICS, ICPSR 26602, CENSUS OF JAIL FACILITIES, DATASET DS1, available at icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb
/NACJD/studies/26602.
66 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, ICPSR 24642, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL ADULT CORRECTIONAL
FACILITIES, DATASET DS1, available at icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/studies/24642; BUREAU OF JUSTICE
STATISTICS, ICPSR 26602, CENSUS OF JAIL FACILITIES, DATASET DS1, available at icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb
/NACJD/studies/26602. Note that both censuses were missing data on when many facilities were built.
67 See TODD S. PHILLIPS & MICHAEL A. GRIEBEL, BUILDING TYPE BASICS FOR JUSTICE FACILITIES 4, 141 (2003);
Joseph Torey Nalbone, Evaluation of Building and Occupant Response to Temperature and Humidity:
Non-Traditional Heat Stress Considerations: A Comparison of Different Construction Types Used by the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice 5 (Dec. 2004) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M Univ.),
available at oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/1504.
68 See, e.g., TODD S. PHILLIPS & MICHAEL A. GRIEBEL, BUILDING TYPE BASICS FOR JUSTICE FACILITIES 4 (2003)
(describing much prison construction as “additive and sometimes at hoc”).
69 See generally NORMAN JOHNSTON, FORMS OF CONSTRAINT: A HISTORY OF PRISON ARCHITECTURE 140–49
(2000) (describing dominant architectural models).
70 TODD S. PHILLIPS & MICHAEL A. GRIEBEL, BUILDING TYPE BASICS FOR JUSTICE FACILITIES 141 (2003).
71 See NORMAN JOHNSTON, FORMS OF CONSTRAINT: A HISTORY OF PRISON ARCHITECTURE 152–54 (2000);
Joseph Torey Nalbone, Evaluation of Building and Occupant Response to Temperature and Humidity:
Non-Traditional Heat Stress Considerations: A Comparison of Different Construction Types Used by the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice 5 (Dec. 2004) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M Univ.) ,
available at oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/1504.
65

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

14

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

facilities based on a campus model of multiple lower-capacity units or pods.72 On the other
hand, this era also saw the birth of “supermax” control-unit prisons, which more resemble the
traditional fortress-style facility.73
2.2.5

Expenditures on Construction and Maintenance

Between 1982 and 1991, as correctional departments expanded their systems to keep up
with the swelling inmate population, state institutional capital outlays—money spent on
construction, renovation, and repair of institutions, on various real-estate expenses, and on
purchasing durable equipment—accounted for between 8.5 and 13.6 percent of annual
corrections expenditures.74 In any given year during that time frame, at least six states found
themselves putting 20 percent or more of their corrections dollars toward capital outlays.75
Annual spending on capital outlays peaked in 1991, coming in at $4.6 billion.76
After that peak, annual capital outlays began to fall, eventually reaching $2.3 billion or less
for each year between 2002 and 2010.77 In only one year during that period did more than a
single state allocate 20 percent or more of its corrections expenditures to capital outlay.78
Construction expenses for the correctional sector can vary considerably from year to year,
particularly on the local level. With that caveat, some figures from fiscal year 2011 are still
instructive. During fiscal 2011, state governments together spent roughly $1.25 billion on
construction of correctional institutions.79 All but 12 states—Delaware, Hawai‘i, Kentucky,
Maine, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and
Wyoming—spent more than $1 million each on correctional construction.80 A number of large
See NORMAN JOHNSTON, FORMS OF CONSTRAINT: A HISTORY OF PRISON ARCHITECTURE 153–54 (2000).
See id. at 148, 157–58.
74 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 239672, STATE CORRECTIONS EXPENDITURES, FY 1982–2010, at 2
(rev. 2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/scefy8210.pdf.
75 See id. at 3 tbl.1.
76 See id. at 2.
77 See id.
78 See id. at 3 tbl.1.
79 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247020, JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT EXTRACTS, 2011:
PRELIMINARY, file jeeus1110.csv (2014), available at bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5050 (click on
“Comma-delimited format (CSV)” to download data archive, then unzip downloaded archive
“jeeus11p.zip,” then open file “jeeus1110.csv”).
80 See id.
72
73

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

15

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

counties, including Bergen, NJ, Bexar, TX, Broward, FL, Cook, IL, Dade, FL, Hillsborough, FL,
Hudson, NJ, Los Angeles, CA, Maricopa, AZ, Milwaukee, WI, Montgomery, PA, Nassau, NY,
Orange, CA, Orange, FL, Suffolk, NY, Travis, TX, and Wayne, MI, each shouldered construction
expenses in excess of $1 million for correctional facilities.81 And several large cities, including
New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, each spent over $1 million on
correctional construction.82

2.3 Inmate Populations
The total incarcerated population hit an all-time high in 2008 and has been gradually
declining since then.83 At the end of 2013, approximately 2,220,300 individuals were in state or
federal prisons or local jails, compared to approximately 2,307,500 at the end of 2008.84 These
numbers do not include the tens of thousands of juveniles in the custody of the juvenile-justice
system or the hundreds of thousands of immigrants who spend time in US Immigration and
Customs Enforcement facilities each year pending deportation.85 Despite the first decrease in the
number of federal prisoners since 1980 (down by 1,900), the total prison population grew
See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247020, JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT EXTRACTS, 2011:
PRELIMINARY, file jeeus1112.csv (2014), available at bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5050 (click on
“Comma-delimited format (CSV)” to download data archive, then unzip downloaded archive
“jeeus11p.zip,” then open file “jeeus1112.csv”).
82 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247020, JUSTICE EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT EXTRACTS, 2011:
PRELIMINARY, file jeeus1115.csv (2014), available at bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5050 (click on
“Comma-delimited format (CSV)” to download data archive, then unzip downloaded archive
“jeeus11p.zip,” then open file “jeeus1115.csv”).
83 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248479, CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 2013,
at 13 tbl.5 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus13.pdf. The total incarcerated population decreased by 0.5
percent in 2013, the second consecutive year with a decrease of less than 1 percent. Id. at 1.
84 Compare id. at 2 tbl.1 with BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 239972, CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS IN THE
UNITED STATES, 2011, at 3 tbl.2 (2012), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus11.pdf. For a useful interactive map
showing the most recent available data on prison and jail populations and incarceration rates for each of
the 50 states, and allowing comparison between states, see Interactive Map, SENTENCING PROJECT,
sentencingproject.org/map/map.cfm (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
85 Some 68,815 juveniles age 21 or younger were being held state juvenile facilities in late 2011, down from
109,094 in 2003. OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE & DELINQUENCY PREVENTION, NCJ 246826, JUVENILES IN
RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT, 2011, at 3 (2014), ojjdp.gov/pubs/246826.pdf. During 2013, the Department of
Homeland Security apprehended approximately 662,000 aliens and Immigration and Customs
Enforcement detained nearly 441,000 aliens. OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION STATISTICS, IMMIGRATION
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS: 2013, at 1 (2014), dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications
/ois_enforcement_ar_2013.pdf.
81

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

16

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

slightly in 2013 (up by 4,300), putting an end to a three-year downward trend.86 However, that
increase was outweighed by a modest decrease in the local jail population (down by 13,300).87
Of the incarcerated population at the end of 2013, about 70 percent (1,574,700) was in prison and
30 percent (731,200) was in jail.88
2.3.1

Location and Jurisdiction

The prison population at the end of 2013 was split between 215,866 in federal custody and
1,358,875 in state custody.89 Private prisons held 137,200 prison inmates, making up 8 percent of
all state prisoners and 19 percent of all federal prisoners.90 Although the total number of
prisoners held in private facilities fell by 3 percent during 2013, the federal government and
some states continued to make heavy use of private prisons.91 New Mexico housed 44 percent of
its inmates in private facilities, Montana 40 percent, Idaho 36 percent, and Oklahoma 26
percent.92
Most prisoners were held in state and federal prisons but some were housed elsewhere,
most notably in local jails. At the end of 2013, local jails held about 85,600 prisoners on top of
their regular jail populations.93 Some states placed unusual reliance on local jails. Louisiana
housed fully 52 percent of its prison inmates in local jails, Kentucky 39 percent, and Mississippi
29 percent.94 California made use of local jails to help alleviate the chronic overcrowding of its

See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248479, CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 2013,
at 2 tbl.1, 3 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus13.pdf.
87 See id. at 2 tbl.1.
88 Id. at 2.
89 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247282, PRISONERS IN 2013, at 2 tbl.1 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf
/p13.pdf.
90 Id. at 13.
91 Id.
92 Id.
93 Id.
94 Id. at 2.
86

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

17

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

state prisons.95 Territorial prisons housed around 14,000 inmates at the end of 2013 and 1,421
were held in military facilities.96 Jails in Indian country held another 2,287 in mid-2013.97
2.3.2

Reasons for Incarceration

State and federal inmates differ significantly in terms of the offenses for which they are
serving time. In 2012, as Table 1 shows, the most common offenses for which state prisoners
were imprisoned were violent offenses and property offenses.98 In contrast, the most common
offenses for federal prisoners were drug offenses and public-order offenses.99
Table 1. Sentenced prisoners by jurisdiction and offense, 2012, estimates
Most serious offense

State

Violent

53.8%

7.1%

Property

18.8%

5.8%

Drug

16.0%

51.0%

Public order

10.7%

35.5%

0.8%

0.6%

Other/unspecified

Federal

Source: BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247282, PRISONERS IN 2013, at 15 tbl.13, 17 tbl.16 (2014), bjs.gov
/content/pub/pdf/p13.pdf.

2.3.3

Prevalence of Risk Factors for Heat-Related Illness Among Inmates

Certain conditions can increase an individual’s susceptibility to suffering adverse health
effects from heat, including age, mental and physical health, and the use of medications.100

See id. at 11.
BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248479, CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 2013, at
13 app. tbl.3 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus13.pdf; BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247282,
PRISONERS IN 2013, at 21 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p13.pdf.
97 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247017, JAILS IN INDIAN COUNTRY, 2013, at 1 (2014), bjs.gov/content
/pub/pdf/jic13.pdf.
98 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247282, PRISONERS IN 2013, at 15 tbl.13 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub
/pdf/p13.pdf. Data are for December 31, 2012.
99 Id. at 17 tbl.16. Data are for September 30, 2012. The category of public-order offenses “includes
weapons, drunk driving, and court offenses; commercialized vice, morals, and decency offenses; and
liquor law violations and other public-order offenses.” Id. at 15 tbl.13 note e.
100 For an overview of mortality and morbidity associated with extreme heat events among the general
population in the US, see, e.g., ENVTL. PROT. AGENCY, EPA 430-B-06-005, EXCESSIVE HEAT EVENTS
GUIDEBOOK 12–16 (2006), epa.gov/heatisland/about/pdf/EHEguide_final.pdf.
95
96

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

18

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

2.3.3.1

Age

The inmate population is aging.101 Between 1999 and 2013, the number of state and federal
prisoners age 55 and older increased by 234 percent, a much faster rate of growth than among
younger inmates.102 At the end 2013, 9.5 percent of sentenced prisoners were age 55 or older,
including 2.1 percent who were age 65 or older.103 In recent years nearly half a million of those
arrested annually have been age 50 or older.104
This unprecedented growth in the senior inmate population reflects a number of
phenomena, including the graying of the US population as a whole. But the decisive shift in
criminal-justice policies toward punishment and retribution instead of treatment and
rehabilitation, which began in earnest in the early 1980s, bears much of the responsibility.105
Tough sentencing rules such as mandatory minimums for repeat offenders, sharp reductions in
opportunities for discretionary early release, the outright elimination of parole in more than a
dozen states, and even the creation of pardon-proof sentences have had the inevitable effect of
keeping many offenders in custody well into old age.106
From a health perspective, inmates appear to experience accelerated aging compared to
members of the general population.107 From the age of 50 onward, incarcerated people are
significantly more likely to suffer from chronic health problems or disabilities compared to

Including those on parole or probation, the total population of people in custody or under supervision
of the criminal justice system is aging more rapidly than the US population as a whole. Brie A. Williams
et al., Addressing the Aging Crisis in U.S. Criminal Justice Health Care, 60 J. AM. GERIATRICS SOC. 1150, 1150
(2012), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3374923/pdf/nihms363409.pdf.
102 See Prison Population Continues to Age, PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS (Oct. 3, 2014), pewtrusts.org/en/about
/news-room/news/2014/10/03/prison-population-continues-to-age (citing Bureau of Justice Statistics data).
See also RON H. ADAY, AGING PRISONERS: CRISIS IN AMERICAN CORRECTIONS 3 (2003) (noting that the
elderly are now the fastest-growing age group of prisoners).
103 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247282, PRISONERS IN 2013, at 8 tbl.7 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub
/pdf/p13.pdf.
104 RON H. ADAY, AGING PRISONERS: CRISIS IN AMERICAN CORRECTIONS 2–3 (2003).
105 See, e.g., id. at 7, 10–11.
106 See, e.g., id. at 10–11.
107 See, e.g., Brie A. Williams, Addressing the Aging Crisis in U.S. Criminal Justice Health Care, 60 J. AM.
GERIATRICS SOC. 1150, 1151 (2012), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3374923/pdf/nihms363409.pdf
(noting that at least 20 state departments of correction and the National Commission on Correctional
Health Care consider inmates over 50 or over 55 to be “older”).
101

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

19

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

those in the outside world.108 Prisoners over 55 suffer from an average of three chronic health
conditions, such as hypertension, diabetes, and pulmonary disease, and around one out of five
have a mental illness.109
With age also comes increased susceptibility to heat-related illness.110 After around age 65,
the natural decline of the central nervous system over time compromises the body’s ability to
regulate temperature, increasing the risk of illness or death from extreme heat.111 Elderly
individuals who develop full-blown heatstroke have only around a 20 percent chance of
survival.112 Inmates may suffer the inevitable decrease in ability to regulate internal body
temperature earlier than those in the general population.113 Older inmates are also at greater risk
of heat-related illness than their younger fellows because they take more medication, suffer
from more chronic health problems, and are much more likely to be overweight or obese.114
Cognitive impairment afflicts a large portion of older inmates at a far greater rate than
outside the world of corrections. Risk factors for cognitive impairment are common among
prisoners, including a history of substance abuse, traumatic head injury, and post-traumatic
stress disorder.115 According to one study, two out of every five inmates aged 55 or older had a

Id. at 1150.
See id. at 1151; Mike Mitka, Aging Prisoners Stressing Health Care System, 292 JAMA 423, 424 (2004); RON
H. ADAY, AGING PRISONERS: CRISIS IN AMERICAN CORRECTIONS 92–94 (2003).
110 See, e.g., Barbara K. Bailes & Kathleen Reeve, Prevention of Heat-Related Illness, J. FOR NURSE PRAC., Mar.
2007, at 161, 163–64.
111 See, e.g., Heatstroke Risk Factors, MAYO CLINIC (July 12, 2014), mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heatstroke/basics/risk-factors/con-20032814.
112 See Barbara K. Bailes & Kathleen Reeve, Prevention of Heat-Related Illness, J. FOR NURSE PRAC., Mar. 2007,
at 161, 164.
113 See Prison Population Continues to Age, PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS (Oct. 3, 2014), pewtrusts.org/en/about
/news-room/news/2014/10/03/prison-population-continues-to-age (citing TINA CHIU, IT’S ABOUT TIME:
AGING PRISONERS, INCREASING COSTS, AND GERIATRIC RELEASE (Apr. 2010), vera.org/sites/default/files
/resources/downloads/Its-about-time-aging-prisoners-increasing-costs-and-geriatric-release.pdf).
114 See, e.g., Barbara K. Bailes & Kathleen Reeve, Prevention of Heat-Related Illness, J. FOR NURSE PRAC., Mar.
2007, at 161, 163; BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248491, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF STATE AND FEDERAL
PRISONERS AND JAIL INMATES, 2011–12, at 17 app. tbl.2–3 (2015), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpsfpji1112.pdf
(reporting incidence of excess weight).
115 See Brie A. Williams et al., Addressing the Aging Crisis in U.S. Criminal Justice Health Care, 60 J. AM.
GERIATRICS SOC. 1150, 1153 (2012), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3374923/pdf/nihms363409.pdf.
108
109

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

20

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

diagnosis of cognitive impairment in their medical records.116 The actual incidence could well be
much higher, since the study only captured diagnosed cognitive impairment.
People with cognitive impairment often exercise poor judgment. Older inmates whose
cognition is impaired may be less capable of caring for themselves in conditions of extreme heat
by, for example, increasing their fluid intake. This is particularly true because older adults are
less able to rely on subjective feelings of thirst to remain properly hydrated.117 They are also less
aware of changes in skin temperature and may be less capable of recognizing when heat is
causing their health to deteriorate.118
Needless to say, as the prison population ages, the cost of inmate health care increases. This
impact on corrections has already reached crisis proportions.119 The National Institute of
Corrections estimates the cost of caring for inmates age 55 and older with chronic or terminal
illnesses to be two or three times the cost of caring for other inmates.120 Other research suggests
that the costs are higher still.121 The larger the share of a state’s incarcerated population that
inmates age 55 or older make up, the higher the state’s per-capita spending on inmate health

See id.
See Gary W. Mack et al., Body Fluid Balance in Dehydrated Healthy Older Men: Thirst and Renal
Osmoregulation, 76 J. APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY 1615, 1621 (1994) (finding that “an attenuated thirst sensation in
dehydrated 65+ subjects is translated directly into reduced fluid intake”).
118 See John Sanko, Thermoregulation: Considerations for Aging People, in GERIATRIC REHABILITATION MANUAL
53, 55 (Timothy L. Kauffman et al. eds., 2d ed. 2007); Brie A. Williams et al., Addressing the Aging Crisis in
U.S. Criminal Justice Health Care, 60 J. AM. GERIATRICS SOC. 1150, 1154 (2012), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc
/articles/PMC3374923/pdf/nihms363409.pdf (noting need for further research into prevalence and
implications of dementia among older prisoners).
119 See, e.g., id. at 1150 (“Criminal justice institutes, policy-makers, and the media increasingly view the
growing older prisoner population as a health and economic crisis for the criminal justice system and
communities . . . .”).
120 See Prison Population Continues to Age, PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS (Oct. 3, 2014), pewtrusts.org/en/about
/news-room/news/2014/10/03/prison-population-continues-to-age (citing B. JAYE ANNO ET AL.,
CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE: ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF ELDERLY, CHRONICALLY ILL, AND TERMINALLY ILL
INMATES (Feb. 2004), static.nicic.gov/Library/018735.pdf).
121 See, e.g., Brie A. Williams et al., Addressing the Aging Crisis in U.S. Criminal Justice Health Care, 60 J. AM.
GERIATRICS SOC. 1150, 1151 (2012), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3374923/pdf/nihms363409.pdf;
Prison Population Continues to Age, PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS (Oct. 3, 2014), pewtrusts.org/en/about/newsroom/news/2014/10/03/prison-population-continues-to-age (citing Cyrus Ahalt et al., Paying the Price: The
Pressing Need for Quality, Cost, and Outcomes Data to Improve Correctional Health Care for Older Prisoners, 61
J. AM. GERIATRICS SOC. 2013–19 (2013)).
116
117

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

21

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

tends to be.122 Between 2001 and 2008, at least five states—Alabama, Arkansas, Maryland,
Montana, and New Hampshire—saw per-capita spending on inmate health more than
double.123
2.3.3.2

Mental Health

Mental illness is significantly more common behind bars than in the population outside.124
In 2010, a third of all inmates suffered from mental illness, nearly two-thirds met the criteria for
an alcohol- or drug-use disorder, and a quarter had to contend with both mental illness and a
substance-abuse disorder.125
The prevalence of mental illness among inmates increases their vulnerability to adverse
health consequences from extreme heat for at least two reasons. First, many medications used to
treat mental illness compromise the body’s ability to regulate its internal temperature. Second,
like aging inmates with cognitive impairment, mentally ill inmates can be less able to think and
act rationally to take care of themselves when the mercury rises and less aware that they are
suffering the effects of hyperthermia.126
2.3.3.3

Physical Health

Chronic health conditions, including heart, lung, kidney, and liver disease, poor circulation,
hypertension, obesity, diabetes, psychiatric and neurological impairment, cancer, and a history

See PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS & JOHN D. & CATHERINE T. MACARTHUR FOUND., STATE PRISON HEALTH
CARE SPENDING 1 (July 2014), pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2014/07
/StatePrisonHealthCareSpendingReport.pdf.
123 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 239672, STATE CORRECTIONS EXPENDITURES, FY 1982–2010, at 7
(rev. 2014) ), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/scefy8210.pdf. While at least 35 states reported increases in percapital spending on inmate health during this period, 8 states—Illinois, Maine, Nevada, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, and West Virginia—reported decreases. See id.
124 See, e.g., PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS & JOHN D. & CATHERINE T. MACARTHUR FOUND., STATE PRISON
HEALTH CARE SPENDING 9 (July 2014), pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2014/07
/StatePrisonHealthCareSpendingReport.pdf (citing Henry J. Steadman et al., Prevalence of Serious Mental
Illness Among Jail Inmates, 60 PSYCHIATRIC SERVS. 761–65 (2009)).
125 See id. (citing NAT’L CTR. ON ADDICTION & SUBSTANCE ABUSE AT COLUMBIA UNIV., BEHIND BARS II:
SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND AMERICA’S PRISON POPULATION (February 2010)).
126 See, e.g., ENVTL. PROT. AGENCY, EPA 430-B-06-005, EXCESSIVE HEAT EVENTS GUIDEBOOK 17 (2006),
epa.gov/heatisland/about/pdf/EHEguide_final.pdf. See also Gates v. Cook, 376 F.3d 323, 334 (5th Cir. 2004)
(noting lower court’s finding that probability of heat-related illness is “dramatically more [extreme] . . .
for mentally ill inmates who often do not take appropriate behavioral steps to deal with the heat”).
122

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

22

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

of previous heatstroke, can increase an individual’s risk of suffering heatstroke or increase the
likelihood of death from hyperthermia.127 A sedentary lifestyle, almost a defining characteristic
of life in correctional facilities, can also increase the risk.128 Those who are not acclimated to high
temperatures are also more susceptible to heat stress.129
The Bureau of Justice Statistics surveyed prison and jail inmates in 2011 and 2012, asking
them to assess their own health.130 The surveys asked about a number of chronic health
conditions that can increase susceptibility to heat stress, including asthma, diabetes, heart and
kidney problems, and hypertension.
To identify both those at risk of future medical needs and those with current medical needs,
the survey asked inmates whether they ever had a chronic condition and whether they
currently had one.131 Five out of ten state and federal prisoners and local jail inmates reported
ever having a chronic condition and four out of ten reported currently having a chronic
condition.132 Almost a quarter of all prisoners and jail inmates reported ever having multiple

See, e.g., Ekta Choudhary & Ambarish Vaidyanathan, Heat Stress Illness Hospitalizations: Environmental
Public Health Tracking Program, 20 States, 2001–2010, 63 MORBIDITY & MORTALITY WKLY. REP.
SURVEILLANCE SUMMARIES, Dec. 12, 2014, at 1, cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6313.pdf; NAT’L CLIMATE CHANGE
ADAPTATION RESEARCH FACILITY, CASE STUDY: IMPACTS AND ADAPTATION RESPONSES OF INFRASTRUCTURE
AND COMMUNITIES TO HEATWAVES 44 (2010) (Austl.), nccarf.edu.au/business/sites
/www.nccarf.edu.au.business/files/attached_files_publications/Pub 13_10 Southern Cities Heatwaves Complete Findings.pdf; ENVTL. PROT. AGENCY, EPA 430-B-06-005, EXCESSIVE HEAT EVENTS GUIDEBOOK 17
(2006), epa.gov/heatisland/about/pdf/EHEguide_final.pdf; Heat-Related Deaths—United States, 1999–2003,
55 MORBIDITY & MORTALITY WKLY. REP., 796, 797 tbl. (2006), stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/28686; Roy
Sucholeiki, Heatstroke, 25 SEMINARS IN NEUROLOGY 307, 310 tbl.1 (2005); Heatstroke Risk Factors, MAYO
CLINIC (July 12, 2014), mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heat-stroke/basics/risk-factors/con-20032814;
Preventing Heat-Related Illness, WISC. DEP’T OF HEALTH SERVS. (Jan. 16, 2014), dhs.wisconsin.gov/climate
/weather/heatillness.htm; Extreme Heat: A Prevention Guide to Promote Your Personal Health and Safety, CTRS.
FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION, emergency.cdc.gov/disasters/extremeheat/heat_guide.asp (last
visited Aug. 1, 2015).
128 See Heatstroke Risk Factors, MAYO CLINIC (July 12, 2014), mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heat-stroke
/basics/risk-factors/con-20032814.
129 See Roy Sucholeiki, Heatstroke, 25 SEMINARS IN NEUROLOGY 307, 310 tbl.1 (2005); Barbara K. Bailes &
Kathleen Reeve, Prevention of Heat-Related Illness, J. FOR NURSE PRAC., Mar. 2007, at 161, 164 tbl.1.
130 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248491, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF STATE AND FEDERAL PRISONERS AND
JAIL INMATES 1 (2015), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpsfpji1112.pdf.
131 See id. at 2 (explaining rationale).
132 Id. at 5 tbl.3.
127

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

23

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

chronic conditions.133 Table 2 shows the prevalence among prisoners and jail inmates of ever
having or currently having one of several chronic conditions.
Table 2. Chronic conditions among prisoners and jail inmates
Condition

State & federal prisoners

Local jail inmates

Ever

Current

Ever

Current

High blood pressure/hypertension

30.2%

23.0%

26.3%

20.2%

Asthma

14.9%

11.9%

20.1%

15.6%

Heart-related problems

9.8%

5.1%

10.4%

6.0%

Diabetes/high blood sugar

9.0%

7.4%

7.2%

5.3%

Kidney-related problems

6.1%

3.4%

6.7%

3.8%

Stroke-related problems

1.8%

0.9%

2.3%

1.0%

Source: BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248491, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF STATE AND FEDERAL PRISONERS AND JAIL
INMATES, 2011–12, at 3 tbl.1, 4 tbl.2, 21 app’x tbl.7 (2015), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpsfpji1112.pdf..

One unexpected finding was that among both prisoners and jail inmates the rates of ever
having high blood pressure or diabetes had increased significantly since BJS last surveyed those
populations, as had the rate among jail inmates of ever having asthma.134 The rate of diabetes
among prisoners and jail inmates had roughly doubled and the rate of hypertension was
around one and a half times what earlier surveys showed.135 Among jail inmates, the rate of

Id. at 8.
See id. at 6–7. Previously, the Bureau of Justice Statistics had conducted separate surveys of prisoners
and jail inmates. It last surveyed prisoners in 2004 and jail inmates in 2002. See BUREAU OF JUSTICE
STATISTICS, NCJ 221740, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF PRISONERS (rev. 2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpp.pdf;
BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 210696, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF JAIL INMATES (2006),
bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpji.pdf.
135 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248491, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF STATE AND FEDERAL PRISONERS
AND JAIL INMATES, 2011–12, at 6–7 (2015), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpsfpji1112.pdf. Among prisoners, the
rate of diabetes reported was 483 per 10,000 in 2004 and 899 per 10,000 in 2011–2012. Among jail inmates
it was 361 per 10,000 in 2002 and 723 per 10,000 in 2011–2012. Among prisoners, the rate of hypertension
reported was 2,093 per 10,000 in 2004 and 3,020 per 10,000 in 2011–2012. Among jail inmates it was 1,803
per 10,000 in 2002 and 2,626 per 10,000 in 2011–2012. The asthma rate reported by jail inmates was 1,502
per 10,000 in 2002 and 2,012 per 10,000 in 2011–2012. Id. at 6–7, & file mpsfpji1112f03.csv (2015), available
at bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5219 (click on “Comma-delimited format (CSV)” to download data
archive, then unzip downloaded archive “mpsfpji1112.zip,” then open file “mpsfpji1112f03.csv”).
133
134

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

24

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

asthma had gone up by about a third.136 Noting that the newest survey had actually used more
restrictive wording when asking about chronic conditions, BJS called these “true increases.”137
Female inmates were significantly more likely to report ever having a chronic condition
than males. Among state and federal prisoners, 65 percent of females and 50 percent of males
reported ever having a chronic condition; among local jail inmates the respective percentages
were 67 percent of females and 48 percent of males.138 Prevalence of ever having a chronic
condition also varied significantly by age: 73 percent of state and federal prisoners and 79
percent of local jail inmates age 50 or older reported ever having a chronic condition, compared
to 28 percent of prisoners and 38 percent of jail inmates in the 18-to-24 age group.139
The survey also found that clear majorities of prisoners and jail inmates were overweight,
obese, or morbidly obese.140 Male prisoners and jail inmates were more likely to be overweight
than their female counterparts, but obesity and morbid obesity were significantly more
prevalent among females than among males.141 Prisoners and jail inmates age 50 or older were
much more likely to be overweight, obese, or morbidly obese than those in the 18-to-24 age
group.142 As noted previously, excess body weight is a risk factor for increased susceptibility to
heat stress.

See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 248491, MEDICAL PROBLEMS OF STATE AND FEDERAL PRISONERS
AND JAIL INMATES, 2011–12, at 6–7 (2015), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mpsfpji1112.pdf.
137 Id. at 6.
138 See id. at 5 tbl.3. Note that the demographic makeup of the prison population is not identical to the
demographic makeup of the jail population. Consequently, the data reported above cannot be read to
show that female jail inmates are more likely to report ever having a chronic condition than female prison
inmates. This caveat applies to the data throughout this section.
139 See id. at 5 tbl.3.
140 Among prisoners, 46 percent were overweight, 26 percent were obese, and 2 percent were morbidly
obese. The situation was slightly better for jail inmates: 39 percent were overweight, 20 percent were
obese, and 2 percent were morbidly obese. Id. at 8 tbl.5. The survey used the body mass index to
determine if a person was overweight (BMI of 25.0 to 29.9), obese (BMI of 30.0 to 39.9), or morbidly obese
(BMI of 40 or greater). Id. at 15.
141 Among male prisoners, 47 percent were overweight, 25 percent were obese, and 2 percent were
morbidly obese. Among female prisoners, 35 percent were overweight, 37 percent were obese, and 6
percent were morbidly obese. With regard to jail inmates, among males 40 percent were overweight, 19
percent were obese, and 1 percent were morbidly obese. Among females, 32 percent were overweight, 29
percent were obese, and 8 percent were morbidly obese. Id. at 17 app. tbl.2–3.
142 Nearly 80 percent of prisoners and 63 percent of jail inmates age 50 or over were at least overweight,
compared to 57 percent of prisoners and 46 percent of jail inmates age 18 to 24. Id. at 17 app. tbl.2–3.
136

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

25

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

2.3.3.4

Drug Use

The BJS health survey found that 66 percent of prisoners and 40 percent of jail inmates with
current chronic conditions were taking prescription medication.143 Certain drugs can interfere
with thermoregulation, the body’s ability to keep internal temperature around 98.6°F.144 Other
drugs can increase metabolic heat production, constrict blood vessels, impair sweating, and
have other effects that raise the risk of heat-related illness. Inmates (and correctional officers)
who take any of these drugs may be more susceptible to adverse health consequences of heat
and should be closely monitored during extreme heat events. A federal court of appeals recently
upheld district court orders that pretrial detainees taking psychotropic drugs, which are among
those that compromise thermoregulation, be held in cells where temperatures do not exceed
85°F.145
Anticholinergic drugs and drugs that have anticholinergic effects inhibit sweating, reducing
the body’s ability to eliminate excess heat.146 These medicines include some antihistamines,147
parkinsonism medications, belladonna alkaloids such as atropine and scopolamine,

Id. at 10 tbl.7. Among those with chronic conditions who were not taking prescription medication, 20
percent of prisoners and 39 percent of jail inmates explained that they had not seen a doctor about their
condition. Id.
144 See K. C. Mendoza & J. D. Griffin, Thermoregulation, in ENCYCLOPEDIA OF BEHAVIORAL NEUROSCIENCE
400, 400 (George F. Koob et al. eds. 2010). For detailed discussions of the mechanisms by which drugs
interfere with thermoregulation, see generally Peter Lomax & Eduard Schönbaum, The Effects of Drugs on
Thermoregulation During Exposure to Hot Environments, in 115 PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH 193–204 (H. S.
Sharma & J. Westman eds., 1998); Wesley G. Clark & J. M. Lipton, Drug-Related Heatstroke, 26
PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS 345–88 (1984).
145 See Graves v. Arpaio, 623 F.3d 1043, 1049 (9th Cir. 2010) (“Accepting the district court’s factual finding
that temperatures in excess of 85°F greatly increase the risk of heat-related illness for pretrial detainees
taking psychotropic medications, it follows that the Eighth Amendment prohibits housing such pretrial
detainees in areas where the temperature exceeds 85°F.”).
146 See Mary Linda Stotter Cuddy, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 238,
242–43 (2004); Mauricio Martinez et al., Drug-Associated Heat Stroke, 95 S. MED. J. 799, 801 (2002).
147 A recent study of older prisoners in Texas found a high incidence of inappropriate prescription and
use of antihistamines. See Brie A. Williams et al., Medication Prescribing Practices for Older Prisoners in the
Texas Prison System, 100 AM. J. OF PUB. HEALTH 756–60 (2010), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2836339
/pdf/756.pdf.
143

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

26

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

neuroleptics (a broad category of antipsychotics), antispasmodics, bronchodilators, and tricyclic
antidepressants.148
Many antipsychotic drugs, which are widely used in corrections, can affect central
thermoregulatory processes, causing the body to overheat by reducing cutaneous blood flow,
and can also have anticholinergic effects.149 Among these are phenothiazines, thioxanthenes, and
butyrophenones.150 Clozapine, used to treat schizophrenia, is also associated with increased
incidence of heatstroke.151 According to an internal report by the University of Texas Medical
Branch, which provides health care to Texas inmates, nearly 80% of the patients on its mental
health caseload in January 2010 were being treated with psychotropic medications.152
Sympathomimetic drugs, a group of medications that includes amphetamines,
methamphetamines, ephedrine, and pseudoephedrine, elevate body temperatures, constrict
blood vessels (reducing the body’s ability to shed excess heat), and interfere with the
thermoregulatory process at a basic level.153
Diuretic medications, which promote the excretion of water through urination, can cause
dehydration, a particular danger in conditions of extreme heat.154 Monoamine oxidase
inhibitors, benzatropine, trifluoperazine, and ephedra-containing dietary supplements raise

See Mary Linda Stotter Cuddy, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 238,
243, 244 tbl.1 (2004); Mauricio Martinez et al., Drug-Associated Heat Stroke, 95 S. MED. J. 799, 801 (2002);
Peter Lomax & Eduard Schönbaum, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation During Exposure to Hot
Environments, in 115 PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH 193, 199 (H. S. Sharma & J. Westman eds., 1998).
149 See Mauricio Martinez et al., Drug-Associated Heat Stroke, 95 S. MED. J. 799, 801 (2002).
150 See id. at 801–802; Peter Lomax & Eduard Schönbaum, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation During
Exposure to Hot Environments, in 115 PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH 193, 197 (H. S. Sharma & J. Westman
eds., 1998).
151 See Jeffrey S. S. Kwok & Thomas Y. K. Chan, Recurrent Heat-Related Illnesses During Antipsychotic
Treatment, 39 ANNALS PHARMACOTHERAPY 1940, 1941 (2005).
152 BEN G. RAIMER ET AL., HEALTH CARE IN THE TEXAS PRISON SYSTEM: A LOOMING FISCAL CRISIS 5 (2010),
available at utmbhealth.com/doc/Page.asp?PageID=DOC000496. The report noted that “[m]ore than
864,000 prescriptions for psychotropic medications were filled for TDCJ offenders in FY 2009,
representing an increase of nearly 114% since FY 2002.” Id.
153 See Mary Linda Stotter Cuddy, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 238,
242 (2004); Mauricio Martinez et al., Drug-Associated Heat Stroke, 95 S. MED. J. 799, 801 (2002).
154 See, e.g., Jeffrey S. S. Kwok & Thomas Y. K. Chan, Recurrent Heat-Related Illnesses During Antipsychotic
Treatment, 39 ANNALS PHARMACOTHERAPY 1940, 1941 (2005).
148

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

27

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

body temperatures by increasing metabolism.155 Other medications and substances that may
contribute to heat-related illness include lithium and some anticonvulsants, antiemetics,
benzodiazepines, beta blockers, calcium-channel blockers, laxatives, stimulants for attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder, tranquilizers, and vasoconstrictors.156
Some illegal drugs, such as cocaine and ecstasy, also raise the risk of suffering heat-related
illness.157 While correctional departments face practical challenges gauging prevalence of illegaldrug use within their facilities, and may have disincentives to acknowledge that it takes place at
all, they should at least be aware of its implications for inmate health during periods of elevated
temperatures.158

2.4 Correctional Staff Population
One in nine state employees works in a prison.159 For correctional officers (COs), workplace
conditions are in large part the same as inmate housing conditions. Thus, rising indoor
temperatures present both correctional issues and labor issues. This section provides an
overview of the CO population in US prisons and jails.
2.4.1

Size

The Occupational Outlook Handbook, put out by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, says that
COs held roughly 469,500 jobs in 2012, though it does not break this number down at all or

See Mary Linda Stotter Cuddy, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 238,
242–43 (2004); Theresa Pluth Yeo, Heat Stroke: A Comprehensive Review, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 280, 283
tbl.1 (2004).
156 See Heatstroke Risk Factors, MAYO CLINIC (July 12, 2014), mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heat-stroke
/basics/risk-factors/con-20032814; Preventing Heat-Related Illness, WISC. DEP’T OF HEALTH SERVS. (Jan. 16,
2014), dhs.wisconsin.gov/climate/weather/heatillness.htm; James L. Glazer, Management of Heatstroke and
Heat Exhaustion, 71 AM. FAM. PHYSICIAN 2133, 2135 tbl.1 (2005), aafp.org/afp/2005/0601/p2133.pdf; Mary
Linda Stotter Cuddy, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 238, 243 (2004).
157 See, e.g., Theresa Pluth Yeo, Heat Stroke: A Comprehensive Review, 15 AACN CLINICAL ISSUES 280, 283
tbl.1, 284 (2004); Peter Lomax & Eduard Schönbaum, The Effects of Drugs on Thermoregulation During
Exposure to Hot Environments, in 115 PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH 193, 198, 200–202 (H. S. Sharma & J.
Westman eds., 1998).
158 The same certainly goes for illegal drug use by correctional officers.
159 ROBERT A. FERGUSON, INFERNO: AN ANATOMY OF AMERICAN PUNISHMENT 3 (2014).
155

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

28

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

indicate its source.160 The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ Census of State and Federal Correctional
Facilities and Census of Jails both provide some data on the number of people who work in
state and federal facilities, though, as noted earlier, neither census has been updated recently.
The Jails in Indian Country series is more current.
The 2005 Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities found that about 420,000
employees were working in such facilities at the end of 2005.161 Of these, 295,000—roughly twothirds—were COs, supervisors, and others who worked in direct contact with inmates and
therefore worked at least some of the time in the same environment in which inmates lived.162
The 2006 Census of Jails counted around 231,500 jail employees.163 The 2013 Jails in Indian
Country survey identified 1,642 employees working in 73 facilities, 1,106 of them (again, about
two-thirds) in direct contact with inmates at least half of the time.164
2.4.2

Health

Information about COs’ physical health is not easy to come by even though, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, “correctional officers have one of the highest rates of injuries and
illnesses of all occupations” because of exposure to violence and contagious diseases in the
workplace.165 Chronic illnesses and drug use (both legal and illegal) certainly put some
correctional workers at greater risk of suffering heat stress. COs who work in facilities that lack
air conditioning may be at greater risk than inmates because they may be more physically active

See Correctional Officers, in BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, OCCUPATIONAL OUTLOOK HANDBOOK, 2014–15
EDITION (2014), bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/correctional-officers.htm.
161 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 222182, CENSUS OF STATE AND FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL
FACILITIES, 2005, at 20 app. tbl.12 (2008), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf. Since numbers were not
reported for several facilities, the actual number of correctional employees was higher. The Bureau of
Justice Statistics estimated the actual total to be approximately 445,055. See id. at 7, 20 app. tbl.12.
162 See id. at 4, 20 app. tbl.12.
163 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 230188, CENSUS OF JAIL FACILITIES, 2006, at 23 tbl.12 (2011),
bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cjf06.pdf. The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated the actual total to be closer to
234,000. See id. at 23 tbl.12, 27.
164 See BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247017, JAILS IN INDIAN COUNTRY, 2013, at 7 (2014), bjs.gov
/content/pub/pdf/jic13.pdf.
165 Correctional Officers, in BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, OCCUPATIONAL OUTLOOK HANDBOOK, 2014–15
EDITION (2014), bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/correctional-officers.htm (Work Environment tab).
160

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

29

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

and burdened by heavier clothing and work equipment, all of which may result in rapid
accumulation of metabolic heat.166
Texas COs have sounded alarms about the deleterious impact on their health from working
in the state’s prisons, which generally lack air conditioning. In a 2013 op-ed piece that ran in the
New York Times, union leader Lance Lowry described seeing fellow officers “pass out from the
heat” and noted that during the previous year, “92 state correctional officers reported heatrelated illnesses as a result of working in prisons lacking climate control.”167 According to
Lowry,
a physician’s examination isn’t required for applicants—even though they’ll be
expected to work in a physically demanding job up to 12 hours a day, sometimes
in heavy Kevlar vests, often in extreme heat. And just as the inmate population is
aging, the officer population is getting older, too: with the economic downturn,
we’ve seen retired officers returning to the job. I once worked with an officer
who was 82 years old. Like the older inmates, many of these older officers take
medications that make them particularly sensitive to the heat, including
antidepressants and diuretics to control high blood pressure.168
The paucity of information on COs’ physical health, particularly as it relates to their
susceptibility to heat stress, makes it difficult to gauge what adaptive measures may be needed
to ensure their wellbeing. Accounts like those of Lowry, however, underline the potential risks
to the correctional workforce from working in inadequately cooled environments. It goes
without saying that when COs succumb to heat stress, more is at stake than their own health.

See Sheila Arbury et al., Heat Illness and Death Among Workers: United States, 2012–2013, 63 MORBIDITY &
MORTALITY WKLY. REP. 661, 662 (2014), cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm6331.pdf (“Heat-related deaths often
occur in occupations in which workers are performing tasks in hot environments, causing them to build
metabolic heat faster than their bodies can release heat and cool down.”).
167 Lance Lowry, Opinion, In Texas, Inmates and Officers Swelter, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 22, 2013, at A29,
nytimes.com/2013/11/22/opinion/in-texas-inmates-and-officers-swelter.html.
168 Id. (paragraph break omitted).
166

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

30

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

2.5 Correctional Reforms
Starting around 2007, concerns about rising correctional costs, prison overcrowding
(particularly in California), and growing doubts about the efficacy of mass incarceration began
to provide the impetus for what has become a significant wave of reform in corrections.169 Many
states have followed a “justice reinvestment” approach to correctional reform, redirecting
correctional dollars into evidence-based policies and practices shown to improve public safety
while reducing incarceration rates.170 States have revisited sentencing policies, including those
that imposed mandatory minimums and required enhanced sentences for repeat offenders.
They have focused attention and resources on alternatives to incarceration for low-level
offenses, including drug and mental-health treatment. They have streamlined the parole process
and invested in more effective probation and parole supervision aimed at getting former
prisoners back on their feet without reoffending.171 For the most part, these reforms have
enjoyed bipartisan backing and public support. In 2010, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, part of
the US Department of Justice, and the Public Safety Performance Project at the Pew Charitable
Trusts partnered to launch the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, which works with a number of

Some advocates of reform worry that current policy discussions have marginalized concerns such as
racial equity, human rights, and basic fairness, noting that an improving economy could undercut the
appetite for reform. See, e.g., OPPORTUNITY AGENDA, AN OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC OPINION AND DISCOURSE ON
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUES 3 (2014), opportunityagenda.org/files/field_file/2014.08.23CriminalJusticeReport-FINAL_0.pdf (“The almost exclusive focus on fiscal concerns as the justification
for reform is problematic, as is the absence of a long-term vision of what a model criminal justice system
would look like.”).
170 So-called justice reinvestment states include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut,
Georgia, Hawai‘i, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.
See Justice Reinvestment, JUST. CTR., csgjusticecenter.org/jr (last visited Aug. 1, 2015) (click on “States”).
171 For a helpful chart showing a long list of policy reforms and identifying by year which have been
adopted by specific states, see Sentencing and Corrections Reforms in Justice Reinvestment States, PEW
CHARITABLE TRUSTS (May 2014), pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2013
/PSPP_Sentencing_and_Corrections_Reform_Matrix.pdf.
169

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

31

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

other public and private organizations to provide technical assistance to states and localities as
they design and implement such data-driven reforms.172
Even though the need to adapt corrections in the face of climate change has not informed
these recent reforms, policies that can reduce the size of the incarcerated population without
compromising public safety contribute to the adaptation cause. Simply put, the smaller the
number of people held in jails and prisons, the easier it will be to protect the inmate population
and the correctional workforce and to maintain the facilities of confinement as temperatures
rise.

2.6 Structural Vulnerabilities to Extreme Heat
The risks that extreme heat presents to the correctional sector reflect the particular
characteristics surveyed above. Its greatest vulnerability by far is its vast population of inmates,
with their elevated susceptibility to heat-related illness and limited capacity to care for
themselves. Rising temperatures also jeopardize the correctional officers who must perform
difficult and stressful work in the same conditions in which inmates live. Electrical systems and
other critical components of penal facilities themselves may also be threatened by extreme
heat.173
The challenge of protecting inmates from heat and other harmful impacts of climate change
is made all the more difficult by structural factors over which correctional departments have
little or no control. No matter how many inmates are placed in correctional custody, no matter
how long they are sentenced to remain in custody, no matter how unhealthy they may be, no
matter what particular security risks they may pose, correctional departments must be prepared
to ensure their basic wellbeing, whatever the cost, notwithstanding scarce financial resources
and often inadequate facilities.

See What Is JRI?, BUREAU JUST. ASSISTANCE, bja.gov/programs/justicereinvestment/what_is_jri.html (last
visited Aug. 1, 2015); Public Safety Performance Project, PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS, pewtrusts.org/en/projects
/public-safety-performance-project (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
173 For a discussion of the impacts of heat waves on the electricity generating sector and recommendations
for adaptation to minimize those impacts, see SOFIA AIVALIOTI, ELECTRICITY SECTOR ADAPTATION TO HEAT
WAVES (2015), web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/climate-change/white_paper__electricity_sector_adaptation_to_heat_waves.pdf
172

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

32

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

This section has provided an overview of the structural features of corrections such as the
populations of inmates and correctional officers and the facilities in which inmates are housed.
The next section explores legal considerations that shape the challenges posed by heat and other
impacts of climate change, as well as the options available for meeting those challenges.

3

HEAT, CORRECTIONS, AND THE LAW

Like any division of government, the correctional sector needs to adapt to our changing
climate so it can continue to fulfill its essential functions. Beyond that basic motive for
adaptation, a number of legal considerations arise in the case of corrections that present further
reasons to adapt. Some of these are unique to corrections, others not. Many amount to, in effect,
another form of vulnerability to climate change that correctional departments face. While these
legal vulnerabilities may be less tangible than physical or technological vulnerabilities such as
the inability to maintain acceptable interior temperatures during heat waves or the location of
prisons on flood plains, they are no less pressing.

3.1 Inmate Litigation
Inmates and their advocates have long looked to the courts for protection against dangerous
or unjustly harsh conditions of confinement. Both constitutional and statutory claims can
compel correctional departments to implement reforms in how they house and care for inmates.
As temperatures rise with the changing climate, correctional departments can expect to see an
increase in heat-based litigation.
3.1.1

Constitutional Claims

Corrections is by far the largest on a very short list of sectors for which the failure to adapt
has constitutional implications.174 This exceptional legal vulnerability provides a strong
incentive for adaptation.

As discussed below, taking people into custody triggers constitutional duties of care. Outside the
correctional context, this occurs in very limited circumstances, such as when people are detained
following arrest, Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital, 463 U.S. 239, 244–45 (1983), and when
individuals are involuntarily committed, Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307, 315–16 (1982).
174

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

33

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids cruel and unusual
punishment.175 This guarantee embodies “broad and idealistic concepts of dignity, civilized
standards, humanity and decency,”176 and requires that penal measures conform to “the
evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.”177 “It is
undisputed that the treatment a prisoner receives in prison and the conditions under which he
is confined are subject to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment.”178 Conditions of confinement
may be “restrictive and even harsh,” and “the Constitution does not mandate comfortable
prisons.”179 But inmates may not be held in conditions that deprive them of “the minimal
civilized measure of life’s necessities.”180
In 1991, the United States Supreme Court recognized warmth as one such essential human
need and observed that “a low cell temperature at night combined with a failure to issue
blankets” could amount to an Eighth Amendment violation.181 Since then, numerous federal
courts have applied the same logic to allegations of a failure to protect inmates against excessive
heat, recognizing that allowing inmates to be exposed to such extreme temperatures may
constitute cruel and unusual punishment.182
Unlike the prison population, which consists primarily of offenders who have been
convicted and sentenced to a term of confinement, much of the jail population is made up of
people who have not yet stood trial. Because those individuals are not in custody for the
purpose of punishment, the Eighth Amendment does not apply to them.183 Instead, the Due

U.S. CONST. amend. VIII. The Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause applies to the states by way of
the Fourteenth Amendment. Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 675 (1962).
176 Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 102 (1976) (quoting Jackson v. Bishop, 404 F.2d 571, 579 (8th Cir. 1968)).
177 Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 101 (1958).
178 Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 31 (1993).
179 Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 347–48 (1981).
180 Id. at 347.
181 Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 304 (1991).
182 E.g., Walker v. Schult, 717 F.3d 119, 128 (2d Cir. 2013); Blackmon v. Garza, 484 F. App’x 866, 870–72
(5th Cir. 2012); Hathaway v. Holder, 491 F. App’x 207, 208 (2d Cir. 2012); Graves v. Arpaio, 623 F.3d 1043,
1049 (9th Cir. 2010); Vasquez v. Frank, 209 F. App’x 538, 541 (7th Cir. 2006); Hearns v. Terhune, 413 F.3d
1036, 1043 (9th Cir. 2005); Chandler v. Crosby, 379 F.3d 1278, 1294 (11th Cir. 2004); Gates v. Cook, 376
F.3d 323, 340 (5th Cir. 2004); Wilson v. Seiter, 893 F.2d 861, 865 (6th Cir. 1990), vacated on other grounds, 501
U.S. 294 (1991).
183 See City of Revere v. Mass. Gen. Hosp., 463 U.S. 239, 244 (1983).
175

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

34

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments protect federal and state pretrial
detainees, respectively, from mistreatment while in custody.184
[W]hen the State takes a person into its custody and holds him there against his
will, the Constitution imposes upon it a corresponding duty to assume some
responsibility for his safety and general well-being. . . . The rationale for this
principle is simple enough: when the State by the affirmative exercise of its
power so restrains an individual’s liberty that it renders him unable to care for
himself, and at the same time fails to provide for his basic human needs—e.g.,
food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and reasonable safety—it transgresses the
substantive limits on state action set by the Eighth Amendment and the Due
Process Clause.185
Indeed, “the due process rights of a [pretrial detainee] . . . are at least as great as the Eighth
Amendment protections available to a convicted prisoner.”186
Current inmates and detainees, as well as former inmates, can assert claims based on
allegedly unconstitutional conditions of confinement.187 The survivors of deceased inmates can
bring such claims as well.188
As temperatures inside correctional facilities rise with climate change, constitutional claims
brought by inmates and their survivors will become more common and will arise in
jurisdictions that did not previously see litigation concerning extreme heat conditions.
Correctional departments that fail to adapt to the changing climate will become increasingly
vulnerable to such suits. On the other hand, correctional departments that make diligent

E.g., id.; Bistrian v. Levi, 696 F.3d 352, 367 (3d Cir. 2012); Caiozzo v. Koreman, 581 F.3d 63, 69 (2d Cir.
2009).
185 DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 489 U.S. 189, 199–200 (1989) (citations omitted).
186 Mass. Gen. Hosp., 463 U.S. at 244.
187 See, e.g., Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 733 (2002) (suit brought by former inmate).
188 As of August 2015, the survivors of numerous deceased Texas inmates alleged to have died in custody
because of exposure to extreme heat had suits pending in US District Court for the Southern District of
Texas. See Bailey v. Livingston, No. 4:14-cv-1698; Caddell v. Livingston, 4:14-cv-3323; Hinojosa v.
Livingston, No. 4:14-cv-3311; Martone v. Livingston, No. 4:13-cv-3369; McCollum v. Livingston, No. 4:14cv-3253; Webb v. Livingston, No. 4:14-cv-3302.
184

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

35

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

adaptation efforts can reduce if not eliminate their exposure in two ways. First, and most
obviously, successful adaptation can prevent or rectify unconstitutional conditions of
confinement.189 Second, even partially successful adaptation efforts may defeat this kind of suit
by making it impossible for litigants to prove their cases.
To prevail on a claim that particular conditions of confinement violate the Constitution, a
plaintiff must establish two elements, whether proceeding under the Cruel and Unusual
Punishments Clause of the Eighth Amendment or under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth or
Fourteenth Amendment.190 First, a plaintiff must show that the challenged conditions, “alone, or
in combination,”191 objectively pose a “substantial risk of harm,”192 even if no harm has yet
occurred.193 Second, a plaintiff must show that state officials were “subjectively aware of the
risk” and, despite that knowledge, acted or failed to act with “deliberate indifference” to the
danger presented to the health or safety of inmates.194 Robust adaptation efforts could make it
impossible for inmates or their survivors to make this second necessary showing, since “prison
officials who actually knew of a substantial risk to inmate health or safety may be found free
from liability if they responded reasonably to the risk, even if the harm ultimately was not
averted.”195
Defending against constitutional claims is expensive. On top of their own litigation costs,
which may include hiring outside counsel and expert witnesses, defendants must pay the legal

Note, however, that actual harm already suffered due to conditions that have since been remedied
could still provide the basis for an award of monetary damages.
190 E.g., King v. Kramer, 763 F.3d 635, 640 (7th Cir. 2014); Jackson v. Buckman, 756 F.3d 1060, 1065–66 (8th
Cir. 2014); Doe v. Robertson, 751 F.3d 383, 387–88 (5th Cir. 2014); Keith v. DeKalb County, 749 F.3d 1034,
1044 n.35 (11th Cir. 2014); Thomas v. Cumberland Cty., 749 F.3d 217, 223 n.4 (3d Cir. 2014); Caiozzo v.
Koreman, 581 F.3d 63, 71 (2d Cir. 2009).
191 Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 347 (1981).
192 Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994).
193 See Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 32–33 (1993) (rejecting argument Eighth Amendment “does not
protect against prison conditions that merely threaten to cause health problems in the future, no matter
how grave and imminent the threat”).
194 Farmer, 511 U.S. at 829. Subjective awareness of a risk may be inferred where the risk of harm is
obvious. Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 738 (2002).
195 Farmer, 511 U.S. at 844.
189

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

36

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

fees of successful plaintiffs and any money damages that are awarded.196 They also face the
possibility of having to implement court-ordered reforms, which can involve considerable
expense and may force them to take measures beyond those they would have chosen had they
proactively addressed excessive heat conditions.
Ironically, however, having to comply with court orders can push underfunded correctional
departments toward the front of the line for state spending. State legislatures that might
otherwise resist spending on correctional institutions have little choice in the matter when a
court has ordered corrective measures to cure a constitutional violation. Simply put, “the lack of
adequate funds cannot justify unconstitutional treatment of prisoners.”197
In order to understand how these legal principles can apply in the context of rising
temperatures due to climate change, it is helpful to examine cases in which inmates brought
constitutional claims based on their confinement in conditions of high heat and humidity. The
following two examples of Eighth Amendment litigation come from Mississippi and Louisiana,
states where extreme heat is no theoretical future possibility. Both states are within the Fifth
Circuit of the federal court system and the plaintiffs in both cases happened to be inmates on
death row. Neither of those facts, however, made the legal issues or their analysis atypical.
3.1.1.1

Example 1: Mississippi State Penitentiary in Parchman, Unit 32

In 2002, Willie Russell, an inmate on Mississippi’s death row, Unit 32-C198 of the Mississippi
State Penitentiary in Parchman, filed a class-action suit in US District Court against officials of
the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), alleging that extreme temperatures and

Courts typically exercise the discretion that the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. §
1988(b) (2015), gives them to award attorneys’ fees and expenses to plaintiffs who prevail on
constitutional claims brought, as these cases are, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Courts can also require
defendants to pay the fees of experts retained by successful plaintiffs. § 1988(c). The Prison Litigation
Reform Act also provides for awards of attorneys’ fees, subject to certain limits. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d)
(2015).
197 Johnson v. Bowers, 884 F.2d 1053, 1055 (8th Cir. 1989) (citing Campbell v. Cauthron, 623 F.2d 503, 508
(8th Cir. 1980)). See also, e.g., Smith v. Sullivan, 611 F.2d 1039, 1043–44 (5th Cir. 1980) (“inadequate
funding will not excuse the perpetuation of unconstitutional conditions of confinement”); Detainees of
Brooklyn House of Det. for Men v. Malcolm, 520 F.2d 392, 399 (2d Cir. 1975) (“Inadequate resources of
finances can never be an excuse for depriving detainees of their constitutional rights.”).
198 Unit 32-C was a section of Unit 32, Mississippi’s supermax facility, which opened in 1990.
196

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

37

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

humidity, an uncontrolled mosquito infestation, and other conditions on death row subjected
him and his fellow inmates to cruel and unusual punishment.199 Based on the evidence
presented at a bench trial, the trial judge made the following findings of fact with regard to
temperature, humidity, and mosquitos:
The summer temperatures in the Mississippi Delta average in the nineties with
high humidity, and Unit 32, for the most part, is not an air-conditioned
facility. . . . There are industrial type fans in the hallways to help with air
circulation, and most inmates have smaller fans. Relief from the heat can be
obtained by keeping the windows open in the cell using fans [sic]. However,
keeping the windows open increases the mosquito population in the cells . . . .
Generally, the ambient temperature in the cells is within reasonable limits except
during the summer months. The court finds that the ventilation in Unit 32–C is
inadequate to afford prisoners a minimal level of comfort during the summer
months. While temperatures obviously run high during the summer months in
Mississippi, inmates on lockdown status, such as the inmates on Death Row,
must rely on the Mississippi Department of Corrections for minimal relief. The
probability of heat-related illness is extreme at Unit 32–C, and is dramatically
more so for mentally ill inmates who often do not take appropriate behavioral
steps to deal with the heat. Also, the medications commonly given to treat
various medical problems interfere with the body’s ability to maintain a normal
temperature. The inmates are not afforded extra showers, ice water, or fans if
they don’t have fans when the heat index is 90 or above. The court finds that the
heat problem extends to all of Unit 32 and possibly throughout Parchman.
The heat problem also exacerbates the problem of pest control.
Mosquitoes in Mississippi and the Delta, in particular, are a problem that cannot
be eliminated. The court finds, however, that the problem must be addressed and
the impact lessened, especially with the incidence of West Nile virus, a mosquito199

See Russell v. Johnson, No. 1:02-cv-261, 2003 WL 22208029, *1 (N.D. Miss. May 21, 2003).
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

38

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

born disease, increasing in Mississippi. The court finds that inadequate screening
on the cell windows causes the inmates to choose between suffering from the
heat or increasing the mosquitoes in their cells. The problems of heat and
mosquitoes must be addressed to provide the plaintiffs with conditions that
would meet minimal constitutional standards.200
The trial court found that such conditions posed a substantial risk of serious harm and that
MDOC officials knew of this risk because it was obvious.201 Implicitly finding that the officials’
acts or omissions in light of this knowledge demonstrated deliberate indifference, the court
concluded that the heat and other challenged conditions constituted cruel and unusual
punishment.202
Turning to remedies, the trial court ordered prison officials to closely monitor the heat
index—a combined measure of air temperature and relative humidity203—in the individual
housing tiers.204
If the heat index reaches 90 degrees or above, the defendants will insure that each
cell is equipped with a fan, that ice water is available to each inmate, and that
each inmate may take one shower during each day when the heat index is 90
degrees or above. As an alternative, the defendants may provide fans, ice water,
and daily showers during the months of May through September.205

Id. at *2–3 (subheading omitted).
Id. at *5.
202 See id. at *5 (applying Farmer deliberate-indifference test); see also Gates v. Cook, 376 F.3d 323, 335 (5th
Cir. 2004) (noting that Russell court found deliberate indifference). While commending the state officials
for obtaining accreditation of the Mississippi State Penitentiary by the American Correctional Association
during the course of the litigation, the court dismissed the notion that accreditation might moot the issues
in the case or insure that conditions at the facility were constitutional. See Russell, 2003 WL 22208029, at
*2, *5 (citing Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 190 (2002)).
203 See, e.g., Heat Index, NAT’L WEATHER SERV., srh.weather.gov/jetstream/global/hi.htm (last modified Oct.
21, 2011).
204 See Russell, 2003 WL 22208029, at *5.
205 Id. The court also ordered the defendants to “insure that all cell windows are repaired and screened
with 18 gauge window screen or better.” Id.
200
201

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

39

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

The court cautioned state officials that it would not consider “monetary considerations . . . as a
legitimate reason for non-compliance.”206 The court also ordered the state to pay the plaintiffs’
reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses.207
The Mississippi defendants made a number of arguments on appeal, including that much of
the injunctive relief was not required because MDOC was “already meeting, intending to meet,
or attempting to meet the standards enunciated by the trial court”; that Parchman’s
accreditation by the American Correctional Association (ACA) proved that conditions at the
facility did not violate the Eighth Amendment; that none of the injunctions was based on an
Eighth Amendment violation; and that no Unit 32-C inmate had ever suffered a serious heatrelated illness.208 The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected all these arguments and
held that the constitutional violations, including the heat and mosquito conditions, justified the
specific injunctive relief ordered.209
On the issue of whether the injunctive relief was necessary, the Fifth Circuit noted that a
defendant’s voluntary conduct can moot a case only under very narrow circumstances, when a
defendant meets the “heavy burden” of persuading a court that it is “absolutely clear” that the
underlying wrongful conduct cannot reasonably be expected to recur.210 The court concluded
that the prison officials had not met that heavy burden.211 Regarding Parchman’s ACA
accreditation, the court acknowledged that compliance with ACA standards was not irrelevant
but declared it “absurd to suggest that the federal courts should subvert their judgment as to
alleged Eighth Amendment violations to the ACA whenever it has relevant standards.”212

Id. at *6, *8.
Id. at *8.
208 See Gates v. Cook, 376 F.3d 323, 337, 339–40 (5th Cir. 2004). Because Russell was consolidated with
Gates, a pre-existing class action, after the plaintiff class in Russell was certified as a subclass of Gates, the
case had a new party designation on appeal. See id. at 327–28.
209 See id. 337, 339–40. The court narrowed the scope of the injunctions from all of Unit 32 to only Unit 32C, the section in which Russell and the other class members were confined. See id. at 339.
210 Id. at 337 (5th Cir. 2004) (citing Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 190
(2002)).
211 Id.
212 Id.
206
207

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

40

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

The court also rejected the prison officials’ argument that nobody on death row had ever
suffered a serious heat-related illness, noting that the question was whether the conditions
posed a substantial risk of harm to which MDOC officials had shown deliberate indifference,
not whether death or serious illness had yet occurred.213 The court cited expert testimony at trial
“that it was ‘very likely’ that, under current conditions on Death Row, an inmate will die of heat
stroke or some other heat-related illness.”214
After the Fifth Circuit issued its opinion, the legal team that represented Russell and his 64
fellow inmates on death row moved to extend the relief they had won to the rest of Unit 32,
which housed around a thousand inmates.215 The Unit 32 inmates’ lawyers filed suit against
Mississippi officials in June 2005.216 This time the parties were able to sit down and negotiate
terms of a consent decree, which the court approved in April 2006.217 In contrast to the
injunction in the death-row case, the consent decree’s provisions on the issue of heat were tied
only to the calendar, not to any specific heat index. From May through September of each year,
prison officials were to ensure that each cell in Unit 32 was equipped with a fan, that each
prisoner received a 32-ounce cup of ice three times daily, and that each prisoner was allowed to
shower once a day, six days a week.218
The final chapters of Unit 32’s story end up not being primarily about the extreme heat
conditions at the facility. A host of other problems had long bedeviled Unit 32 and MDOC
eventually launched a series of deep reform initiatives to address the facility’s many

Id. at 339.
Id.
215 See Margaret Winter & Stephen F. Hanlon, Parchman Farm Blues: Pushing for Prison Reforms at
Mississippi State Penitentiary, 35 LITIG. 6, 11–12 (2008), reprinted at aclu.org/files/images
/asset_upload_file829_41138.pdf. The trial court in the death-row case had originally found that “the heat
problem extends to all of Unit 32 and possibly throughout Parchman.” Russell v. Johnson, No. 1:02-cv261, 2003 WL 22208029, *2 (N.D. Miss. May 21, 2003). The Fifth Circuit, however, had narrowed the scope
of injunctive relief to only Unit 32-C, where the plaintiff class was housed. See Gates, 376 F.3d at 339–240.
216 Complaint at 1, Presley v. Epps, No. 4:05-cv-148 (N.D. Miss. June 22, 2005).
217 See Order on Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Proposed Consent Decree at 2–3, Presley, No.
4:05-cv-148 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 6, 2005); Presley, No. 4:05-cv-148 (N.D. Miss. Apr. 28, 2005) (order granting
final approval of consent decree).
218 See Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement at 2–3, Presley, No. 4:05-cv-148 (N.D. Miss. Apr. 28,
2005).
213
214

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

41

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

problems.219 Ultimately, despite the success of many of those reforms, MDOC chose to close
Unit 32 altogether.220 Based on this planned shutdown, the parties agreed to dismiss the consent
decree in June 2010.221
The Unit 32 litigation has important lessons for correctional departments facing the prospect
of constitutional claims based on excessive cell temperatures. Heat that poses a substantial risk
of harm can be enough to prove unconstitutional conditions of confinement, even if no inmate
has yet suffered that harm. Correctional officials’ failure to take reasonable measures to relieve
the heat can amount to deliberate indifference to those unconstitutional conditions if the risk is
obvious. And budgetary constraints can never excuse constitutional violations or justify the
failure to enact court-ordered reforms.
3.1.1.2

Example 2: Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola, Death Row

In June 2013, three inmates on death row at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola sued
prison officials, alleging ongoing violations of their rights under the Eighth Amendment and

See, e.g., John Buntin, Mississippi’s Corrections Reform, GOVERNING (Aug. 2010), governing.com/topics
/public-justice-safety/courts-corrections/mississippi-correction-reform.html; Margaret Winter & Stephen
F. Hanlon, Parchman Farm Blues: Pushing for Prison Reforms at Mississippi State Penitentiary, 35 LITIG. 6, 13–
14 (2008), reprinted at aclu.org/files/images/asset_upload_file829_41138.pdf.
220 The facilities to which the inmates of Unit 32 were relocated are not necessarily any better than Unit 32
from the standpoint of heat. Most inmate housing in Mississippi remains without air conditioning and,
according to an MDOC spokesperson interviewed in 2013, Parchman stopped keeping temperature
records in March 2012. See Emily Lane, Miss. Prisoners on Death Row Lack Air Conditioning, CLARIONLEDGER (Jackson, Miss.) (Aug. 22, 2013, 11:36 PM), archive.clarionledger.com/article/20130823/news
/308200040/Miss-prisoners-death-row-lack-air-conditioning. Alan Bean, executive director of the civil
rights organization Friends of Justice, visited the new death row in 2011 and met with an inmate who told
him:
219

They closed down Unit 32 partly ’cause it was so hot; but we still have no airconditioning and I believe it’s hotter now than it used to be. The old building was made
out of cinder block, so at least the temperature would drop at night. This new building is
pretty much all metal, so it holds the heat all night long. I don’t ever wear a shirt on the
cell-block because anything you put on is instantly covered with sweat. I really feel sorry
for the guards who have to work in here.
Alan Bean, It’s Still Hot as Hell on Parchman’s Death Row, FRIENDS OF JUSTICE (July 8, 2011),
friendsofjustice.wordpress.com/2011/07/08/its-still-hot-as-hell-on-parchmans-death-row.
221 See Presley, No. 4:05-cv-148 (N.D. Miss. Aug. 10, 2010) (order dismissing case without prejudice by
agreement of parties).
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

42

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

discrimination on the basis of disability.222 The plaintiffs, Elzie Ball, Nathaniel Code, and James
Magee, alleged that the defendants were “subjecting them to excessive heat, acting with
deliberate indifference to their health and safety, and discriminating against them on the basis
of their disabilities.”223 They sought strictly injunctive relief, including a court order requiring
defendants to take necessary measures to reduce and maintain the heat index on death row at
or below 88°F.224 The district court ordered the independent collection of temperature,
humidity, and heat-index data for the three-week period immediately before trial.225 After a
bench trial, the district court found that the defendants had subjected the plaintiffs to cruel and
unusual punishment but rejected their claims of discrimination based on disability.226
The court’s ruling and order contained extensive findings of fact.227 It began with a
description of death row, which the judge had visited, noting that its eight housing tiers had no
air conditioning or other mechanical system to lower temperatures or humidity, only louver
windows and non-oscillating fans.228 Individual cells had exhaust vents but no windows or
fans.229 Inmates spent all but one hour a day locked in their cells and were permitted daily
showers.230 Each housing tier had an ice chest, all stocked from a single ice machine.231 Inmates’
only direct access to ice was during their daily hour of “tier time,” when they were free to move
about the tier outside their cells, though they could usually get ice during other daytime hours

See Ball v. LeBlanc, 988 F. Supp. 2d 639, 642 (M.D. La. 2013).
Id.
224 Id. at 643. The US Justice Department filed a “statement of interest” shortly before trial in order “to
assist the Court in determining what remedies would be necessary should the Court find that the
Louisiana Department of Corrections violated the federal civil rights of prisoners in its custody.”
Statement of Interest of the United States at 1–2, Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 13-368 (M.D. La. Aug. 2, 2013). The
Justice Department made two points: that the district court would have broad authority to enter
injunctive relief and that monitoring mechanisms would be essential to the success of any remedy. Id. at
4–8.
225 Ball, 988 F. Supp. 2d at 643–44.
226 Id. at 641. I discuss the court’s analysis of the plaintiffs’ discrimination claim separately in the section
on disability-based statutory claims.
227 See id. at 647–61.
228 Id. at 647–49.
229 Id. at 648.
230 Id.
231 Id.
222
223

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

43

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

from fellow inmates whose turn it was for tier time.232 They had no access to ice at night, during
lock-downs, or when supplies from the single ice machine ran out.233
The court noted that the plaintiffs, who ranged in age from 35 to 60, all suffered from
hypertension and each had at least one other chronic condition or illness, such as diabetes,
hepatitis, depression, high cholesterol, or obesity.234All three took medications that made them
more susceptible to heat-related illness.235 The court summarized the plaintiffs’ trial testimony
about how the heat affected them and what they did to cope. They described profuse sweating,
swelling of joints and extremities, tingling sensations, dizziness, lightheadedness,
disorientation, headaches, nausea, and difficulty breathing and sleeping.236 The plaintiffs’
coping strategies included lying on the floor or “as still as possible,” drinking water, and
creating “cool towels” by wrapping them around ice.237
The court’s opinion provided considerable detail about the data collected on the various
housing tiers during the 21 days before the early-August trial.238 The heat index in all of the tiers
exceeded 104°F at various times and the temperature, humidity, and heat index on the tiers all
tended to be the same or higher—sometimes much higher—than outdoors.239 Protracted,
unbroken periods of high heat indices were recorded.240 The data “unequivocally established
that inmates housed in each of the death row tiers are consistently, and for long periods of time,
subjected to high temperatures and heat indices in the NWS’s ‘caution,’ ‘extreme caution,’ and
‘danger’ zones.”241

Id. at 649.
Id.
234 Id. at 650–51.
235 Id. at 650–52.
236 See id.
237 Id.
238 See id. at 652–60.
239 Id. at 653, 659.
240 See id. at 652–59.
241 Id. at 659. The National Weather Service’s (NWS) heat-index chart, to which the court referred, shows
specific combinations of temperature and humidity that give rise to various degrees of likelihood that
prolonged exposure will result in heat disorder. They range from “caution” to “extreme caution” to
“danger” to “extreme danger.” The chart is available at NWS Heat Index, NAT’L WEATHER SERV.,
nws.noaa.gov/om/heat/heat_index.shtml (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
232
233

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

44

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Based on this evidence, as well as expert testimony at trial on risks that the heat and
humidity on death row posed to the plaintiffs, along with public health information from
multiple state and federal agencies, the court concluded that the conditions on death row
constituted a substantial risk of serious harm to the plaintiffs.242 Thus, the first of the two
elements of a successful claim of cruel and unusual punishment was established.243
Turning to the second element of the Eighth Amendment claim, the court found sufficient
evidence that the defendants had acted with deliberate indifference to the substantial risk of
harm that the extreme heat conditions posed. The court concluded that the defendants’
knowledge of the risk could be inferred from its obviousness as well as from circumstantial
evidence presented at trial.244 Citing the warden’s own testimony that he took no actions to
reduce the heat conditions, the court further concluded that the defendants had disregarded the
risks to the plaintiffs.245 Accordingly, the court concluded that the conditions of confinement in
which the plaintiffs were held violated the Eighth Amendment.246
After denying the plaintiffs’ disability claims, the district court turned to the question of
relief. Reasoning that the defendants might move the plaintiffs to a different cell or tier at any
time, the court concluded that a remedy would have to address heat conditions throughout
death row and that facility-wide remedial measures would not be overly broad.247 The court
ordered prison officials to come up with a plan to reduce the heat index on all death row tiers,
to keep it at or below 88°F each year from April 1 through October 31, and to closely monitor
and record temperature, humidity, and heat index during that seven-month timeframe.248 Death
row inmates at risk of developing heat-related illnesses were also to receive at least one cold
Ball, 988 F. Supp. 2d at 672.
As discussed previously, conditions of confinement are unconstitutional if (1) they present a
“substantial risk of harm” to an inmate’s health and (2) correctional officials acted with “deliberate
indifference” to that risk. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 829, 834 (1994).
244 Ball, 988 F. Supp. 2d at 672–73 (M.D. La. 2013) (citing Gates v. Cook, 376 F.3d 323, 332 (5th Cir. 2004)).
The plaintiffs had introduced evidence of complaints they had lodged about the heat and testimony
revealed that prison officials closely monitored and logged temperatures on death row and regularly
walked the tiers. Id. at 676.
245 Id. at 676.
246 Id. at 684.
247 Id. at 688–89.
248 Id. at 689.
242
243

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

45

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

shower daily, as well as 24-hour direct access to clean and uncontaminated ice, cold drinking
water, or both.249 The court admonished the defendants that “financial considerations will not be
considered a legitimate reason” for noncompliance with its order.250 Finally, it awarded
reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to the plaintiffs.251
On appeal, in July 2015, the Fifth Circuit unanimously affirmed both the finding of
constitutional violations and the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ disability claims.252 However, a
majority held that while injunctive relief was appropriate, the relief ordered by the trial court
went beyond the bounds set by the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA), which
significantly limits trial courts’ discretion to fashion injunctive relief to remedy violations of
inmates’ federal rights.253
Under the PLRA, an injunction to cure unconstitutional conditions of confinement must
“extend no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right of a particular
plaintiff or plaintiffs,” must be “narrowly drawn,” and must be “the least intrusive means
necessary to correct the violation.”254 The majority held that both the type of relief and the scope
of relief exceeded these constraints.255
In the majority’s view, “the district court ordered a type of relief—air conditioning—that is
unnecessary to correct the Eighth Amendment violation.”256 Yet, as the dissenting judge noted,
the injunction “in principal only orders the heat index in the Angola death row tiers to be
maintained below 88 degrees.”257 Indeed, aside from setting a maximum heat index, the

Id.
Id. The court also announced that it would retain jurisdiction and appoint a special master to oversee
implementation of the defendants’ plan, at state expense. Id.
251 Id. at 690 (citing 42 U.S.C. § 1988).
252 Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30067, slip op. at 14 (5th Cir. July 8, 2015), ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/1430067-CV0.pdf. The court’s discussion of the disability claims is discussed below in the section on such
statutory claims.
253 Id. at 18–19.
254 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A) (2015). The act also requires district courts to “give substantial weight to any
adverse impact on public safety or the operation of a criminal justice system caused by the relief.” Id. For
an overview of other ways in which the 1995 law made litigation more difficult for inmates, see, e.g.,
Margo Schlanger, Inmate Litigation, 116 HARV. L. REV. 1555, 1627–64 (2003).
255 Ball, slip op. at 19, 21.
256 Id. at 19.
257 Id. at 23 (Reavley, J., dissenting).
249
250

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

46

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

injunction did not prescribe any particular method of staying below that ceiling.258 It did not
mention air conditioning.259
The majority also faulted the district court for determining that a facility-wide remedy was
necessary to provide effective relief to the three plaintiffs.260 On this score, the majority was on
firmer footing, since the case was not a class action and targeted measures could have reduced
the risk that heat posed to the three plaintiffs without affecting other inmates.
The Fifth Circuit vacated the injunction and remanded the case to the district court with
instructions to produce a new injunction.261 It directed the district court to limit its order to
measures similar to those affirmed in the 2004 Gates decision and to target relief only to the
three plaintiffs:
[T]he Defendants could divert cool air from the guards’ pod into the tiers; allow
inmates to access air conditioned areas during their tier time; allow access to cool
showers at least once a day; provide ample supply of cold drinking water and ice
at all times; supply personal ice containers and individual fans; and install
additional ice machines. . . . Plaintiffs could be placed in cells next to the officers’
pod, which are cooler than those farther down the tiers. Louisiana could also air
condition one of the four [death row] tiers for the benefit of prisoners susceptible
to heat-related illness. When coupled with an order not to move the Plaintiffs

See Ball v. LeBlanc, 988 F. Supp. 2d 639, 689 (M.D. La. 2013) (“Defendants’ plan shall include a step-bystep description as to how Defendants will: (1) immediately lower and maintain the heat index in the
Angola death row tiers at or below 88 degrees Fahrenheit; (2) maintain the heat index in the Angola death
row tiers at or below 88 degrees Fahrenheit from April 1 through October 31; (3) monitor, record, and report
the temperature, humidity, and heat index in each of the death row tiers every two hours on a daily basis
from April 1 through October 31; (4) provide Plaintiffs, and other death row inmates who are at risk of
developing heat-related illnesses, with (a) at least one cold shower per day; (b) direct access to clean,
uncontaminated ice and/or cold drinking water during their “tier time” and the twenty-three hours in
which the inmates are confined to their cell; and (c) any and all relief that it is necessary to comply with
this Court’s order and the prevailing constitutional standards.”).
259 See id. at 689–91.
260 Ball, slip op. at 21 (majority opinion).
261 Id. at 22.
258

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

47

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

from these cells unless certain conditions are met, these options could adequately
remedy the Plaintiffs’ constitutional violation.262
As of this writing, in August 2015, Ball remains on remand in the district court and the
question of relief is still unresolved. But the Fifth Circuit’s affirmance of the verdict on the
plaintiffs’ constitutional claims reinforces the lessons from the Unit 32 litigation about what
evidence can suffice to prove constitutional violations based on extreme heat. Even more than
the Mississippi litigation, Ball shows the persuasive power of quantitative evidence of
temperature, humidity, and heat index.
Ball is also important because of the actions it sparked on the part of third parties. Amicus
briefs supporting the plaintiffs at the appellate stage were filed by the US Department of
Justice,263 AFSCME Local 3807 (Texas Correctional Employees),264 the Louisiana Advocacy
Center and Disability Rights Texas,265 and Families of Deceased Texas Prisoners.266 The Justice
Department’s amicus brief, along with the statement of interest it submitted at the trial level,267
signal its concern with high prison temperatures and its willingness to become involved in
efforts to force correctional departments to provide adequate cooling. The amicus brief from
Texas Correctional Employees shows a rare congruence of interests between inmates and
correctional officers when prison temperatures are concerned, hinting at the possibility of future
cooperation in efforts to compel correctional departments to take extreme heat seriously.268

Id. at 19–21.
Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants and
Urging Affirmance in Part, Ball, No. 14–30067 (5th Cir. Sept. 30, 2014).
264 Amicus Brief of American Federation of State County Municipal Employees Local 3807 (Texas
Correctional Employees) in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees in Favor of Affirmance, Ball, No. 14-30067 (5th
Cir. Sept. 30, 2014).
265 Brief on Behalf of Amici Curiae Advocacy Center (La.) and Disability Rights Texas, in Support of
Plaintiffs’ Cross Appeal (with Consent of the Parties), Ball, No. 14-30067 (5th Cir. Sept. 30, 2014). The
Advocacy Center and Disability Rights Texas are the agencies designated by the governors of Louisiana
and Texas, respectively, to protect and advocate for the rights of individuals with disabilities in their
states, pursuant to federal statutes. Id. at 1.
266 Brief for Amicus Curiae Families of Deceased Texas Prisoners (Filed in Support of Appellees Elzie Ball,
Nathaniel Code, and James Magee, and Urging Affirmation), Ball, No. 14-30067 (5th Cir. Sept. 30, 2014).
267 Statement of Interest of the United States, Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 13-368 (M.D. La. Aug. 2, 2013).
268 In 2013, the president of the Texas union had declared support for survivors of deceased Texas inmates
in civil suits alleging that their deaths were caused by exposure to extreme heat while in custody:
262
263

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

48

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

With the issue of relief up in the air, it is harder to assess the significance of Ball for future
litigation around remedies. The Fifth Circuit majority’s strained reading of the injunction
suggests an active effort to avoid leaving any basis for future arguments that air conditioning is
legally required to remedy unconstitutionally high temperatures in inmate housing.269 Because a
remedial measure must be calibrated to the risk it is meant to mitigate, however, there is no
sound basis for categorically eliminating any specific approach, particularly if it is the most
practical way of reducing that risk. Furthermore, “[i]f air conditioning is the only means of
avoiding that risk, that is a function of defendants’ decision to build the facility as they did.”270
It is also striking how differently the district court and appellate court conceptualized
appropriate relief. The district court set an objective goal for the state defendants to meet—
keeping the heat index from exceeding 88°F—while allowing the defendants to propose a
means of achieving that goal. In contrast, the Fifth Circuit singled out various acceptable
measures, such as increasing access to showers and ice, without defining the end that those
means were meant to achieve except to reduce risk “to a socially acceptable level.”271 As the
Fifth Circuit did not reject the approach of setting a goal while allowing flexibility in how that
goal is achieved, the district court may once again take that approach, while eliminating the
requirement for a facility-wide remedy.

“Several inmates’ families have filed wrongful-death lawsuits, and the officers’ union supports them.”
Lance Lowry, Opinion, In Texas, Inmates and Officers Swelter, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 22, 2013, at A29,
nytimes.com/2013/11/22/opinion/in-texas-inmates-and-officers-swelter.html.
269 The majority went out of its way to categorically reject air conditioning as a remedy: “Even assuming
that air conditioning is an acceptable remedy here—and it is not—it is possible to provide air conditioning
solely to these three inmates.” Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30067, slip op. at 21 (5th Cir. July 8, 2015) (emphasis
added).
270 Jones’El v. Berge, No. 00–C–421–C, 2003 WL 23109724, *1 (D. Wis. Nov. 26, 2003) (“Defendants
constructed a facility in which inmates are subjected to temperatures that can pose a serious risk to their
well-being, particularly if they are taking medications or have health conditions that prevent their bodies
from adjusting to high heat. If air conditioning is the only means of avoiding that risk, that is a function of
defendants’ decision to build the facility as they did. Leaving inmates vulnerable to serious health
consequences or death is not a reasonable alternative.”)
271 Ball, slip op. at 19.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

49

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

3.1.2

Claims Under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act

In addition to the constitutional claims available to all inmates, disabled inmates may be
able to bring successful claims under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(ADA)272 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (RA)273 against correctional
departments that fail to protect them from adverse health consequences of heat. Title II, which
“unmistakably includes State prisons and prisoners within its coverage,”274 protects individuals
who would otherwise be qualified for the benefits of public services, programs, or activities
against being excluded from or denied those benefits or discriminated against because of a
disability.275 Title II of the ADA is an expansion of Section 504 of the RA, which similarly
protects individuals who would otherwise be qualified for the benefits of services, programs, or
activities that receive federal funding against being excluded from or denied those benefits or
discriminated against because of a disability.276 The remedies, procedures, and rights under the
two statutes are the same.277
Viable heat-related claims under Title II and Section 504 may arise where inmates need
reasonable accommodations to enable them to withstand heat that inmates who are not
disabled can tolerate. In Hinojosa v. Livingston, the mother of a former inmate who died while
incarcerated in Texas claimed that the failure to make reasonable accommodations for her son’s
disabilities, in violation of Title II and Section 504, resulted in his death from hyperthermia.278
She argued that the combination of her son’s various medical conditions and the drugs used to
treat them “made him more vulnerable to suffer adverse consequences as a result of the extreme

42 U.S.C. §§ 12131–12134 (2014).
29 U.S.C. §§ 794–794a (2014).
274 Pa. Dep’t of Corr. v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206, 209 (1998). While Yeskey only explicitly addressed Title II, its
holding is applied to Section 504 as well. See, e.g., Key v. Grayson, 179 F.3d 996, 997 (6th Cir. 1999) (“it is
now established that the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act apply to prisoners”) (citing Yeskey); McIntyre v.
Robinson, 126 F. Supp. 2d 394, 407–8 (D. Md. 2000) (“There is no longer any question after . . . Yeskey . . .
that Title II of the ADA and by extension the Rehabilitation Act apply to inmates or prisons.”).
275 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (2014).
276 29 U.S.C. § 794(a) (2014).
277 42 U.S.C. § 12133 (2014).
278 994 F. Supp. 2d 840, 841–42 (S.D. Tex. 2014). The specific disabilities were hypertension, diabetes,
depression, schizophrenia, and obesity. Id. at 842. As of this writing, the Hinojosa case is in active
litigation.
272
273

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

50

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

heat that the inmates at the Garza West Unit must endure.”279 The state defendants moved to
dismiss the suit, arguing that the plaintiff failed to allege any facts that would demonstrate
discrimination.280
Denying the motion to dismiss, the Hinojosa court began by noting that a “failure to make
reasonable accommodations to the needs of a disabled prisoner may have the effect of
discriminating against that prisoner because the lack of an accommodation may cause the
disabled prisoner to suffer more pain and punishment than non-disabled prisoners.”281 The
court rejected the argument that the deceased inmate’s living and housing conditions were
shared by all his fellow prisoners, noting that “Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to state that
those conditions were more onerous on the decedent due to his particular disabilities.”282 The
court also stressed that it was not incumbent on the disabled inmate to request particular
accommodations when prison officials took no action despite knowing of his disabilities and
needs.283
The plaintiffs in Ball v. LeBlanc, discussed at length above, brought Title II and Section 504
claims along with their Eighth Amendment claims.284 Unlike in Hinojosa, however, the Ball court
found that they had not shown that they were “disabled,” as that term is defined by the ADA
and the RA, a threshold showing for their statutory claims.285 Both statutes define a “disability”
as “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities”
of an individual.286 The court found that the evidence did establish that the plaintiffs each
suffered from several chronic diseases.287 However, it continued, “[w]hile the Court has no
doubt that such diseases may limit one or more of Plaintiffs’ major life activities, the record is
Id. at 842.
Id.
281 Id. at 843 (quoting McCoy v. Tex. Dep’t of Criminal Justice, 2006 WL 2331055, *7 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 9,
2006)).
282 Id.
283 See id. at 843–44.
284 See Ball v. LeBlanc, 988 F. Supp. 2d 639, 684 (M.D. La. 2013).
285 Id. at 687. The court’s analysis ended at that threshold issue and did not reach the substance of their
arguments about discrimination.
286 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1)(A) (2014); 29 U.S.C. § 705(9)(B) (incorporating definition in 42 U.S.C. §
12102(1)(A)).
287 Ball, 988 F. Supp. 2d at 686–87.
279
280

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

51

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

void of any evidence to support such a conclusion.”288 The district court therefore dismissed their
disability-based claims.289
On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that the district court had applied the wrong standard by
citing cases and regulations that had been abrogated and superseded by the ADA Amendments
Act of 2008.290 The Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice made the same basic
argument in an amicus brief.291 Both the plaintiffs and the Justice Department argued that
thermoregulation—the regulation of internal body temperature—is a “major life activity” under
current law and that, accordingly, individuals whose capacity for proper thermoregulation is
compromised, for whatever reason, are disabled for purposes of Title II and Section 504.292
The Fifth Circuit agreed that the district court had erroneously applied a superseded and
excessively restrictive definition of disability but concluded that the error was harmless.293 As it
had done on a prior occasion, the Fifth Circuit assumed for the sake of argument that
thermoregulation is a major life activity for purposes of the ADA but explicitly left the question
undecided.294 But it found “no evidence that these prisoners’ thermoregulatory systems are
actually impaired.”295 It therefore affirmed the district court’s dismissal of their disability
claims.296
Hinojosa and Ball both show that inmates with disabilities that increase their susceptibility to
harm from extreme heat may have viable claims under the ADA and the RA. Hinojosa teaches
the important lesson that correctional departments have an affirmative responsibility to
determine whether disabled inmates need reasonable accommodations to protect them from the
Id. at 687.
Id.
290 See Appellees’ Principal and Response Brief at 50–52, Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30067 (5th Cir. Sept. 23,
2014).
291 See Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants and
Urging Affirmance in Part at 24–31, Ball, No. 14–30067 (5th Cir. Sept. 30, 2014).
292 See Appellees’ Principal and Response Brief at 56–57, Ball, No. 14-30067; Brief for the United States as
Amicus Curiae at 24, 30, Ball, No. 14–30067.
293 Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30067, slip op. at 14 (5th Cir. July 8, 2015).
294 Id. at 16 & n.11. In EEOC v. Agro Distribution, LLC, 555 F.3d 462 (5th Cir. 2009), the court “assume[d],
without deciding, that the regulation of body temperature constitutes a major life activity under the
ADA.” Id. at 469 n.8.
295 Ball, slip op. at 16.
296 Id. at 17.
288
289

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

52

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

heat and that they cannot wait for those inmates to demand such accommodations. Ball makes
clear the importance of introducing evidence to show that plaintiffs are indeed disabled.
Although the Ball plaintiffs were ultimately unsuccessful on their disability claims, the case
has brought the problem of extreme cell temperatures to the attention of mainstream disability
advocates. As previously noted, the Advocacy Center and Disability Rights Texas submitted an
amicus brief to the Fifth Circuit supporting the Ball plaintiffs. Those are the agencies designated
by the governors of Louisiana and Texas, respectively, to protect and advocate for the rights of
individuals with disabilities in their states. The Justice Department’s amicus brief demonstrates
its concern with the issue as well.
As the Fifth Circuit noted in Ball, “no court has held that thermoregulation is a major bodily
function [under the current statutory definition of disability], nor do EEOC regulations list
thermoregulation as a major bodily function.”297 That may change as temperatures continue to
rise, driving an increase in inmate litigation and bringing additional attention from disability
advocates.

3.2 The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980 (CRIPA)298 empowers the US
Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate correctional facilities and certain other institutions
where people are held in state or local custody in order to determine whether conditions there
violate the Constitution.299 Where DOJ finds a pattern and practice of civil rights violations and
has reasonable cause to believe that state or local authorities are subjecting inmates to
conditions that violate their constitutional rights, it can initiate litigation to remedy those
violations.300 First, however, it must attempt to work with and assist the authorities in correcting
unconstitutional conditions without the need for litigation.301 In situations where DOJ finds a

Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30067, slip op. 16 n.11 (5th Cir. July 8, 2015) (citing 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(i)(1)(ii)).
42 U.S.C. §§ 1997–1997j (2014).
299 See §§ 1997a(a), 1997a-1. CRIPA’s definition of “institution” also encompasses places such as skillednursing facilities, juvenile-justice facilities, and institutions for the mentally ill, among others. See §
1997(1).
300 See § 1997a(a).
301 See § 1997b(2).
297
298

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

53

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

pattern and practice of civil rights violations and unconstitutional conditions of confinement,
and where an inmate has already commenced litigation, it may intervene in that litigation upon
motion.302 DOJ may seek whatever equitable relief is appropriate to remedy unconstitutional
conditions of confinement.303
To date, DOJ has not used its authority under CRIPA to investigate heat conditions in
correctional facilities. However, the fact that it filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs in
Ball v. LeBlanc, as discussed above, demonstrates that DOJ has taken an interest in extreme heat
conditions. It remains to be seen how much that interest will translate into active enforcement
efforts under CRIPA. But as temperatures rise with climate change, there is a distinct possibility
that DOJ will decide to prioritize eliminating unconstitutional conditions of confinement due to
heat.

3.3 Legal Action by Correctional Officers
“Heat sees no difference in an inmate or an officer. It does not choose its victims based on
their moral character, their criminal history, or their uniform.”304 This striking statement
appears in an amicus brief that the Texas Correctional Officers Union filed in support of the
inmate plaintiffs in Ball v. LeBlanc. The very existence of the brief is remarkable; it is not every
day that correctional officers (COs) side with inmates in disputes with correctional
departments. Yet the union’s move makes strategic sense. Perhaps ironically, COs enjoy
significantly less legal protection than inmates do against being forced to endure heat
conditions that threaten their health. From a legal standpoint, COs are simply state employees
like any other. Their employers owe them no special duty of care beyond those owed to all
employees. Thus, their best option for getting dangerous heat in their workplaces remedied
may be to hitch their wagons to those of inmates who assert can constitutional claims and win
injunctive remedies.

See § 1997c(a)(1).
See § 1997a(a).
304 Amicus Brief of American Federation of State County Municipal Employees Local 3807 (Texas
Correctional Employees) in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees in Favor of Affirmance at 1, Ball. v. LeBlanc,
No. 14-30067 (5th Cir. Sept. 30, 2014).
302
303

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

54

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

In its 2014 amicus brief, the Texas Correctional Officers Union described a number of recent
reports it had received from officers who were harmed by having to work under extreme heat
conditions at various Texas prisons.305 One officer reported receiving medical advice that
regularly working in temperatures above 90°F was causing complications to his diabetes.306
Another complained about almost passing out from the heat at a time when no fans were
working.307 An officer with hypertension complained of summertime temperatures regularly
exceeding 100°F in the building where he works.308 Another report documented several officers’
suffering heat exhaustion and passing out.309 On four occasions, one officer had to be sent to the
hospital by emergency medical personnel because of heat-related complications to a bloodpressure condition, while another reported suffering from heat exhaustion “at least three or
four times.”310
Although the Texas Correctional Officers Union has attracted national media attention
through its advocacy around working conditions,311 Texas is not the only state in which extreme
heat has affected COs’ health.312 Wherever correctional facilities lack sufficient cooling capacity,
the health of inmates and COs alike is in jeopardy.

See id. at 4–5. Two of these reports noted that the excessive heat also presented security concerns. One
“described how excessive heat continually fogs up the officer’s eyewear resulting in decreased ‘visibility
and reaction time to emergencies,’” while the other, filed by an officer who had suffered from heat
exhaustion on multiple occasions, “lament[ed] the security risk in the event [that] the symptoms of heat
exhaustion arise when the officer is tending to offenders out of their cells.” Id. at 5.
306 Id. at 4.
307 Id.
308 Id.
309 Id.
310 Id. at 5.
311 See, e.g., Lance Lowry, Opinion, In Texas, Inmates and Officers Swelter, N.Y. TIMES, Nov. 22, 2013, at A29,
nytimes.com/2013/11/22/opinion/in-texas-inmates-and-officers-swelter.html (describing workplace
conditions; “Last year, 92 state correctional officers reported heat-related illnesses as a result of working
in prisons lacking climate control”).
312 See, e.g., Editorial, Hot Front: Prison Conditions at a Boiling Point, DAILY OKLAHOMAN, July 9, 2010,
newsok.com/hot-front-prison-conditions-reach-a-boiling-point/article/3474535 (warning that summer
heat and humidity take physical and emotional toll on Oklahoma COs); Laurie Willis, Union Criticizes
Conditions at Jail: Several Workers Fell Ill After Air Conditioner Broke, BALT. SUN, May 14, 2004, at 3B,
articles.baltimoresun.com/2004-05-14/news/0405140164_1_air-conditioning-conditioner-correctionalofficers (reporting that COs suffered heatstroke and had to be hospitalized when air conditioning at
Baltimore’s Central Booking and Intake Center failed during heat wave).
305

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

55

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

For individual COs who experience heat-related illnesses or injuries on the job, workers’
compensation statutes provide coverage for medical expenses and lost income, as well as
compensation for disability or death.313 Workers’ compensation claims are generally the
exclusive legal remedy for workplace injuries.314
Workers’ compensation can address the specific injuries that an individual CO suffers due
to extreme heat. It is not, however, an effective vehicle for COs to demand improvements in
working conditions that would prevent heat-related illness from occurring in the first place. For
such efforts, COs may turn to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act).315
The OSH Act requires employers to provide their employees with a workplace that is free of
recognized hazards that may cause death or serious physical harm.316 Standards set by the
federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) do not directly apply to state or
local public employees but half the states have OSHA-approved state plans that afford them at
least the same protections.317 Public employees in those states, including COs, have the right to
request an OSHA inspection of their workplace, the right to information and training about
hazards and harm prevention, the right to copies of the results of tests conducted to identify
workplace hazards, the right to review records of work-related accidents and injuries, and
protection against retaliation or discrimination for exercising these and other rights.318
Since states with OSHA-approved state plans must adopt workplace standards that are “at
least as effective as” federal OSHA standards, they often simply adopt the wording of federal

Every state has its own workers’ compensation statutes, as does the federal government.
82 AM. JUR. 2D Workers’ Compensation § 54 (2015).
315 29 U.S.C. ch. 15 (2014).
316 29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(1) (2014).
317 See 29 U.S.C. § 667(a)–(c) (2014). State and local workers in Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut,
Hawai‘i, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New
Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, and Wyoming, as well as Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, are protected by OSHAapproved state plans. State Plans, OSHA, osha.gov/dcsp/osp/index.html (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
318 Id.
313
314

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

56

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

standards as their own.319 Federal OSHA has not yet set any specific standards for indoor
workplace heat and so far Minnesota is the only state to do so as part of its state plan.320
Minnesota’s OSHA rules set “two-hour time-weighted average permissible heat exposure
limits” for “employee exposure to indoor environmental heat conditions,” calibrated to the
intensity of the work performed.321 Employees must not be exposed to heat in excess of 77°F for
heavy work, 80°F for moderate work, or 86°F for light work.322 The rule also requires that
workers exposed to heat receive training to understand the risks associated with workplace
heat, permissible exposure levels, and appropriate emergency treatment measures.323
The lack of specific standards for workplace heat set by OSHA—and, by extension, under
state plans that simply use federal standards—does not leave workers unprotected. Such
hazards fall under the General Duty Clause of the OSH Act, which provides that “[e]ach
employer . . . shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment
which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious
physical harm to his employees.”324 In 2012 and 2013, twenty cases of heat illness or death were
brought for federal enforcement under the General Duty Clause.325

OSH Act § 18(c)(2), 29 U.S.C. § 667(c)(2) (2014); State Plans, OSHA, osha.gov/dcsp/osp/index.html (last
visited Aug. 1, 2015).
320 California and Washington have adopted specific standards for workplace heat but they only apply to
outdoor workplaces. See Heat Illness Prevention in Outdoor Places of Employment, CAL. CODE REGS. tit.
8, § 3395 (2015); Outdoor Heat Exposure, WASH. ADMIN. CODE § 296-62-095 to -09560 (2015).
321 Indoor Ventilation and Temperature in Places of Employment, MINN. R. 5205.0110, subpt. 2(B) (2015).
322 Id. at subpt. 2(B) tbl.1 (2015). The rule defines the three levels of work. “‘Heavy work’ means 350 or
higher kcal/hr (kilocalories per hour), for example: heavy lifting and pushing, shovel work”; “‘Moderate
work’ means 200 to 350 kcal/hr, for example: walking with moderate lifting and pushing”; and “‘Light
work’ means up to 200 kcal/hr, for example: sitting or standing performing light hand or arm work.” Id.
at subpt. 2(A)(4)–(6) (2015). Most work by COs would likely fall into the light or moderate categories.
323 Id. at subpt. 2(C); 5206.0700, subpts. 1 & 3 (2015).
324 OSH Act § 5(a)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(1) (2014). See also Occupational Heat Exposure, OSHA, osha.gov
/SLTC/heatstress/standards.html (last visited Aug. 1, 2015) (“This includes heat-related hazards that are
likely to cause death or serious bodily harm.”). For a representative decision of the Occupational Safety
and Health Review Commission in which a serious violation was upheld against an employer under the
General Clause after an employee died from workplace exposure to heat, see Secretary of Labor v. Post
Buckley Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., No. 10-2387 (OSHRC Mar. 15, 2012) (ALJ), oshrc.gov/decisions/pdf_2012
/10-2587.pdf.
325 Sheila Arbury et al., Heat Illness and Death Among Workers: United States, 2012–2013, 63 MORBIDITY &
MORTALITY WKLY. REP. 661 (2014) ), cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm6331.pdf.
319

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

57

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Although OSHA has not yet set standards for workplace heat exposure, heat is clearly a
matter of active concern for the agency.326 OSHA has launched a “Campaign to Prevent Heat
Illness in Outdoor Workers,” has a webpage devoted to occupational heat exposure, has
produced an employer’s guide to using the heat index, and has developed an application for
mobile devices that allows workers to calculate the heat index in their workplace and instructs
them in appropriate safety precautions.327 As climate change progresses and heat becomes a
more significant workplace hazard, OSHA may well define standards that would protect COs
in jurisdictions with OSHA-approved state plans.
The workers’ compensation and OSHA statutory schemes apply to workers generally. For
workers with disabilities who sustain injury or are at greater risk of injury because of their
disabilities, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) provides additional legal
options.
Title I of the ADA prohibits discrimination in employment against qualified individuals
with disabilities.328 Refusal to make reasonable accommodations that a qualified individual
needs in order to perform the essential functions of the job is a form of prohibited
discrimination.329 Therefore, COs with disabilities that place them at greater risk of heat-related
injury are entitled to reasonable accommodations to mitigate that greater risk and allow them to
fulfill their essential job functions. Whether such accommodations could be made, or whether
A 2012 article in Professional Safety, the journal of the American Society of Safety Engineers, states that
“[t]he likelihood of OSHA enforcement in this area is very high.” Mark A. Lies II & Meagan Newman,
OSHA Campaign to Protect Employees from Heat Hazards: Multiple Legal Liabilities, PROF. SAFETY EXTRA, July
2012, at 2, asse.org/assets/1/7/PSExtra_Lies-Newman_0712.pdf. Discussing OSHA’s Campaign to Prevent
Heat Illness in Outdoor Workers, the authors advise that “OSHA can be expected to enforce this agenda
across the entire spectrum of industries where heat is a factor in the workplace. For those employers who
do not have employees working outside, the same potential liabilities exist for operations within a facility
where there are inadequate HVAC resources.” Id. at 1.
327 See OSHA’s Campaign to Prevent Heat Illness in Outdoor Workers, OSHA, osha.gov/SLTC/heatillness
/index.html (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Occupational Heat Exposure, OSHA, osha.gov/SLTC/heatstress
/index.html (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Using the Heat Index: A Guide for Employers, OSHA, osha.gov/SLTC
/heatillness/heat_index/pdfs/about.pdf (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Heat Safety Tool, OSHA, osha.gov/SLTC
/heatillness/heat_index/heat_app.html (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
328 See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a) (2015). The ADA defines a “qualified individual” is one who, “with or without
reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such
individual holds or desires.” § 12111(8).
329 See § 12112(b)(5).
326

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

58

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

they would be considered “reasonable,” are largely matters of conjecture at this point since the
issue has not yet arisen.
Labor law provides a final legal tool that COs may employ in pushing for mitigation of
dangerous workplace heat. Working conditions are a classic labor concern and a frequent topic
of collective bargaining. In jurisdictions where heat in the workplace jeopardizes COs’ health,
the issue may make its way into contract negotiations or become the focus of labor actions. As
the CO union’s amicus brief in Ball illustrates, dangerously hot working conditions are already
of concern to organized labor in the correctional sector.
All of these options presume that COs who suffer from excessive heat in the workplace will
try to find ways to improve their working conditions. But it is equally likely that worsening
prison temperatures will simply drive some COs to seek less risky employment. States that
cannot maintain healthy interior temperatures in their correctional facilities may face increasing
problems with workforce retention as climatic conditions become more difficult.330

3.4 Policies and Regulations Concerning Heat and Climate Control in
Corrections
Constitutional requirements for humane conditions of confinement and worker health
protections are not the only standards that correctional departments must meet in order to
ensure the wellbeing of inmates and correctional officers in the context of high temperatures.
Many departments must also comply with policies and regulations. Those policies and
regulations vary considerably but many share common features. This section presents a brief
survey of some common requirements. The Appendix provides specific policy and regulatory
language from most jurisdictions.

“In a recent report to the Texas Legislature, work conditions including extreme heat were cited as the
second greatest reason for the high turnover rate among TDCJ [Texas Department of Criminal Justice]
staff, second only to low pay. Complaints about overheating and extreme heat conditions consistently
rank among the top four or five workplace complaints from TDCJ correctional staff.” HUMAN RIGHTS
CLINIC, UNIV. OF TEX. SCH. OF LAW, RECKLESS INDIFFERENCE: DEADLY HEAT IN TEXAS PRISONS 11–12 (2015),
available at law.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/04/2015-HRC-USA-Reckless-IndifferenceReport.pdf (citations omitted).
330

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

59

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

The existence of a particular policy or rule certainly does not guarantee its enforcement. It
does, however, provide a legal framework for the administration of correctional facilities and
may offer leverage to inmates, correctional officers, or other advocates who seek to pressure
correctional departments into improving temperature conditions inside correctional facilities.
Many states have rules that define specific permissible temperature ranges or maximum
temperatures for local or municipal jails. For example, in Maine, all inmate housing areas in
county jails, holding facilities, and short-term detention areas must be kept between 65 and
85°F.331 Texas has the same requirement for its county correctional centers, jails, and lockups.332
Often such rules only apply to new construction. Thus, Kentucky requires that living areas and
direct-supervision areas in all new local correctional facilities be designed to maintain
temperatures between 65 and 85°F.333 Another common requirement is that temperatures be
kept within the seasonal “comfort zone,” a term that is not always defined.334 As an example,
Massachusetts requires independent verification every three years that the temperatures in all
living areas are appropriate to the winter and summer comfort zones.335 For the most part, such
temperature regulations apply only to jails, not prisons.
A number of states have adopted specific protocols that departments must follow when
temperatures cross a given threshold. Iowa, for example, requires that fans and adequate
supplies of cold liquids be made available and used when interior temperatures in jails and
03-201 ME. CODE R. ch. 1, §§ II.a(R.20) (county jails), II.b(H.43) (holding facilities), II.c(SDA.22) (shortterm detention areas) (LexisNexis 2015).
332 37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE §§ 260.154 (county correctional centers), 261.160 (maximum-security jails),
261.255 (lockups), 261.350 (minimum-security jails) (2015).
333 501 KY. ADMIN. REGS. 3:050, § 10(16)(a)(3), (17)(c) (2015). The same requirement applies to occupied
areas in new restricted-custody centers. 7:050, § 10(3)(e)(6).
334 To receive accreditation by the American Correctional Association, a facility must demonstrate that
“[t]emperatures in indoor living and work areas are appropriate to the summer and winter comfort
zones.” AM. CORR. ASS’N, ADULT CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS, § 4-4153 (4th ed. 2006). In 2012, the ACA
Standards Committee considered a proposal to replace this standard with ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55,
“Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy.” Standard 55, promulgated by the
American Standards Institute and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, is more specific, objective, and robust than the ACA standard. The proposal was referred to
the Physical Plant Standards Subcommittee but does not seem to have gone anywhere. See Am. Corr.
Ass’n, Standards Committee Meeting Minutes [98–100] (July 20, 2012), aca.org/ACA_PROD_IMIS/docs
/Standards and Accreditation/sac_August_2012.pdf.
335 103 MASS. CODE REGS. 920.10(3) (2015)
331

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

60

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

temporary holding facilities exceed 85°F.336 Virginia regulations require that air conditioning or
mechanical ventilation systems such as fans be provided when temperatures in jails and
lockups rise above 85°F.337 South Dakota goes much further, requiring regular monitoring of the
heat index and specifying measures that must be taken when the heat index reaches 105°F,
including carefully observing inmates for signs of heat stress and suspending strenuous
outdoor work and recreation.338
Some jurisdictions have adopted specific rules to protect inmates who are at greater risk of
heat stress because they take psychotropic drugs. Alabama, Delaware, New Mexico, Ohio, and
Vermont, for example, all require correctional staff to identify such inmates, educate them about
the dangers that heat and sun exposure pose to them and about preventive measures they
should use to protect themselves, and take specific steps to reduce the danger of heat illness
when cell temperatures reach 90°F.339
Extreme heat is treated more as an occupational hazard than as an environmental or
residential hazard in certain jurisdictions. Thus, Georgia, which has no regulations or policies
concerned with heat in inmate housing, requires correctional staff to be “particularly alert to the
early detection of symptoms and the prevention of cases of heat exhaustion” among inmates
working outdoors during hot weather, and singles out new inmates and those “who have not
acclimated to the environment” for particular attention.340 Texas, which regulates temperatures
in local jails but not state prisons, has detailed policies to protect both inmate workers and
correctional staff from the dangers of working in hot weather.341

IOWA ADMIN. CODE §§ 201-50.4(3) (jails), 201-51.4(3) (holding facilities) (2015).
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-40-1160(C) (2015).
338 See S.D. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY 1.5.C.1, § IV(1)–(3) (2014). This policy was scheduled for revision in
March 2015.
339 See ALA. DEP’T OF CORR., ADMIN. REG. 419, §§ IV–V (change no. 1, 2005); DEL. DEP’T OF CORR, POLICY D02.1, § V (2010); N.M. CORR. DEP’T, POLICY CD-171501 (2013); OHIO DEP’T OF REHAB. & CORR., POLICY 67MNH-07, § H (2015); VT. DEP’T OF CORR., PROTOCOL 361.01.14, § V(G) (1997).
340 GA. COMP. R. & REGS. 125-3-5-.04(1)(d) (2015).
341 See TEX. DEP’T OF CRIM. JUST., CORRECTIONAL MANAGED HEALTH CARE POLICY MANUAL D-27.2 (2014). In
a recent report, however, the Human Rights Clinic at the University of Texas School of Law presented
evidence that Texas prison officials often require heat-sensitive inmates to work in extremely hot
environments such as kitchens and laundries, casting doubt on whether this administrative directive
provides any meaningful protection for inmate workers. See HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC, UNIV. OF TEX. SCH. OF
336
337

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

61

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

At least partly as a consequence of litigation, Maryland has particularly comprehensive
policies to protect pretrial detainees.342 A key component of these policies is “heat stratification,”
which involves assessing all arrestees at intake to evaluate their individual susceptibility to
heat-related illness and then assigning them each a heat-risk code.343 That code determines
housing assignments and provisions for respite during periods of high heat.344
As the warming effects of climate change become more pronounced in the coming years,
more correctional officers and inmates will suffer heat-related illness. New policies and
regulations may address those harms and seek to minimize future injuries. Many correctional
departments will be unable to remain in compliance with existing policies and regulations, or to
come into compliance with new ones, without implementing adaptive measures.

3.5 Mandated Adaptation Efforts
Executive orders or other legal mandates may require correctional departments to begin
adaptation planning and action. In 2009, President Obama issued an executive order requiring
all federal agencies to prepare and annually update strategic sustainability performance
plans.345 Those plans must include evaluations of “agency climate-change risks and
vulnerabilities to manage the effects of climate change on the agency’s operations and mission
in both the short and long term.”346 In compliance with that requirement, federal agencies have

LAW, RECKLESS INDIFFERENCE: DEADLY HEAT IN TEXAS PRISONS 23–24 (2015), available at law.utexas.edu
/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/04/2015-HRC-USA-Reckless-Indifference-Report.pdf.
342 See Duvall v. O’Malley, No. 94-cv-2541 (D. Md. Aug. 18, 2009) (partial settlement agreement); Duvall,
No. 94-cv-2541 (D. Md. Apr. 18, 2012) (report and recommendation that motion to amend partial
settlement agreement be granted); Duvall, No. 94-cv-2541 (D. Md. May 8, 2012) (order granting approval
of amendment to partial settlement agreement).
343 MD. DIV. OF DET. & PRETRIAL SERVS., DIRECTIVE DPDS.185.0008.05, § A (2009); MD. OFFICE OF INMATE
HEALTH SERVS., MED. EVALS. MANUAL, ch. 1, sec. 1A, pt. I, § II(D)(2)(a) (2009).
344 MD. DIV. OF DET. & PRETRIAL SERVS., DIRECTIVE DPDS.185.0008.05, § B (2009).
345 Exec. Ord. 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 74 Fed.
Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 8, 2009). The executive order also required agencies to pursue reductions of greenhouse
gas emissions; “implement high performance sustainable Federal building design, construction,
operation and management, maintenance, and deconstruction”; and designate Senior Sustainability
Officers who would be accountable for agency conformance with the order. Id. §§ 2(a)–(c), (g), 7.
346 Id. § 8(i).
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

62

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

produced climate change adaptation plans.347 Because the Federal Bureau of Prisons is part of
the US Department of Justice, it is included in DOJ’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, the details
of which are discussed below in section 3.348
Some state governors have also issued executive orders requiring state agencies to take
measures to address climate change. For example, a 2014 executive order requires Rhode Island
state agencies, of which the Department of Corrections is one, to assist a newly created
Executive Climate Change Council by assessing the vulnerability of public infrastructure to
impacts of climate change and recommending strategies to protect that infrastructure.349 And in
Virginia, the Secretariat of Public Safety and Homeland Security, which includes the
Department of Corrections, co-chairs a commission convened in 2014 and charged with
updating and prioritizing the recommendations contained in the state’s 2008 Climate Action
Plan.350 Those recommendations included having state agencies develop adaptation plans for
the infrastructure for which they are responsible, based on a minimum increase of 3.6°F in air
and water temperatures and at least a 2.3-foot rise in sea level.351 While these and other
executive orders from state governors have not yet mandated the level of adaptation planning
and action that exists at the federal level, future orders from state and local executives, or
comparable legislative enactments, are likely to impose increasingly significant adaptation
requirements on state agencies as the climate crisis progresses.

See Press Release, Council on Envtl. Quality, Obama Administration Releases Federal Agency Strategic
Sustainability Performance Plans (Feb. 7, 2013), whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/Press_Releases
/February_07_2013; Press Release, Council on Envtl. Quality, Obama Administration Releases Federal
Agency Climate Plans on Fifth Anniversary of Presidential Sustainability Initiative (Oct. 31, 2014),
whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/Press_Releases/_October_31_2014. A 2013 executive order
spelled out the required contents of Adaptation Plans. See Exec. Ord. 13653: Preparing the United States
for the Impacts of Climate Change, 78 Fed. Reg. 66,819 (Nov. 6, 2013).
348 The current DOJ Climate Change Adaptation Plan is available at justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/pages
/attachments/2014/10/30/doj-climate-change-adaptation-plan.pdf. It updates the first Climate Change
Adaptation Plan, which can still be found at justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2014/03/07/doj-ccap2012.pdf.
349 See R.I. Exec. Ord. 14-01: Rhode Island Executive Climate Change Council, § 4(g) (Feb. 21, 2014).
350 See Va. Exec. Ord. 19: Convening the Governor’s Climate Change and Resiliency Update Commission 2
(July 1, 2014).
351 See GOVERNOR’S COMM’N ON CLIMATE CHANGE, FINAL REPORT: A CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN 35, 60
(2008), sealevelrisevirginia.net/docs/homepage/CCC_Final_Report-Final_12152008.pdf.
347

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

63

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

3.6 The Legal Context for Adaptation
The above review of legal dimensions of the climate challenge for corrections permits some
generalizations about the legal context for adaptation. First, litigation will almost certainly
continue to exert pressure on correctional departments to protect inmate and employee
populations from excessive heat. Successful constitutional litigation by inmates can result in
court-ordered change that may be more costly than other adequate measures that departments
might have taken on their own accord. Once constitutional violations are established and
remedial actions are ordered, financial constraints will not justify noncompliance with ordered
relief. While litigation may be the only route to adaptation in jurisdictions that would not
otherwise act in the face of the climate threat, it is an inefficient means of reform. Judges are also
less likely to craft optimal prescriptions for adaptation than policymakers, engineers, scientists,
and other professionals.
Second, outside the context of litigation the legal pressures to adapt are few at this point.
Policies, rules, and regulations in some jurisdictions require that correctional facilities meet
certain requirements for internal temperature but those requirements are not couched in the
language of climate-change adaptation. The one significant exception is at the federal level,
where executive action has driven adaptation efforts. But if adaptation is, for the most part, not
legally required today, the full brunt of climate change is still ahead of us. As the years elapse
and climate change increases, the law may begin to catch up and require public agencies to
undertake adaptation in earnest. Of course, correctional departments need not wait for the law
to require them to begin adaptation efforts. Adaptation will advance their missions regardless
of any legal mandates.
Third, the lack of legal pressures to undertake adaptation has a positive corollary, which is
that forward-thinking correctional administrators have few legal constraints on their
formulation of adaptive strategies. That fact, combined with the current resurgence of interest in
the correctional sector and in reducing mass incarceration, growing concern about climate
change, and an increasingly solid scientific consensus around what changes to expect, makes
the time ripe for correctional administrators to begin to devote resources to adaptation.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

64

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

The next section takes up the question of what adaptation might look like in the correctional
sector.

4

ADAPTATION CHALLENGES AND OPTIONS

Climate change requires all public agencies, including correctional departments, to
determine how it will likely impact their mission, programs, and operations, and to find ways
to minimize its negative impacts. Neither the challenges nor the solutions will look the same in
all places. There is ample room for correctional departments to collaborate with each other and
with other public agencies in preparing, deploying, and adjusting adaptation strategies. But
ultimately each department must tailor its adaptation efforts to its own circumstances.
While the correctional sector has not led the way, other entities, both public and private,
have been grappling with the adaptation challenge for years. As departments begin to assess
their vulnerabilities and options, they will not have to reinvent the wheel. Many departments
will be able to plug into efforts already underway in their states or localities.352 For those at the
vanguard of adaptation in their jurisdiction, resources of many kinds are readily available to
guide and support their efforts.353

For information about existing state and local efforts, see, e.g., State and Local Adaptation Plans,
GEORGETOWN CLIMATE CENTER, georgetownclimate.org/adaptation/state-and-local-plans (last visited
Aug. 1, 2015); Law and Governance, GEORGETOWN CLIMATE CENTER, georgetownclimate.org/search
/apachesolr_search?featured=lg (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); State and Local Climate Blackboard, CENTER FOR
CLIMATE STRATEGIES, climatestrategies.us/policy_tracker/state (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
353 See, e.g., Climate Change Adaptation Resources, SABIN CENTER FOR CLIMATE CHANGE LAW,
web.law.columbia.edu/climate-change/resources/adaptation-resources (last visited Aug. 1, 2015). One of
several useful starting points for adaptation planning is the US Climate Resilience Toolkit, a resource of
the federal government that is available at toolkit.climate.gov. Another is the Adaptation section of the US
Global Change Research Program’s 2014 National Climate Assessment, available as a web-based publication
at nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/response-strategies/adaptation or for download at
nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads. The Environmental Protection Agency’s Adaptation Tools for Public
Officials, available at epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/adapt-tools.html, provides links to many
resources that will be of interest to public officials. Guidance documents and materials used by federal
agencies in their adaptation planning are available at Climate Change Adaptation, FEDCENTER.GOV,
fedcenter.gov/_kd/go.cfm?destination=Page&Pge_ID=3853 (last visited Aug. 1, 2015). The Adaptation
Clearinghouse at the Georgetown Climate Center, available at georgetownclimate.org/adaptation
/clearinghouse, offers a wealth of useful information and links to many valuable resources. For a legal
perspective on adaptation, begin with Michael B. Gerrard and Katrina Fischer Kuh’s edited collection The
352

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

65

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Adaptation in the correctional sector presents a mix of common and unusual challenges.
This section begins with some observations about adaptation in general, then explores special
considerations for corrections, and finally suggests possible adaptation options to address the
problem of excessive heat in light of those special challenges.

4.1 The Basics of Adaptation
Like climate change itself, adaptation is a process, not an isolated event. And like climate
change, adaptation is a long-term process, much of which lies beyond the immediately visible
horizon. It requires thoughtful action on the basis of sometimes incomplete information, as
many of the minute details of localized climate changes and impacts will not be known with a
high degree of precision until it is too late to move proactively to minimize harmful
consequences.
Although this uncertainty complicates adaptation, risk management is a basic part of public
administration; administrators must often make policy choices based on probabilities rather
than certainties. Just as uncertainty about future crime rates, inmate numbers, and the incidence
of recidivism does not prevent policy makers from formulating and implementing correctional
policy, uncertainty about how high temperatures and sea levels will rise, and how quickly, does
not preclude successful, proactive adaptation planning and action. While the scale, complexity,
and novelty of the task may seem paralyzingly daunting, delay will only make subsequent
action more costly and difficult.
The first step in preparing for the impacts of climate change is committing to a policy of
adaptation and assigning administrative responsibility for research, decision making,
implementation, and collaboration.354 The initial work of the adaptation officers or team consists
of making a variety of assessments: What are the most likely local impacts of climate change?
How are the department and its assets vulnerable? What are the most pressing risks? What

Law of Adaptation to Climate Change (2012), particularly Robert L. Fischman and Jillian R. Rountree’s
chapter on Adaptive Management (19–47) and J. Cullen Howe’s chapter on Buildings (209–34).
354 A useful model policy statement for climate change adaptation is available in COUNCIL ON ENVTL.
QUALITY, FEDERAL AGENCY CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLANNING: SUPPORT DOCUMENT, App. C
(2011), whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ceq/adaptation_support_document_3_3.pdf.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

66

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

resources are available for adaptation and what additional resources are needed? What
opportunities exist for learning about climate impacts and adaptation options? Departments can
tackle these kinds of questions far more productively and effectively by building partnerships
with one another and with both public and private entities that are already engaged in adaptive
efforts.
Identifying a department’s vulnerabilities involves considering three interrelated issues:
exposure, sensitivity, and capacity to adapt.355 Exposure refers to particular expected impacts
and the systems or assets they will affect. A correctional department’s exposure might include
the threat of high temperatures to its facilities. Sensitivity refers to how prone a system or asset
is to harm from a given exposure. Thus, a correctional facility that lacks any mechanical system
for climate control and a similar one that has high-capacity air conditioning may share exposure
to the same level of extreme heat, but the first facility has greater sensitivity to harm from that
exposure. Finally, adaptive capacity refers to the room for making adjustments to a threatened
system or asset to minimize any harmful consequences of a given exposure. For example, a
correctional facility with a failing air-conditioning system may have greater adaptive capacity
than one built without any air conditioning at all, since repair is often easier than retrofitting.
On a human level, inmates and correctional officers in good health have a greater capacity to
adapt to high temperatures than those who are unwell. By considering their exposures,
sensitivities, and adaptive capacities, correctional departments can determine their greatest
vulnerabilities and then set priorities for adaptive action, bearing in mind that vulnerabilities
change over time and must therefore be periodically reassessed.
A department’s most vulnerable assets may not all be appropriate priorities for adaptation
efforts. For example, a department would not likely prioritize adaptation of a highly vulnerable
facility that is near the end of its expected useful life. Setting priorities for adaptation generally

See, e.g., CTR. FOR CLIMATE & ENERGY SOLUTIONS, CLIMATE CHANGE 101: ADAPTATION 6 (2011), c2es.org
/docUploads/climate101-adaptation.pdf. For a detailed theoretical discussion of the concept of
“vulnerability,” see Omar-Dario Cardona et al., Determinants of Risk: Exposure and Vulnerability, in
MANAGING THE RISKS OF EXTREME EVENTS AND DISASTERS TO ADVANCE CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION 65,
69–72 (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2012), ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srex/SREXChap2_FINAL.pdf.
355

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

67

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

involves weighing a number of criteria, including the magnitude of a specific risk, its
probability and timing, and equitable considerations.356 A risk is of high magnitude if it
endangers important assets or systems and threatens to have particularly costly consequences,
such as death or economic loss. Where the probability of a particular risk is high, as is the case
with extreme temperatures, it generally takes higher priority. The timing of a risk may increase
its priority, though postponing action on less imminent risks may come at the cost of losing the
best chance to avert them. Equitable concerns will likely come into play as correctional
departments compete with other public agencies for scarce adaptation dollars, given prevailing
public attitudes toward inmates. Whatever priorities correctional departments set for their
adaptation efforts, the dynamic natures of climate change and adaptation may require
departments to change their priorities over time.
Once vulnerabilities are assessed and priorities established it becomes possible to consider
specific adaptation options, taking into account their relative costs and benefits. The most
attractive adaptation options are those that address existing needs irrespective of climate
change and that, therefore, do not depend on climate change to justify the investment. One such
option is making use of passive-cooling technologies such as insulation and cool roofs in new
construction. Not only does passive cooling make it easier to handle increased heat, it reduces
energy needs, which can save money as well as help cut carbon emissions. Other options, such
as avoiding new construction in areas that are likely to become vulnerable to flooding in the
future, yield no additional benefits beyond adaptation but do not entail prohibitive costs. While
such options are appealing, in many contexts truly effective adaptation may require more costly
and difficult choices. One example is the need to relocate existing vital assets that are at risk of
catastrophic loss due to rising sea levels.

See Michael Oppenheimer et al., Emergent Risks and Key Vulnerabilities, in CLIMATE CHANGE 2014:
IMPACTS, ADAPTATION, AND VULNERABILITY. PART A: GLOBAL AND SECTORAL ASPECTS. CONTRIBUTION OF
WORKING GROUP II TO THE FIFTH ASSESSMENT REPORT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE
CHANGE 1039, 1052 (Christopher B. Field et al. eds., IPCC, 2014), ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads
/WGIIAR5-Chap19_FINAL.pdf.; CTR. FOR CLIMATE & ENERGY SOLUTIONS, CLIMATE CHANGE 101:
ADAPTATION 7 (2011), c2es.org/docUploads/climate101-adaptation.pdf.
356

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

68

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Some adaptations may appear to make sense in the short term but may prove to be
maladaptive in the long run. A simple example would be retrofitting an existing facility with air
conditioning based on current temperature levels without considering projected future
temperatures. The added cost of later upgrading such a system to meet future conditions—or
retiring the poorly adapted facility altogether—could well exceed the cost of installing a system
with sufficient capacity in the first place. In addition, even relatively efficient air conditioning
systems use electricity, thereby contributing to the problem of climate change as long as we
remain dependent on fossil fuels for power generation.
Ongoing collaboration among public and private entities is essential to successful
adaptation. Adaptation efforts are strengthened by the systematic sharing and exchange of
knowledge, expertise, and resources among agencies at all levels of government, the scientific
community, and the private sector. Because significant adaptation work has been taking place at
the federal level for several years, federal agencies are particularly well suited to support
nascent state and local efforts.357 To some degree collaboration is not only prudent but also
necessary, since society and its institutions are highly interdependent. For example, higher
temperatures will likely affect water and food supplies, tax the electric grid, and strain complex
systems of all sorts. Successful adaptation to such impacts will depend on coordinated and
collaborative efforts.

4.2 Special Challenges for Corrections
Beyond the basics outlined above, adaptation in the correctional context will require
addressing a number of special challenges. This section addresses some of those considerations.
4.2.1

Security

All correctional policies must address security concerns and adaptation policies will be no
different. Adaptation options will be shaped and limited by the need to ensure the safety and
There are a variety of useful online federal resources to support adaptation. See, e.g., U.S. CLIMATE
RESILIENCE TOOLKIT, toolkit.climate.gov (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Climate Change Adaptation,
FEDCENTER.GOV, fedcenter.gov/programs/climate (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Adaptation,
GLOBALCHANGE.GOV, nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/response-strategies/adaptation (last visited Aug.
1, 2015); Adaptation Tools for Public Officials, EPA, epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/adapttools.html (last updated Sept. 9, 2013).
357

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

69

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

security of the general public, of correctional workers, and of inmates. Security concerns also
underline the importance of careful long-term advance planning and preparation so as to
minimize improvisation during extreme-heat events. And certain aspects of adaptation
planning itself may need to be kept confidential for reasons of security, which can complicate
collaboration with public- and private-sector partners.
Adaptation strategies that involve retrofitting existing correctional facilities may present
security difficulties, since some retrofitting work will necessarily require relocating inmates.
Temporarily accommodating the inmates from a small facility while retrofitting is underway
may not be terribly difficult but finding space to house the inmates of larger facilities on a
temporary basis may be quite another matter. This is one of many reasons not to delay
proactive adaptation planning and action.
The need to maintain custody over inmates and to keep them in secure locations, segregated
from the general public, also makes some common short-term options for weathering periods of
extreme heat impractical. Public cooling centers, for example, cannot serve as resources for
correctional populations. Correctional facilities must be self-sufficient, developing on-site
cooling capacity to meet foreseeable cooling needs, backed up by stormproof generators that
can run cooling systems in the event of blackouts or brownouts.358 Facilities that capitalize on
opportunities for passive cooling and minimize their reliance on energy-dependent mechanical
cooling will be best prepared to maintain cooling capacity when power supplies are stressed or
disrupted.
Security concerns also make short-term relocation of inmates from facilities with inadequate
cooling to better-prepared facilities during extreme-heat events a poor option. Even when
secure receiving locations are available, relocating large numbers of inmates presents

Renewable generating sources such as windmills and photovoltaic arrays cannot presently provide
reliable emergency backup power because they generate electricity intermittently (when the wind blows
or the sun shines) and because battery technology has not yet advanced to the point of making large-scale
storage practical. Storage is now a priority area for research and development. See, e.g., Umair Irfan and
ClimateWire, Battery Storage Needed to Expand Renewable Energy, SCI. AM. (Feb. 13, 2015),
scientificamerican.com/article/battery-storage-needed-to-expand-renewable-energy.
358

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

70

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

considerable difficulty and always entails significant risk.359 Furthermore, because heat waves
are rarely localized, secure locations to which inmates might otherwise be evacuated may
already be hard-pressed to handle their own cooling needs without having to accommodate an
influx of additional inmates.
4.2.2

Unique Buildings

Another factor that distinguishes correctional facilities is their unusually high population
density, which has important implications for the problem of excessive heat. Jails and prisons
are not designed to provide spacious housing for inmates. Whether formally overcrowded or
not, correctional facilities hold large numbers of people relative to their interior volume,
particularly in their housing tiers. Numbers dip somewhat at night when fewer correctional
officers and other staff are needed on site, but for the most part the population density in
correctional facilities remains high around the clock.
Every inmate and correctional officer contributes heat to the indoor environment, adding to
the cooling load that a climate-control system has to carry. Just to dissipate the heat added by
600 people requires around 240,000 BTUs-per-hour of cooling capacity—the equivalent of a 20ton air-conditioning system—on top of the capacity dictated by outdoor temperatures.360 Given

Correctional departments have managed effective evacuations of sizable facilities in the past. For
example, in August 1992, the Florida Department of Corrections successfully evacuated some 1,000
inmates held at Dade Correctional Institute as Hurricane Andrew bore down on the state. See NAT’L INST.
OF CORR., NIC 020293, A GUIDE TO PREPARING FOR AND RESPONDING TO PRISON EMERGENCIES 319–21
(2005). Many factors contributed to the successful outcome, including comprehensive advance planning,
particularly effective leadership, dedicated and courageous staff, and inmate cooperation. See id. at 321–
32; see also id. at 289–91 (recounting successful evacuation by Missouri Department of Corrections of
hundreds of inmates from Renz Correctional Center during 1993 floods). Such examples stand in stark
contrast to the calamitous situation at Orleans Parish Prison during and after Hurricane Katrina, where
no attempt was made to evacuate the facility before the storm hit. Inmates and staff were stranded for
days in the flooded and sweltering prison, which was without power because floodwaters had
submerged the backup generators. Their eventual evacuation was a haphazard exercise in improvisation
that should serve as an object lesson in how not to evacuate a correctional facility. See, e.g., ACLU
NATIONAL PRISON PROJECT, ABANDONED AND ABUSED: ORLEANS PARISH PRISONERS IN THE WAKE OF
KATRINA (2006), aclu.org/prisoners-rights/abandoned-and-abused; DEMAREE INGLESE, NO ORDINARY
HEROES: 8 DOCTORS, 30 NURSES, 7,000 PRISONERS, AND A CATEGORY 5 HURRICANE (2007).
360 This estimate assumes that each person adds 400 BTUs per hour to the cooling load. See THE “PEOPLE
LOAD,” HEATING, AIRCONDITIONING & REFRIGERATION DISTRIBS. INT’L 1 (n.d.), hvacsalesandsupply.com
/Linked Documents/Tech Tips/26-The people load.pdf.
359

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

71

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

this immutable factor, it is particularly important for correctional facilities to minimize the
penetration of outdoor heat during the summer.
4.2.3

Unstable Population Size

The size of the inmate population today—and therefore the scale and difficulty of
correctional departments’ responsibilities—is radically different from what it was a generation
or so ago. By the middle of this century, the inmate population may shrink or swell
significantly, or remain roughly the same. Only for the relatively short term can correctional
departments predict with confidence how many inmates they must be prepared to hold in
confinement, since crime, law enforcement, and sentencing policies are all subject to trends over
which the correctional sector has little direct influence. The uncertainty about rises and drops in
inmate populations is another special challenge for correctional adaptation to a warmer climate.
Because the difficulty of maintaining a healthy interior climate in a prison or jail increases
significantly with overcrowding, correctional departments must develop and maintain a margin
of excess cooling capacity if they are to be adequately prepared for extreme heat, which can
entail capital outlays for contingencies that may never materialize. The alternative is to risk
having to accommodate an inmate population beyond what facilities can handle, jeopardizing
the health and safety of both correctional workers and inmates and exposing the state to costly
litigation.
4.2.4

Unpopular Constituency

Adaptation entails expenses. Some of the costs may well be high. It will be far easier to sell
public spending to adapt schools, hospitals, and some other public facilities to rising
temperatures than to adapt prisons and jails.361 Correctional departments already have to fulfill
a demanding mission with inadequate resources. They will likely find themselves at a unique
disadvantage as they are forced to compete with more popular sectors for scarce adaptation
funds. While public sentiment is shifting away from support for harsh sentencing and mass

Several studies show minimal support for increasing spending on prisons at the expense of other areas
such as health, education, or infrastructure. See OPPORTUNITY AGENDA, AN OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC OPINION
AND DISCOURSE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUES 26 (2014), opportunityagenda.org/files/field_file/2014.08.23CriminalJusticeReport-FINAL_0.pdf.
361

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

72

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

incarceration and toward support for crime prevention and rehabilitative services, that shift
does not translate into willingness to increase public spending on corrections.362 Perhaps
ironically, the pressure of inmate litigation around conditions of confinement may give
correctional departments leverage in the contest for adaptation dollars.

4.3 Options
4.3.1

Reduce the Size of the Incarcerated Population

One rational approach to the adaptation challenge in corrections is to reduce the size of the
problem by reducing the size of the incarcerated population. On the face of it, this may seem
like a naïve exercise in denial, an effort to avoid the problems that climate change presents
rather than deal with them. In fact, promising efforts are already underway to shrink the
correctional population, for reasons that have nothing to do with climate change but that
dovetail perfectly with the sector’s adaptation needs.363 Policy changes such as sentencing
reforms and putting more resources into reducing crime and recidivism have brought down
inmate populations in some jurisdictions.364 In recent years, California, New Jersey, and New

See id. at 7–8 (2014) (reporting meta-analysis of public-opinion research). A 2013 study of US voters
found that 52 percent believed that society spends too much on prisons. See id. at 26.
363 California is under federal court orders to reduce its adult prison population. See Brown v. Plata, 131 S.
Ct. 1910, 1923 (2011) (affirming court order requiring California to reduce adult prison population to
137.5 percent of prisons’ design capacity). Much of the reductions elsewhere have been due to policies
adopted under the umbrella of “justice reinvestment,” a public-private initiative begun by the US
Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Pew Charitable Trusts and now involving
additional partners. Details about justice reinvestment projects in 24 states and 17 local jurisdictions are
available from BJA at bja.gov/programs/justicereinvestment/index.html. See also Public Safety Performance
Project, PEW CHARITABLE TR., pewtrusts.org/en/projects/public-safety-performance-project (last visited
Aug. 1, 2015); About Justice Reinvestment, JUST. CTR., csgjusticecenter.org/jr/about (last visited Aug. 1,
2015); Justice Reinvestment Initiative, VERA INST. OF JUST., vera.org/project/justice-reinvestment-initiative
(last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Justice Reinvestment at the Local Level, URB. INST., urban.org/center/jpc/justicereinvestment/index.cfm (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), CRIME & JUST. INST.,
crj.org/cji/entry/project_justicereinvest (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
364 See, e.g., Success Stories, BJA, bja.gov/programs/justicereinvestment/success_stories.html (last visited
Aug. 1, 2015); Justice Reinvestment Publications, JUST. CTR., csgjusticecenter.org/jr/publications-library (last
visited Aug. 1, 2015).
362

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

73

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

York have all reduced their prison populations by around a quarter without seeing any increase
in crime.365
Not only does downsizing the incarcerated population promise to make other adaptation
strategies more manageable, it also speaks to special difficulties that adaptation presents for
corrections. Security considerations become less complicated and challenging with a smaller
inmate population, and particularly problematic facilities can be retired. Reducing the inmate
population lowers individual facilities’ population density, provided that capacity is not cut in
lockstep with population reductions. Facilities with lower population density are more able to
handle an elastic supply of inmates. And bringing down the number of inmates without
triggering an increase in crime adds to the credibility and perceived effectiveness of the criminal
justice system, thereby strengthening its hand in competition for scarce adaptation funds.
Needless to say, reducing the incarcerated population cannot come at the expense of
increasing crime or otherwise compromising public safety. While shorter sentences, more
effective rehabilitation and reentry services, more supportive parole and supervision, and other
policies can bring down inmate populations over time, downsizing can only go so far before it
produces unacceptable consequences. It also bears noting that increasing the rate at which older
inmates are released as part of overall downsizing, particularly older inmates with cognitive
impairment or mental illness, could have significant implications for community resources and
public health as a whole, since older former inmates already make heavy use of emergency
health care and are frequently hospitalized after release.366

Marc Mauer & David Cole, Opinion, How to Lock Up Fewer People, N.Y. TIMES, May 24, 2015, Sunday
Review at 6, nytimes.com/2015/05/24/opinion/sunday/how-to-lock-up-fewer-people.html.
366 See Brie A. Williams et al., Addressing the Aging Crisis in U.S. Criminal Justice Health Care, 60 J. AM.
GERIATRICS SOC. 1150, 1150, 1154 (2012), ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3374923/pdf
/nihms363409.pdf. One study found that in the two weeks following release from prison older former
inmates were significantly more susceptible to health-related mortality than younger former inmates. See
Ingrid A. Binswanger et al., Release from Prison: A High Risk of Death for Former Inmates, 356 N. ENGL. J.
MED. 157, 159-61 (2007), nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMsa064115.
365

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

74

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

4.3.2
4.3.2.1

Reduce Inmates’ and Correctional Officers’ Susceptibility to Heat Stress
Acclimatize Inmates and Correctional Officers to Heat

In 2011, Larry Gene McCollum, 58, received a one-year sentence in Texas for a minor,
nonviolent offense.367 After serving the first month of his sentence in the air-conditioned
McLennan County Jail, he was transferred in July to the Hutchins State Jail in Dallas County
and assigned to a cell without air conditioning, a fan, or a window that could be opened. Within
a week of his transfer the indoor heat index hit 150°F and McCollum died of heatstroke. Earlier
in the week, Douglas Hudson, 62, had died from heatstroke after three days at the Joe F. Gurney
Transfer Facility in Anderson County, Texas.368 Two weeks later, Kenneth James, 52, also died
from heatstroke three days after arriving at Gurney.369 A year later, Rodney Adams, 45, died
from heatstroke the day after he arrived at Gurney.370
At the time of their deaths, McCollum, Hudson, James, and Adams were all taking
medications that increased their susceptibility to heat illness, and some had other risk factors.371
But the suddenness of their deaths after arrival at overheated facilities illustrates the importance
of acclimatization to surviving exposure to hot environments.372
Heat acclimatization is the adaptation of the body over time to a high-temperature
environment. Over the course of days or weeks, the body’s ability to dissipate heat through
perspiration improves and blood vessels undergo physiological changes that increase heat

The facts of McCollum’s story are taken from Jacquielynn Floyd, The Crime of Un-Air-Conditioned Texas
Prisons, DALL. MORNING NEWS (Apr. 24, 2014, 11:01 PM), dallasnews.com/news/columnists/jacquielynnfloyd/20140424-the-crime-of-un-airconditioned-texas-prisons.ece.
368 Brief for Amicus Curiae Families of Deceased Texas Prisoners (Filed in Support of Appellees Elzie Ball,
Nathaniel Code, and James Magee, and Urging Affirmation), Ball v. LeBlanc, No. 14-30067 at 20 (5th Cir.
Sept. 30, 2014).
369 Id.
370 Id.
371 Id.
372 In general, jail inmates are at greatest risk of dying of whatever cause within their first week in a new
facility. Out of the 958 inmates who died in local jails during 2012, more than a third—348—had served
seven or fewer days. BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, NCJ 247448, MORTALITY IN LOCAL JAILS AND STATE
PRISONS, 2000–2012: STATISTICAL TABLES 8 tbl.4 (2014), bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mljsp0012st.pdf. The 2012
data are typical. See id. at 9 tbl.5. The Bureau of Justice Statistics does not appear to collect comparable
data for prison-inmate deaths.
367

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

75

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

resistance.373 When people are exposed to high heat without having time to acclimatize, they can
suffer serious or fatal heat illness. A recent study of 20 cases of heat-related workplace death or
injury cited for federal enforcement under section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health
Act found that employers’ “failure to support acclimatization appears to be the most common
deficiency and the factor most clearly associated with death.”374 Of the 13 fatalities, 4 involved
workers who died on their first day on a new job or after returning from time away from the
job; 9 involved deaths in the first three days on a new job or after returning to work.375
Beyond the obvious reasons why acclimatization is important, it has particular significance
in the correctional context for at least two reasons. First, symptoms of even mild heat illness,
such as fatigue and weakness, can diminish correctional officers’ ability to perform their duties
effectively, which can in turn compromise security. Second, numerous conditions can make
acclimation difficult to achieve, including high population density, widespread use of
prescription medications that interfere with thermoregulation, high incidence of chronic health
problems that increase susceptibility to heat, and a sometimes limited availability of cooler
housing assignments.
Correctional health staff should closely monitor inmates and correctional officers who are
new to a hotter facility while they adjust and should instruct them in recognizing and acting on
the warning signs of heat stress. To the extent possible, these inmates and COs should remain in
areas with more moderate temperatures until they have acclimatized. Although full
acclimatization can take a couple of weeks, measurable acclimatization can be obvious within

See Acclimatizing Workers, OSHA, osha.gov/SLTC/heatillness/heat_index/acclimatizing_workers.html
(last visited Aug. 1, 2015); see also Zhe Tian et al., Experimental Study on Physiological and Psychological
Effects of Heat Acclimatization in Extreme Hot Environments, 46 BUILDING & ENV’T. 2033 (2011) (reporting
results of experimental study demonstrating that effects of heat acclimatization are significant and that
acclimatization training can improve adaptability of human body to extremely hot environments). It is
important to note that there has been scant research on the extent to which elderly people or those with
chronic medical conditions are capable of acclimatizing to heat. See Shakoor Hajat et al., Health Effects of
Hot Weather: From Awareness of Risk Factors to Effective Health Protection, 375 LANCET 856, 861 (2010).
374 Sheila Arbury et al., Heat Illness and Death Among Workers—United States, 2012–2103, 63 MORBIDITY &
MORTALITY WKLY. REP. 661, 664 (2014) ), cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm6331.pdf.
375 See id. at 663 tbl.
373

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

76

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

only a few days of exposure to heat.376 New correctional officers and those returning to work
after an absence of more than a week should begin with reduced hours and work up to a full
shift over the course of a work week.377 Inmates and correctional officers alike should have
access to abundant drinking water and ice and should be reminded to remain hydrated.
Inmates should minimize exercise and take frequent cool showers until they become
acclimatized. Correctional officers should take frequent rest breaks and spend time in airconditioned areas where available. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration both provide guidelines to help
employers acclimatize their employees to hot work environments and minimize the risk to
employee health posed by heat.378
4.3.2.2

Segregate Inmates Based on Heat Sensitivity

Another straightforward adaptation option is to assess individual inmates’ vulnerability to
heat stress and assign housing based on those assessments. While temperature and humidity in
all housing areas should be kept at healthy levels, a department or facility that is unable yet to
guarantee that level of care for all inmates should at least ensure that areas that hold the mostsusceptible inmates have adequate climate controls. As a short-term measure for departments
that have only limited housing with adequate climate control, relocating more vulnerable
inmates to separate housing units, where they could be more closely observed and more easily
assisted when temperatures spike, would allow departments to minimize risk while they bring
deficient facilities or housing tiers up to par. For the long term, prophylactically identifying
inmates who are at greater risk of heat-related illness and assigning them to cooler housing
would make it easier to anticipate, minimize, and respond effectively to individual cases of heat
stress.

See id. at 664; Shakoor Hajat et al., Health Effects of Hot Weather: From Awareness of Risk Factors to Effective
Health Protection, 375 LANCET 856, 860 (2010).
377 See Sheila Arbury et al., Heat Illness and Death Among Workers: United States, 2012–2013, 63 MORBIDITY &
MORTALITY WKLY. REP. 661, 664 (2014), cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm6331.pdf (recommending 20 percent
exposure to hot work environment on first day and additional 20 percent on subsequent days for workers
of all types).
378 See Heat Stress, CDC (June 24, 2014), cdc.gov/niosh/topics/heatstress; OSHA’s Campaign to Prevent Heat
Illness in Outdoor Workers, OSHA, osha.gov/SLTC/heatillness/edresources.html (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
376

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

77

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Some segregation of inmates according to their tolerance for heat already takes place. In one
recent case, a federal court ordered that pretrial detainees who take psychotropic drugs be kept
in housing where temperatures do not exceed 85°F.379 Maryland uses a “heat stratification”
process in making housing assignments.380 Individuals admitted to a Maryland Department of
Public Safety and Correctional Services facility receive a medical intake evaluation, in part to
“[i]dentify at an earlier time arrestees/detainees/inmates who may be at risk for heat related
health issues if placed in non–air conditioned environments.”381 All inmates initially receive one
of three “heat risk codes” and are then periodically reevaluated to determine whether that code
should be changed based on factors such as chronic medical conditions and medication use.382
Housing assignments are based, in part, on the individual inmate’s heat-risk code.383
More than half the states now have some geriatric facilities where older inmates are cared
for while still confined.384 Departments should make it a priority to ensure that geriatric housing
be kept at appropriate temperatures.
4.3.3

Phase Out the Most Vulnerable Facilities

Correctional departments close facilities as their needs change, as buildings deteriorate, and
as designs and the penological theories that inspired them become obsolete. The decision to
shut an individual facility involves a variety of considerations, including the age and condition
of the facility, characteristics such as its security level, and adverse local economic impacts and
staff layoffs from a closure. The degree to which a given facility is well-adapted to the impacts
of climate change should be among those factors so that facility closures advance adaptation
efforts rather than setting them back.

See Graves v. Arpaio, 623 F.3d 1043, 1049 (9th Cir. 2010) (affirming district court order).
See MD. OFFICE OF INMATE HEALTH SERVS., MED. EVALS. MANUAL, ch. 1, sec. 1A, pt. I, § II(D)(2) (2009).
381 MD. OFFICE OF INMATE HEALTH SERVS. & OFFICE OF TREATMENT SERVS., MED. EVALS. MANUAL, ch. 1,
sec. 1A, pt. I, § I (2009).
382 Id. § II(D)(2).
383 See id.
384 See RON H. ADAY, AGING PRISONERS: CRISIS IN AMERICAN CORRECTIONS 152 (2003). Examples include
State Park Correctional Center in South Carolina, McCain Correctional Hospital in North Carolina, SCI
Laurel Highlands in Pennsylvania, Hocking CF in Ohio, and Estelle Unit in Texas. See id. at 159–62, 209.
379
380

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

78

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

In the process of assessing their vulnerabilities to the impacts of climate change, correctional
departments will find that some facilities are already well-adapted, others can be retrofitted at
reasonable cost, and still others would be too difficult or costly to cool or are at risk of
inundation from rising sea levels and storm surges. Ultimately, facilities that cannot reasonably
be made suitable for future climate conditions will have to be phased out. If inmate populations
fall significantly, correctional departments may find it unnecessary to replace phased-out
vulnerable facilities. Where replacement facilities are needed, departments will have the
opportunity to build resilient facilities that are well-adapted to meet foreseeable climate impacts
during their expected useful lifetimes.
4.3.4

Retrofit Adaptable Facilities by Maximizing Passive Cooling

Many cost-effective options exist for modifying existing buildings to make them better
suited for hot weather. Installing or upgrading mechanical air-conditioning systems is the most
familiar means of controlling indoor temperatures during summertime, but air conditioning
should not be the first option that correctional departments consider when deciding how to
improve their facilities’ cooling capacity. Air conditioning is expensive, both to install and to
operate, and even the most efficient systems consume significant amounts of energy, which
means more of the carbon emissions that are causing climate change in the first place.
Correctional departments should look first to passive cooling options, including cool roofs,
green roofs and walls, and awnings. Even where passive cooling alone will be inadequate, it
will reduce the need for air conditioning.
Long before human beings used air conditioners or, for that matter, electric fans, they took
advantage of passive cooling techniques to create healthy indoor environments without using
energy. Correctional departments can capitalize on both ancient knowledge and modern
innovations to cool their facilities. A variety of incentives may help defray the cost of installing
passive-cooling options.385

See, e.g., Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency, N.C. CLEAN ENERGY TECH. CENTER,
dsireusa.org (last visited Aug. 1, 2015); CATALOG OF FED. DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE, cfda.gov (last visited
Aug. 1, 2015); LEED, U.S. GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL, usgbc.org/leed (last visited Aug. 1, 2015).
385

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

79

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

In the correctional context, retrofit work on building exteriors offers significant advantages
because it does not require displacing inmate populations and minimizes security
complications. Roofs are a prime target for passive-cooling retrofits.386
Cool roofs, which are typically though not always white or light gray, are a cost-effective
and proven form of passive cooling.387 They work by reflecting solar energy away from a
building and by readily giving up (or emitting) the heat that they do absorb from the sun. Their
high reflectivity and high emissivity allow them to remain about 50 to 60°F cooler than
traditional roofs.388 At their warmest, they can get to 20°F above air temperature, in sharp
contrast to traditional roofs, which can exceed air temperature by up to 85°F.389
Because cool roofs allow less heat to reach building interiors, indoor spaces remain cooler.
That can translate into significant public health benefits where buildings lack mechanical air
conditioning.390 Prime candidates for cool roofs include buildings with existing cooling
deficiencies, buildings whose roof surfaces make up a quarter or more of the total exterior

The Onondaga County Department of Correction is near the end of a multi-year comparative study of
the effects on energy consumption and stormwater management of different roof retrofit options at its
Jamesville, NY, facility. In 2009, four different roofs were installed on top of four inches of foam
insulation: a black rubber conventional roof, an extensive green roof, and two white thermoplastic
polyolefin cool roofs, one over an extra four inches of insulation. Onondaga is a central New York county
where winters are more challenging than summers, so the study has not focused on roof performance
during maximum summertime temperatures. Nevertheless, it will be of interest to any correctional
department considering roof retrofits as part of a climate-change adaptation strategy. See James R. Kirby,
Green, Greener, Greenest?, ROOFING CONTRACTOR (June 4, 2013), roofingcontractor.com/articles/89570green-greener-greenest; ASHLEY-MCGRAW ARCHITECTS, PC, & CDH ENERGY CORP., FINAL REPORT:
COMPARATIVE ROOF TESTING AT ONONDAGA COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY (2011), cdhenergy.com
/presentations/ashley roof final report-Oct 2011.pdf; see also Coalition Extending Research Project on
Sustainable Roofing, CONSTRUCTION SPECIFIER (Dec. 19, 2014), constructionspecifier.com/coalitionextending-research-project-on-sustainable-roofing (reporting extension of research through 2015).
387 A 2008 EPA publication, Reducing Urban Heat Islands: Compendium of Strategies, available at epa.gov
/heatisland/resources/compendium.htm, offers an excellent primer on cool roofs and other passive
cooling techniques. In addition to providing clear explanations of different techniques and how they
work, it lists useful resources for conducting cost-benefit analyses and other calculations.
388 See CLIMATE PROT. P’SHIP DIV., OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC PROGRAMS, EPA, REDUCING URBAN HEAT
ISLANDS: COMPENDIUM OF STRATEGIES: COOL ROOFS 1 (2008), epa.gov/heatisland/resources/pdf
/CoolRoofsCompendium.pdf.
389 See id. at 4.
390 See id. at 11 (reporting on results of Philadelphia program that provided cool roofs and insulation for
residential buildings that lacked air conditioning).
386

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

80

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

surface, and buildings where sun damage already causes traditional roofing materials to
deteriorate.391 Installing exterior insulation at the same time as cool roofing can provide
additional benefits.392
A variety of cool roofing materials are available. For low-sloped rooftops, which are the
most common sites for cool roofs, the main options are coatings and single-ply membranes.393
Options for steep-sloped roofs include cool shingles, tiles, and metal roofing.394 Since cool roofs
do not impose additional loads and since all buildings eventually need new roofs, cool roofs are
an ideal option for retrofitting.
Growing a layer of vegetation on a rooftop provides passive cooling as well as
environmental benefits. Where structural considerations make such green roofs impractical,
green walls—typically trellises with climbing plants—can provide similar benefits.395 Both
approaches take advantage of the shade that plants provide as well as evapotranspiration, the
cooling effect of evaporation from soil (and from foliage after a rainfall) combined with the
movement of water through a plant, up from its roots and out through its leaves, known as
transpiration.396 Although they are darker than cool roofs and reflect less solar energy, green
roofs can be cooler still, both below the temperature of the surrounding air and up to 90°F
cooler than conventional rooftops.397
For roof retrofits, the most appropriate model is the extensive (or low-profile) green roof,
which is relatively light and simple, populated by hardy, rugged, shallow-rooted plants that
spread quickly and require little maintenance once established, such as sedums.398 A

See id. at 20.
See id.
393 See id. at 5–6.
394 See id. at 6–7.
395 One study found that growing vines on a wall cut the temperature of the wall by up to 36°F. See id. at 2.
396 See CLIMATE PROT. P’SHIP DIV., OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC PROGRAMS, EPA, REDUCING URBAN HEAT
ISLANDS: COMPENDIUM OF STRATEGIES: GREEN ROOFS 2–3 (2008), epa.gov/heatisland/resources/pdf
/GreenRoofsCompendium.pdf.
397 See id. at 1.
398 See id. at 4, 14. The other main model is the intensive green roof, also called high- or deep-profile,
which is more akin to a garden or park. See id.
391
392

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

81

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

lightweight, engineered growing medium is used to minimize the load on the roof.399 The
multilayer design ensures adequate drainage, provides insulation, and protects the building
below from leaks.400 Extensive green roofs can have fairly significant pitches, as much as a 30° or
greater slope.401
Green roofs reduce indoor temperatures and can help with stormwater management.402
While green roofs have higher initial costs than cool roofs, they have longer expected lives, so
their lifetime cost may be no higher than that of conventional or cool roofs.403 The viability and
cost effectiveness of retrofitting a building with a green roof largely depends on how the
existing roof was built. Roofs with concrete structural systems lend themselves to green roof
retrofits while those with steel decks present more difficulty and cost.404 Needless to say, such
considerations do not come into play for green walls, which do not add any appreciable
structural load.
Both cool and green roofs can be augmented with photovoltaic systems to generate
electricity. The roof of the Santa Rita Jail in Alameda County, California, combines an extensive
photovoltaic array with a cool roof.405 The shade from the raised panels and the 65-percent
reflectivity of the cool roof membrane lowers peak roof temperatures by 50°F, while the supply
of solar energy cuts almost a third off the facility’s electric bill.406
Green walls are not the only passive cooling option for retrofits that does not require roof
modifications. Windows can be a significant source of heat gain if they are not protected from
direct sunlight. Shading windows with awnings is a traditional, highly cost-effective tactic for
beating summer heat. Indeed, when the court ordered the collection of temperature data on
Louisiana’s death row in Ball v. LeBlanc, the facility’s warden had awnings installed over the

See id. at 15.
See id. at 15–16.
401 See id. at 4.
402 See id. at 8.
403 See id. at 10.
404 See id. at 13.
405 See CTY. OF ALAMEDA, SMART ENERGY STRATEGIES: INTEGRATING SOLAR ELECTRIC GENERATION AND
ENERGY EFFICIENCY: SANTA RITA JAIL CASE STUDY 7 (2002), acgov.org/srjp/caseStudy.pdf.
406 See id. at 2, 7.
399
400

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

82

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

windows of two housing tiers in order to bring down temperatures.407 Awnings over southfacing windows can cut heat gain by up to 65 percent and awnings over west-facing windows
can reduce heat gain by 77 percent.408 High-reflectivity window films can also be applied to
existing windows to deflect sunlight.409
4.3.5

Build New Sustainable, Adapted, and Resilient Facilities

Compared to the complexity of adapting existing correctional facilities to the coming higher
temperatures of this century and the next, ensuring that new facilities are built to be sustainable
and resilient under reasonably foreseeable future conditions is relatively straightforward.
Simply locating new facilities in areas less prone to climate impacts will improve resiliency.410
The range of innovative and effective designs, materials, and technologies will only broaden as
sustainable, climate-adapted construction becomes increasingly commonplace. Opportunities to
share best practices and create model facilities will abound.
It is imperative, however, that correctional departments take the foreseeable impacts of
climate change into account in all current and future construction projects. One way to do this is
to incorporate likely future climate conditions in environmental impact analyses.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires federal agencies to consider
the environmental impact of proposed federal actions and to prepare environmental impact
statements before undertaking actions that are likely to have a significant effect on the
environment.411 Many states and some localities have equivalent statutes that mandate

See Ball v. LeBlanc, 300 F.R.D. 270, 275 (M.D. La. 2013).
Energy Efficient Window Treatments, ENERGY.GOV (Sept. 25, 2012, 9:04 AM), energy.gov/energysaver
/articles/energy-efficient-window-treatments.
409 See id.
410 In some jurisdictions, departments are already required to take climate impacts into account when
siting new facilities. See, e.g., Md. Exec. Ord. 01.01.2012.29: Climate Change and “Coast Smart”
Construction, § B (Dec. 28, 2012) (requiring state agencies seeking funding for new construction,
reconstruction, or rehabilitation of infrastructure to “consider the risk of coastal flooding and sea level
rise to the project” and recommending that they “site and design State structures to avoid or minimize
associated impacts”); Cal. Exec. Ord. S-13-08, § 5 (Nov. 14, 2008) (requiring state agencies planning
construction in coastal areas to “consider a range of sea level rise scenarios for the years 2050 and 2100 in
order to assess project vulnerability and, to the extent feasible, reduce expected risks and increase
resiliency to sea level rise”).
411 See National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 § 102, 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (2015).
407
408

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

83

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

environmental assessments for projects that require the action of a public agency.412 Because
changes in the climate during a project’s lifespan may require adaptations that have
environmental impacts—such as increased water consumption as temperatures rise—
foreseeable future conditions should be taken into account in environmental impact analyses.
In December 2014, the Council on Environmental Quality published a draft guidance for
federal departments and agencies on how to include climate-change considerations in their
NEPA reviews.413 The draft guidance calls on federal agencies to “take into account the ways in
which a changing climate over the life of the proposed project may alter the overall
environmental implications” of agency actions.414 To envision the “expected future state of the
environment” during the “expected lifespan of the proposed project,” the guidance directs
federal agencies to use “available climate change information, including observations,
interpretive assessments, predictive modeling, scenarios, and other empirical evidence.”415
Considering future climate conditions will “inform[] decisions on whether to proceed with and
how to design the proposed action” and will “ultimately enabl[e] the selection of smarter, more
resilient actions.”416
A recent environmental impact statement issued in connection with a proposed new federal
correctional institution and prison camp at Leavenworth, Kansas, acknowledged the need to
consider the impacts of climate change on the project. However, its discussion of the issue was

E.g., California Environmental Quality Act, CAL. PUB. RES. CODE §§ 21000–21177 (West 2015); CONN.
GEN. STAT. §§ 22a-1 to -1h (2014); D.C. CODE §§ 8-109.01–.11 (2015); Environmental Policy Act, GA. CODE
ANN. §§ 12-16-1 to -8 (2015); Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, HAW. REV. STAT. §§ 343-1 to -8 (2015); IND.
CODE §§ 13-12-4-1 to -10 (2015); Maryland Environmental Policy Act, MD. CODE ANN., NAT. RES. §§ 1-301
to -305 (West 2015); MASS. GEN. LAWS ch. 30, §§ 61–62I (2015); Minnesota Environmental Policy Act,
MINN. STAT. §§ 116D.01–.06 (2015); State Environmental Quality Review Act, N.Y. ENVTL. CONSERV. LAW
§§ 8-0101 to 8-0117 (2015); North Carolina Environmental Policy Act of 1971, N.C. GEN. STAT. §§ 113A-1 to
-13 (2015); South Dakota Environmental Policy Act, S.D. CODIFIED LAWS §§ 34A-9-1 to -13 (2014); VA.
CODE ANN. §§ 10.1-1188 to -1192 (2014); State Environmental Policy Act, WASH. REV. CODE §§ 43.21C.010–
.900 (2015); Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act, WIS. STAT. § 1.11 (2015); see also N.J. EXEC ORDER 215
(1989) (requiring environmental review of projects in New Jersey).
413 Revised Draft Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews, 79 Fed. Reg. 77,802 (Dec. 24, 2014).
414 Id. at 77,825.
415 Id. at 77,828.
416 Id. at 77,828–29.
412

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

84

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

only cursory. After noting that global warming of 3 to 8°F is expected over the next 40 to 50
years, the study stated: “It is expected that the proposed project will be unaffected by a
potential climatic change of this magnitude. Furthermore, . . . the proposed project would not be
affected by changes in sea levels.”417 The study did not explain the basis for these conclusions.
States with analogues to NEPA should require environmental impact studies to encompass
analyses of the implications of foreseeable climate changes for all proposed projects, in order to
encourage sustainability and resiliency. As construction of correctional facilities always involves
the action of public agencies, such protocols for impact analyses would provide a formal
structure for designing and building well-adapted prisons and jails. With appropriate planning
there is no reason for correctional officers or inmates to suffer heat stress in a correctional
facility built from this point forward, regardless of how much temperatures rise due to climate
change.
4.3.6

Require Adequate Cooling of Private Facilities

Correctional departments that make use of private facilities to house inmates should ensure
that those facilities have adequate cooling capacity to safeguard inmates’ health. Contracts with
private entities that operate jails or prisons should include provisions requiring that
temperature and humidity in all interior areas be kept within safe ranges. Where private
operators cannot guarantee that inmates and staff will be protected from excessive heat, their
contracts should not be renewed. Designs for new private facilities should incorporate energyefficient and passive cooling features as necessary to guarantee sufficient cooling throughout
the expected lifespan of the facilities, taking into account projections for severe heat.
4.3.7

Collaborate and Cooperate

Climate change will test today’s generation of correctional leaders in ways that few likely
imagined when they entered the field. Adapting their operations and facilities to the changing
climate will take time, resources, creativity, and an ability to make and implement decisions
based on only partial information, since postponing action until the precise extent of
LOUIS BERGER, FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, PROPOSED FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL
INSTITUTION AND FEDERAL PRISON CAMP, LEAVENWORTH, KANSAS III-97 to -98 (April 2015) (prepared by
Louis Berger for Federal Bureau of Prisons).
417

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

85

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

temperature rise and other impacts becomes clear is dangerous and unwise. Correctional
leaders should collaborate and cooperate with each other, with stakeholders, and with
independent public and private entities, sharing best practices and learning from one another’s
successes and disappointments. Adaptation will not be easy but it is still eminently feasible.

4.4 Adaptation Planning by the Federal Bureau of Prisons
The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), part of the US Department of Justice (DOJ), is
included in that department’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, produced in compliance with
executive orders.418 Like all federal agencies, DOJ has been guided in its efforts by materials
issued by the Council on Environmental Quality.419 Although the DOJ plan covers the
department as a whole, some of its contents explicitly mention the BOP.
DOJ began its adaptation work by designating a senior official to be responsible for the
effort.420 It then evaluated the likely impacts of climate change on its assets and infrastructure
and determined that the assets at greatest risk were its buildings, utilities infrastructure, and
personnel.421 It found that the greatest threats to those assets are from severe weather and
flooding, followed by drought and high temperatures, and then sea-level rise.422 The
vulnerabilities of DOJ’s high-risk assets fell into four broad categories: physical damage to
buildings and utilities infrastructure; human health impacts (including prisoners’ vulnerability
to “heat-related health impacts”); disruption of operations resulting from potential unrest and

See Exec. Ord. 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 74
Fed. Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 8, 2009) (superseded by Exec. Ord. 13693: Planning for Federal Sustainability in the
Next Decade, 80 Fed. Reg. 15,871 (Mar. 25, 2015)); Exec. Ord. 13653: Preparing the United States for the
Impacts of Climate Change, 78 Fed. Reg. 66,819 (Nov. 6, 2013).
419 See COUNCIL ON ENVTL. QUALITY, FEDERAL AGENCY CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLANNING:
IMPLEMENTING INSTRUCTIONS (Mar. 4, 2011), whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ceq
/adaptation_final_implementing_instructions_3_3.pdf; COUNCIL ON ENVTL. QUALITY, FEDERAL AGENCY
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLANNING: SUPPORT DOCUMENT (Mar. 4, 2011), whitehouse.gov/sites
/default/files/microsites/ceq/adaptation_support_document_3_3.pdf. Adaptation planners in correctional
departments will find the Support Document particularly useful.
420 DEP’T OF JUSTICE, CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION PLAN 1-1 (2014), justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd
/pages/attachments/2014/10/30/doj-climate-change-adaptation-plan.pdf.
421 Id. at 2-2.
422 Id.
418

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

86

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

increased violence among those affected by climate change; and increased fiscal needs.423 The
plan notes that “[m]ore detailed information on agency vulnerability cannot be published
within this Adaptation Plan because it is considered sensitive to the DOJ mission.”424
To manage climate risks and build resilience, the Adaptation Plan identifies programmatic
activities for DOJ to implement under existing programs and initiatives.425 These include
demonstrating commitment to adaptation efforts through internal communications and policies
and dissemination of up-to-date information; integrating climate-change preparedness into
agency policies, programs, operations, and budgeting; collaborating, sharing information, and
coordinating preparedness planning with other public-sector partners; examining capital
improvement plans for ways to implement adaptive designs; and periodically reviewing and
updating adaptation efforts to reflect both current science and lessons learned.426
Beyond these programmatic activities, the Adaptation Plan enumerates a set of actions that
“require a higher level of effort that is beyond the scope of existing programs and initiatives.”427
Five of these actions, intended to increase understanding of the risks and opportunities
associated with climate change, “include a combination of detailed vulnerability assessments;
monitoring; scientific, social, economic, and behavioral research; exploration of climate change
scenarios; and studies of specific geographic areas, programs, and operations.”428 Noting that
“the BOP must ensure that prisons continue to function in the case of energy disruption, heat
waves, drought, or coastal storm impacts,” the Adaptation Plan emphasizes the need to identify
the department’s highest-risk assets with a greater degree of detail.429 The plan also highlights

Id.
Id.
425 See id. at 2-2 to -5.
426 See id.
427 See id. at 2-3, 2-5, 2-7.
428 Id. at 2-5. The five “actions to understand” are: “Identify High Risk Assets,” “Summarize Current
Climate Resiliency Practices and Lessons Learned by Locality,” “Identify Locations and Scenarios Prone
to Climate-Related Health Impacts,” “Identify Locations and Scenarios Prone to Climate-Related
Population Unrest,” and “Assess Budgetary Implications of Climate-Related Impacts.” Id. at 2-6 to -7. The
plan’s Appendix A provides detailed explanations of all five actions.
429 Id. at 2-6.
423
424

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

87

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

“the spread of a climate-related illness throughout the BOP inmate population” as a health
impact that would have budgetary implications that must be better understood.430
In addition to the five actions to improve understanding, the plan delineates five actions to
address climate-change risks and opportunities, “including pilot activities, modifications to
existing programs, formal integration and dissemination of preparedness policies, sharing of
best practices, and collaboration.”431 As one example of why the agency has committed to
integrating adaptation its investment decisions, the plan notes that “if a facility installs a roof in
a southwestern region of the country without consideration of the projected increased incidence
of heat waves, the investment may not perform as planned and the roof may have to be
replaced or repaired ahead of schedule, resulting in additional financial outlay.”432
The plan also outlines some steps that DOJ will take “to ensure that climate related risks are
considered . . . in real property acquisition and leasing decisions,” including determining
whether “infrastructure is built to withstand projected extreme temperatures.”433 One challenge
for the BOP that the plan identifies is the bureau’s limited control over where its facilities are
located, since Congress, not the BOP, decides where to site federal prisons.434 Additional
provisions in the plan commit DOJ to take actions to “remove barriers to climate resilient
investment, reform policies and funding programs that increase climate vulnerabilities, and
incentivize climate-resilient investment by states, local communities, and tribes,” including
through DOJ grants.435

Id. at 2-7.
Id. The five “actions to address” are: “Increase Adaptive Capacity of Buildings, Utilities Infrastructure,
and Assets,” “Increase Adaptive Capacity of Personnel,” “Anticipate and Avoid Disruption to
Operations,” “Anticipate and Avoid Budgetary Impacts,” and “Integrate Adaptation into Funding,
Investment, and Purchasing Programs.” Id. at 2-7 to -8. The plan’s Appendix B provides detailed
explanations of all five.
432 Id. at 2-8.
433 Id. at 2-10.
434 Id.
435 Id. at 3-1 to -2.
430
431

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

88

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Like all adaptation plans, the DOJ plan is explicitly a work in progress, subject to ongoing
revision as adaptation efforts progress and as climate science develops.436 It also recognizes the
critical importance of approaching adaptation as a collaborative effort, involving information
sharing, participation in interagency programs, and coordination with similar efforts by state,
local, tribal, and territorial partners.437 As they begin their own adaptation work, therefore,
correctional departments across the country will benefit from building relationships with the
adaptation planners at the BOP. Although DOJ’s published Climate Change Adaptation Plan offers
few details to the general public about adaptation efforts at the BOP in particular, more
complete and valuable information is undoubtedly available to fellow correctional departments.

5

CONCLUSION

Much remains unknown about how climate change will transform our nation and world in
the coming decades. That it will have transformative effects is beyond reasonable doubt, though
many remain unable to face the daunting tests it poses for us all, seizing upon uncertainties in
the science in the vain hope that it will all prove to have been a vast misunderstanding. Such
resistance to frightening information is understandable but it is maladaptive and dangerous, as
it risks squandering opportunities to minimize the harmful impacts of climate change. Our best
chance for avoiding the worst of what climate change may bring lies in the opposite response:
mitigating the causes of climate change and adapting to its inevitable impacts.
This paper has focused on the implications of rising temperatures for the correctional sector.
Unfortunately, climate change promises much more than just greater heat. Effective adaptation
will require correctional departments to assess the full range of likely impacts of climate change
and to formulate holistic and coherent strategies to address all those impacts. For some
departments, temperatures may not be as significant a concern as flooding from rising sea levels
or more destructive storm surges. Adaptation will be more difficult for some departments than

See id. at 2-1 (committing DOJ to “continued monitoring to assess the success of the plan, and
mechanisms to periodically review and update the plan”).
437 See id. at 2-5.
436

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

89

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

for others. The first step for all departments, however, is to acknowledge the importance of
assessing their vulnerabilities and beginning to take adaptive measures without delay.
In gauging their vulnerabilities and setting adaptation priorities, correctional departments
should consider not only the direct impacts of rising temperatures but also indirect impacts
such as greater risks of wildfires and drought, increased burdens on the electric grid, and
growing pressures on food and water supplies. Impacts beyond heat include coastal and river
flooding, more extreme weather of all kinds, and infestations of insects and other vermin, some
transmitting disease. Damage to infrastructure, reduced agricultural yields, diminishing
supplies of potable water, public-health crises, and other national impacts will impose
significant costs, and correctional departments are likely to find themselves in tough
competition with other divisions of government for limited public funds. Those correctional
departments that make an early start will be at an advantage in adapting to these and other
impacts.
Beyond getting started without delay, one of the most important steps that correctional
departments can take is to collaborate both with one another and with other public agencies.
Adult corrections will find the most common ground with juvenile justice. Other public
agencies that share common features with corrections include immigration, public health, law
enforcement, and the military.
At this juncture, climate change is not likely to be high on the agenda of most correctional
administrators. One reason for this is that those who are focused on climate change have almost
completely disregarded the correctional sector. Mentions of corrections in the literature on
climate change are virtually nonexistent. Just as the correctional sector must come to terms with
the challenges of climate change, those outside corrections who are already devoted to meeting
those challenges must expand their vision of the public sector to include corrections, juvenile
justice, and other essential public agencies that have been left out of the discussion. Corrections
should not—and will not—have to go it alone.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

90

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

APPENDIX:
POLICIES AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING HEAT AND
CLIMATE CONTROL IN CORRECTIONS
Federal
U.S. DEP’T OF JUST., FED. BUREAU OF PRISONS, PROGRAM STMT. 8041.03, § 2.2.2 (1997)
[for Federal Prison Industries facilities at BOP institutions]

HVAC systems shall be designed to maintain a light manufacturing environment, while remaining
compatible with the institution’s systems. Air conditioning, and/or evaporative cooling (depending
on local environmental conditions), shall be included in the design for the main production floor. All
factory support and administrative areas shall be air-conditioned. The temperature range shall
be similar to other areas within the institution. The factory shall be provided with its own air
handling unit to allow for localized temperature control and ventilation. Heating shall be
provided through this air handling unit.
Alabama
ALA. DEP’T OF CORR., ADMIN. REG. 435, § V(C)(3)(a)(2) (2006)
Inmates assigned to Protective Custody who are taking prescribed psychotropic medication
shall comply with the requirements of AR 619, Psychotropic Medication and Heat, [and] when the
temperature in the housing unit reaches 90 degrees Fahrenheit, the following actions shall be
taken:
(a) Record the temperatures on ADOC Form MH-026, Housing Unit Temperature Log.
(b) Increased ventilation of the area through utilization of fans to improve airflow and reduce
cell temperatures to less than 90 degrees.
(c) Provision of increased fluids and ice.
(d) Allowance of additional showers to provide cooling.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

91

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

(e) Recommend to the Warden to temporarily transfer the inmate to an area of the institution
that is more compatible with the inmate’s clinical status.
ALA. DEP’T OF CORR., ADMIN. REG. 419, change no. 1 (2005)
[§ I:] ADOC will ensure inmates prescribed psychotropic medication with side effects that may
cause sensitivity to sustained elevated temperatures and/or direct sunlight are protected from
these potential health risks.
[§ II:] Efforts will be taken to ensure that inmates receiving certain first generation
antipsychotics, such as Mellaril, Thorazine, and Prolixin, as well as mood stabilizers, such as
Lithium, are not exposed to sustained elevated temperatures or extended periods of direct
sunlight. Individuals on this type of medication have increased sensitivity to sunlight and are at
risk for heat induced syndromes, such as heat stroke, hyperthermia, dehydration, and heat
prostration. This policy does not effect most atypical antipsychotics, such as Geodon and
Risperdal, or antidepressants such as Prozac, Effexor, Pamelor, Paxil, and Zoloft.
ALA. DEP’T OF CORR., ADMIN. REG. 419 (2005)
[§ IV:] A. Psychiatrists/Nurse Practitioners are responsible to inform inmates prescribed
psychotropic medication of potential risks when they are exposed to heat/sun for prolonged
periods.
B. The mental health nurses at each institution will conduct individual or group education
sessions before each summer season to remind inmates prescribed psychotropic medication of
the risks involved with elevated temperature and direct sunlight.
C. Correctional Officers assigned to segregation units where inmates taking psychotropic
medication are housed are responsible for:
1. Monitoring and recording of temperatures in segregation.
2. Initiating measures to reduce temperatures in segregation.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

92

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

D. The Director of Treatment and Wardens will ensure that measures to reduce sun/heat
exposure risks for inmates taking psychotropic medication are initiated and maintained at all
ADOC institutions.
E. The Supervising Psychologist is responsible to remind the institutional Wardens of the risks
of elevated temperature on inmates prescribed psychotropic medication before each summer
season. The Supervising Psychologist is also responsible to monitor that measures to minimize
these risks are completed at each institution. The ADOC Director of Treatment will be consulted
for assistance when the Supervising Psychologist experiences difficulties in achieving
compliance at a specific institution.
[§ V:] A. Mental Health Nursing Staff will advise inmates prescribed psychotropic medication of
the potential risks associated with exposure to sustained elevated temperatures and/or direct
sunlight and offer the following precautionary measures:
1. Wear protective clothing and sunscreen when in direct sunlight.
2. Limit activities/work assignments that are physically exhausting and expose the
inmate to direct sunlight.
3. Consume eight to twelve glasses of liquid per day to prevent dehydration.
B. The Supervising Psychologist will provide the Institution’s SEG Commander/Captain with an
updated weekly list of inmates taking psychotropic medication.
C. Correctional Officers in segregation units that house inmates prescribed psychotropic
medication will:
1. Regularly monitor the temperature (at least three times per day) when the outside
temperature is higher than 80 degrees Fahrenheit.
2. Record the temperatures on ADOC Form MH-026, Housing Unit Temperature Log.
3. Take the following measures if the cell temperature exceeds 90 degrees Fahrenheit:
a. Notify the SEG Commander/Captain.
b. Use fans to increase ventilation and airflow.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

93

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

c. Provide increased amounts of fluids and ice.
d. Allow additional showers to provide cooling.
4. If the above efforts fail to reduce the cell temperature, Officers will:
a. Notify the Warden.
b. Consider temporary transfer to a cooler area in the institution.
D. Inmates taking psychotropic medication will be provided sunscreen if both of the following
apply:
1. They are required to be in direct sunlight for longer than one hour.
2. They are unable to afford the purchase of sunscreen.
Alaska
ALASKA DEP’T OF CORR., POLICIES & PROCEDURES § 801.03(5)(C) (2012)
Facility staff shall strive to maintain ventilation and temperatures in each facility indoor living
and work areas appropriate to summer and winter comfort zones. When feasible, temperatures
shall be maintained between 65 and 80 degrees Fahrenheit.
Arizona
ARIZ. DEP’T OF CORR., DEP’T ORDER 717 (2009)
[.02, § 1.4.10] [Service dog (SD) handlers at offender operations facilities] shall ensure that the
SD is properly protected from heat-related conditions . . .
[.07, § 1.4:] Vehicles [used to transport service dogs] shall be equipped with an operational heat
alarm and or shelter to protect the SD from extreme environmental elements . . .
Arkansas
ARK. CRIM. DET. FACILITY STDS. § 15-1004 (2015)
Air circulation shall be provided and temperature shall be between 65° and 85° Fahrenheit.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

94

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

California
CAL. DEP’T OF CORR. & REHAB., DEP’T OPERATIONS MANUAL ch. 5, art. 19, § 52050.27 (2014)
Canine vehicles shall be equipped with . . . heat monitoring systems to ensure the safety of the
canine.
Temperature extremes can be detrimental to the service dog’s health and in extreme cases may
result in death. . . . During hot, humid weather, the vehicle may be secured with the engine and
air conditioning running and windows partially opened. Only vehicles equipped with ‘secure
idle’ may be left running while inside institutional grounds. In such cases, the vehicle shall be
under direct observation . . . . Extreme caution to inside vehicle temperature on hot days shall
be exercised with welfare checks of the service dog conducted . . . at least every thirty (30)
minutes.
Colorado
COLO. DEP’T OF CORR., ADMIN. REG. 300-56,§ IV(H)8) (2011)
Temperatures in indoor living and work areas are appropriate to the summer and winter
comfort zones [while special controls are in use].
Delaware
DEL. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY 8.55, § V (2015)
It is the policy of the Department that all areas of its facilities will be operated in an
environment that complies with applicable standards related to . . . air circulation/temperatures.
DEL. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY 8.62, § VI (2010)
When building cooling is required, systems should be operated so that indoor temperatures are
maintained at 75–78 degrees during normal hours of operation. However, lobby, corridor,
restroom, building entrances and storage areas shall be maintained at a temperature of 78–80
degrees. Unoccupied buildings and buildings during non-business hours shall be maintained at
a temperature no higher than is required to maintain the integrity and operation of the facility
and its systems. 24 hour facilities, institutions and health care delivery areas are exempt from
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

95

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

these temperature controls to the extent [that] following these measures threatens life, health or
safety. However, when possible, the temperature controls are applicable to the administrative
areas of such buildings. Any buildings, rooms or equipment that require precise climate
controlled conditions to properly operate are also exempt from the above temperature
standards.
DEL. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY D-02.1, § V (2010)
1. The psychiatrist and/or medical director responsible for the facility will identify those
inmates who, by virtue of the medications they are prescribed and other relevant medical
criteria, are at risk for suffering from heat-related complications.
2. The psychiatrist and/or prescribing physician will inform the identified inmates of the
potential risks of prolonged exposure to heat. Mental health and/or nursing staff will educate
the inmates regarding preventative measures, symptoms to watch for and actions to be taken
should symptoms develop. Education efforts will include informing inmates on tricyclic
antidepressants, and other photosensitive medications, of the need to use sunscreen and wear
hats during summer months.
3. Between June 1st and September 30th of each year, the responsible Health Services
Administrator will communicate on a weekly basis the names of all identified inmates, and any
resulting considerations that may need to be made, including, but not limited to, housing
requirements, required levels of fluid consumption, ice, and additional showers, to the facility
administrator or their designee.
4. From June 1st through September 30th of each year, correctional officers working in nontemperature controlled units where the identified inmates are housed will monitor the
temperature on the housing units at least three times per day between the hours of l0 a.m. and 5
p.m. A log will be maintained in which the temperature readings are recorded.
5. The following measures are to be taken in housing units where the identified inmates are
housed if a cell temperature exceeds 90 degrees Fahrenheit:
a. Notify the Shift Commander and nursing supervisor.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

96

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

b. Use fans to increase ventilation and airflow.
c. Provide increased quantities of fluid and ice.
d. Allow additional showers to allow cooling.
e. Re-take cell temperature every hour until the temperature no longer exceeds 90
degrees.
6. When the above measures are ineffective in reducing the cell temperature the following steps
are taken:
a. Notify the facility administrator or designated representative.
b. Have inmates evaluated and monitored by a qualified health care professional, at a
level determined to be clinically appropriate by the on-call physician.
c. Consider temporary transfer of identified inmates to a cooler area.
7. Any inmate who shows signs of heat-related pathology (e.g., nausea, fatigue, headache,
muscle cramps, dry flushed skin, alteration in consciousness) must be immediately referred to
the Medical Department for evaluation and treatment.
District of Columbia
D.C. DEP’T OF CORR., PROGRAM STMT. 7500.1, § 10(e) (2008)
Temperature and humidity are mechanically raised or lowered to acceptable comfort levels.
D.C. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY & PROCEDURE 7500.2C, § 12(b) (2014)
During cooling season, the temperature shall be maintained at a level no higher than 84°F.
D.C. CODE § 24-211.02(b)(2) (2015)
[The Department of Corrections must] Provide to the Council [of the District of Columbia] on a
quarterly basis all internal reports relating to living conditions in the Central Detention Facility,
including . . . the monthly report on temperature control and ventilation.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

97

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Georgia
GA. COMP. R. & REGS. 125-3-5-.04(1)(d) (2015)
During hot weather, all Correctional Officers and Supervisory personnel shall be particularly
alert to the early detection of symptoms and the prevention of cases of heat exhaustion [among
inmates working outdoors]. New inmates and others who have not acclimated to the
environment will require the particular attention of supervisory personnel.
Illinois
20 ILL. ADMIN. C. § 701.80(k) (2015)
Detention areas [in county jails] shall be comfortably heated and cooled according to the season
with a system designed to . . . routinely provide temperatures within the normal comfort zone.
20 ILL. ADMIN. C. § 720.40(c) (2015)
[Buildings in which municipal jails are located must] Be heated and cooled according to the
season with a system designed to . . . routinely provide temperatures within the normal comfort
zone (67° to 85°F).
Indiana
210 IND. ADMIN. C. § 3-1-7(a)(3) (2015)
[In inmate living and activity areas of county jails,] Temperatures shall be maintained at an
acceptable comfortable level consistent with exterior conditions, clothing and bedding issued.
Iowa
IOWA ADMIN. C. § 201-50.4(3) (2015)
[In all detention and living areas of jails,] Fans and an adequate supply of cold liquids will be
made available and utilized when indoor temperatures exceed 85° Fahrenheit.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

98

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

IOWA ADMIN. C. § 201-51.4(3) (2015)
[In all detention and living areas of temporary holding facilities,] Fans and an adequate supply
of cold liquids will be made available and utilized when indoor temperatures exceed 85°
Fahrenheit.
Kansas
KAN. DEP’T OF CORR., INTERNAL MGMT. POLICY & PROCEDURE § 09-102 (2011)
Facilities shall maintain energy efficient thermostat settings, with such devices located in
housing, program, and exercise areas to be set . . . where tempered air is available, not lower
than 78 degrees Fahrenheit during summer cooling. In other areas of the facilities, the settings
shall be set at not . . . less than 72 degrees Fa[h]renheit for cooling.
Kentucky
501 KY. ADMIN. REGS. 3:050 (2015)
[§ 10(16)(a)(3):] Temperature ranges within comfort zones (sixty-five (65) degrees Fahrenheit to
eighty-five (85) degrees Fahrenheit) [are among the required design features for living areas in
new local correctional facilities].
[§ 10(17)(c):] Temperature ranges within comfort zones (sixty-five (65) degrees Fahrenheit) to
eighty-five (85) degrees Fahrenheit [are among the required design features for directsupervision areas in new local correctional facilities].
501 KY. ADMIN. REGS. 7:050, § 10(3)(e)(6) (2015)
“Each occupied area [in a new restricted-custody center] shall have temperature ranges within
comfort zones, sixty-five (65) degrees Fahrenheit to eighty-five (85) degrees Fahrenheit.
Louisiana
LA. ADMIN. CODE. tit. 22, § 3707(A) (2015)
Temperature and humidity ranges in . . . [new jails] shall be checked and approved by the state
health officer.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

99

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Maine
ME. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY 12.4, § VI(E)(2) (2015)
Temperatures in indoor living and work areas shall be appropriate to summer and winter
comfort zones.
03-201 ME. CODE R. ch. 1, § II.a(R.20) (LexisNexis 2015)
All inmate housing areas [in county jails] shall be maintained at temperatures no less than 65
and no more than 85 degrees F.
03-201 ME. CODE R. ch. 1, § II.b(H.43) (LexisNexis 2015)
Prisoner holding areas [in holding facilities] shall be no less than 65 degrees F and no more than
85 degrees F.
03-201 ME. CODE R. ch. 1, § II.c(SDA.22) (LexisNexis 2015)
Detention area temperatures shall be no less than 65 degrees F. and no more than 85 degrees F
[in short-term detention areas].
Maryland
MD. CODE REGS. 12.02.03.06(A)(12) (2015)
The [community adult rehabilitation] facility shall be well ventilated to insure that internal
temperatures during summer months do not exceed outside temperatures by more than 10
degrees.
MD. DIV. OF DET. & PRETRIAL SERVS., DIRECTIVE DPDS.185.0008 (2009)
[Note: The origin of these (and perhaps other) provisions appears to be Duvall v. Glendening,
1:94-cv-02541-JFM (D. Md.), available at clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=758.]
[.01(A):] This directive establishes a heat management system for detainees housed in facilities
of the Division of Pretrial Detention and Services.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

100

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

[.03:] The Division will implement the Heat Plan to reduce the possibility of heat injury and
address the health concerns of identified detainees. The Heat Plan will automatically be in effect
from May 1st through September 30th each year and whenever a heat emergency is declared by
the DPSCS [Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services] Medical Director.
[.04(B)(1):] “Heat Plan” means a systematic plan of action implemented in the summer months,
or when there is anticipated warming of the ambient air that exceeds 88° Fahrenheit. The plan
allows for the identification and housing of detainees at risk for heat injury.
[.05:] A. Assessment and Identification
At the time of intake, medical staff will assess the detainee to determine if the individual is
susceptible to heat related injuries and assign a corresponding heat risk code of:
(1) H-1;
(2) H-2; or
(3) H-3.
B. Housing Assignment
Medical staff shall forward documentation reflecting the heat risk code of new detainees to the
Traffic Unit to be used for housing assignment as follows:
(1) Heat Risk Code – H-I detainees shall be assigned to a:
(a) Permanently air-conditioned housing area; or
(b) Housing area with provisions for respite, to include:
(i) Rotational movement of the detainee to an area at a temperature of 87°
Fahrenheit or lower for a period of 1 hour at least 3 times daily;
(ii) Circulating air in the housing area while inside temperatures exceed
88° Fahrenheit for four hours;
(iii) Access to at least 12 ounces of water or other fluids per hour for 10
consecutive hours;

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

101

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

(iv) Minimization of physical activity and outside work related activities;
and
(v) Showers once each day.
(2) Heat Risk Code – H-2 detainees shall be assigned to a housing area with provisions
for respite, to include:
(a) Rotational movement of the detainee to an area at a temperature of 87°
Fahrenheit or lower for a period of 1 hour at least 2 times daily;
(b) Circulating air in the housing area while inside temperatures exceed 88°
Fahrenheit for four hours;
(c) Access to at least 8 ounces of water or other fluids per hour for 10 consecutive
hours;
(d) Minimization of physical activity and outside work related activities; and
(e) Showers as per the routine facility.
(3) Heat Risk Code – H-3 detainees shall be assigned to housing areas following the
standard heat alert protocol.
C. Heat Code Re-Evaluation
(1) Medical Services, Psychology Services and Mental Health staff will provide updated
lists of detainees assigned to heat risk codes of H-1 or H-2 each week.
(2) If the detainee’s heat risk code has changed, the authorized treatment staff will
submit a “Transfer of Housing” form to the Traffic Office.
D. Heat Alert Action – General
(1) The Warden is responsible to provide instructions, procedures, post orders and any
other directions required for the implementation of this directive.
(2) Whenever the Office of Resident Health Services issues a Heat Alert for a facility, the
Warden or design shall ensure that:

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

102

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

(a) All facility staff is notified of the Heat Alert at roll call;
(b) Provisions are made to supply adequate amounts of ice to all housing areas of
that facility;
(c) Provisions are made to deploy additional fans in that facility as needed;
(d) In Specialized Housing Areas ( Maximum Security) respite for H-I and H-2
coded detainees will be provided in 1 dayroom for each housing unit through
the utilization of a window-mounted air condition unit.
(e) Facility staff is advised to follow protocol as outlined in Attachment A of this
directive; and
(f) Daily records are maintained during Heat Alerts to document the time period
and location for which each occasion of respite was provided.
[Attachment A:] Heat Alert Information Sheet
• All individuals should drink additional fluids to keep themselves hydrated. Ensure that
sufficient water, or other drinking fluids, and ice is available during this time of excessive heat
• Work crews should take additional breaks and need to stay hydrated. Please, Note that water
replacement alone is not sufficient in severe heat conditions. In consultation with the DPSCS
Medical Director, outside work crew schedules may be modified related to excessive heat, (e.g..
work in am only).
• Outside recreation may be cancelled or recreation moved to a cooler location and recreation
time may be limited.
• Increased use of showers may be permitted, after consultation with the Building Supervisor.
• Advise all detainees who suffer from chronic conditions such as asthma, hypertension,
diabetes, etc., to use caution in their exercise routine. Individuals on medications that are
sensitive to heat should also use caution in their exercise routine.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

103

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

• Individuals should use caution and be mindful of the symptoms of heat illness listed below.
Please, ensure that all individuals who show these early signs of heat stroke are referred to the
dispensary:
(1) Dizziness
(2) Headache
(3) Nausea
(4) Vomiting
(5) Excessive sweating
(6) Feeling faint
MD. OFFICE OF INMATE HEALTH SERVS., MED. EVALS. MANUAL, ch. 1, sec. 1A, pt. I (2009)
[§ I:] All inmates newly admitted to DPSCS facilities shall receive a medical intake evaluation
immediately upon an inmate’s entrance from the community that will . . . Identify at an earlier
time arrestees/detainees/inmates who may be at risk for heat related health issues if placed in
non-air conditioned environments.
[§ II(D)(2):] Heat Stratification is required on all admissions to an Intake facility and periodically
as conditions affecting any change in that status arise.
a. All arrestees, male and female will be assigned a heat risk category upon entry and at
the Comprehensive Intake Physical Examination and housing assignment process, and
throughout the year.
i. All male arrestees shall be designated for H1 housing by the
receiving/screening nurse while at BCBIC (air conditioned housing) until they
are reevaluated by a clinician and heat risk is reclassified based upon the initial
chronic medical conditions or medications prescribed as per DPSCS heat
stratification policy.
A. Clinical findings and medications prescribed at the intake examination
will determine the final heat risk stratification.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

104

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

B. Any detainee who is prematurely moved prior to receiving a
Comprehensive intake Physical or is placed into a non air-conditioned
facility as part of the transfer screening process, prior to receipt of a final
heat stratification assignment will receive an his or her Intake
Comprehensive Intake Physical and a final heat stratification.
iii. [sic; there is no ii] The H-1 assignment will remain until the intake physical is
completed and an alternative risk is assigned.
b. Female arrestees will receive heat stratification upon entry to BCBIC and upon their
Comprehensive Intake Physical at WDC per protocol.
c. Final heat stratification shall be by medical doctor and shall be documented on the
Electronic Patient Health Record (EPHR) Patient Problem list as “Heat Risk
Stratification” category H-1[,] H-2 or H-3 and in the Electronic Patient Health Record
(EPHR) Medical Classification template located on the home page.
d. A weekly data report of H-1 and H-2 detainees will be maintained and submitted to
classification and to the OIHS as an electronic file from May 1 through September 30th
each calendar year from both medical and mental health contractors . Included in that
file shall be, at a minimum:
i. The inmate’s name,
ii. Date of birth,
iii. DOC number,
iv. Heat stratification code
v. Facility and
vi. Any code changes.
e. There shall be a notification on the individual problem lists for patients requiring a
heat stratification code change, specifically, the original heat stratification on the
problem list will be recorded as resolved and the new Heat Stratification will be entered

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

105

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

as the current “problem” on that list. This process will be repeated every time there is a
Heat Stratification change.
MD. DIV. OF PRETRIAL DET. & SERVS., DIRECTIVE DPDS.185.0008, HEAT PLAN (2009)
[§ .03:] The Division will implement the Heat Plan to reduce the possibility of heat injury and
address the health concerns of identified detainees. The Heat Plan will automatically be in effect
from May 1st through September 30th each year and whenever a heat emergency is declared by
the DPSCS [Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services] Medical Director.
[§ .04(B)(1):] “Heat Plan” means a systematic plan of action implemented in the summer
months, or when there is anticipated warming of the ambient air that exceeds 88° Fahrenheit.
The plan allows for the identification and housing of detainees at risk for heat injury.
[§ .05:] A. Assessment and Identification
At the time of intake, medical staff will assess the detainee to determine if the individual is
susceptible to heat related injuries and assign a corresponding heat risk code of:
(1) H-1;
(2) H-2; or
(3) H-3.
B. Housing Assignment
Medical staff shall forward documentation reflecting the heat risk code of new detainees to the
Traffic Unit to be used for housing assignment as follows:
(1) Heat Risk Code – H-I detainees shall be assigned to a:
(a) Permanently air-conditioned housing area; or
(b) Housing area with provisions for respite, to include:
(i) Rotational movement of the detainee to an area at a temperature of 87°
Fahrenheit or lower for a period of 1 hour at least 3 times daily;

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

106

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

(ii) Circulating air in the housing area while inside temperatures exceed
88° Fahrenheit for four hours;
(iii) Access to at least 12 ounces of water or other fluids per hour for 10
consecutive hours;
(iv) Minimization of physical activity and outside work related activities;
and
(v) Showers once each day.
(2) Heat Risk Code – H-2 detainees shall be assigned to a housing area with provisions
for respite, to include:
(a) Rotational movement of the detainee to an area at a temperature of 87°
Fahrenheit or lower for a period of 1 hour at least 2 times daily;
(b) Circulating air in the housing area while inside temperatures exceed 88°
Fahrenheit for four hours;
(c) Access to at least 8 ounces of water or other fluids per hour for 10 consecutive
hours;
(d) Minimization of physical activity and outside work related activities; and
(e) Showers as per the routine facility.
(3) Heat Risk Code – H-3 detainees shall be assigned to housing areas following the
standard heat alert protocol.
C. Heat Code Re-Evaluation
(1) Medical Services, Psychology Services and Mental Health staff will provide updated
lists of detainees assigned to heat risk codes of H-1 or H-2 each week.
(2) If the detainee’s heat risk code has changed, the authorized treatment staff will
submit a “Transfer of Housing” form to the Traffic Office.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

107

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

D. Heat Alert Action – General
(1) The Warden is responsible to provide instructions, procedures, post orders and any other
directions required for the implementation of this directive.
(2) Whenever the Office of Resident Health Services issues a Heat Alert for a facility, the
Warden or design shall ensure that:
(a) All facility staff is notified of the Heat Alert at roll call;
(b) Provisions are made to supply adequate amounts of ice to all housing areas of that
facility;
(c) Provisions are made to deploy additional fans in that facility as needed;
(d) In Specialized Housing Areas (Maximum Security) respite for H-I and H-2 coded
detainees will be provided in 1 dayroom for each housing unit through the utilization of
a window-mounted air condition unit.
(e) Facility staff is advised to follow protocol as outlined in Attachment A of this
directive; and
(f) Daily records are maintained during Heat Alerts to document the time period and
location for which each occasion of respite was provided.
Massachusetts
103 MASS. CODE REGS. 920.10 (2015)
At least every three years, an independent, qualified source shall document that all living areas
have: . . . (3) Temperatures appropriate to summer and winter comfort zones . . .
MASS. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY 103 DOC 703.12(9) (2013)
[.12(9):] Temperatures in indoor living and work areas [of new construction and additions] are
appropriate to the summer and winter comfort zones per Department of Public Health
Regulations.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

108

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

[.19(3)(C):] [In all activity areas of new construction and additions,] temperatures are
appropriate to the summer and winter comfort zones with consideration for the activity being
performed.
Minnesota
MINN. R. 2900.0200, subpt. 19 (2015)
All [new] facilities shall be designed and provided with necessary equipment to maintain
temperatures in prisoner living areas between 65 and 71 degrees Fahrenheit during winter
months and between 66 and 85 degrees Fahrenheit during summer months.
MINN. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICIES, DIRECTIVES & INSTRUCTIONS MANUAL, POLICY 105.126 (2015)
PURPOSE: To establish a process for the prevention of heat related illnesses, cold weather
exposure, and protection from severe weather.
POLICY: . . . Each applicable unit/facility must establish a safety program that establishes
guidelines for the prevention of heat related illnesses, cold weather exposure, and protection
from severe weather. Each applicable unit/facility must develop instructions to implement this
policy.
MINN. R. 5205.0110, subpt. 2 (2015)
. . . The requirements of this subpart cover employee exposure to indoor environmental heat
conditions. . . .
[(A)(1):] “Wet bulb globe temperature index” or “WBGT” means a measure of the combined
effect of air temperature, air speed, humidity, and radiation. WBGT = 0.7 Tnwb + 0.3 Tg.
[(A)(4):] “Heavy work” means 350 or higher kcal/hr (kilocalories per hour), for example: heavy
lifting and pushing, shovel work.
[(A)(5):] “Moderate work” means 200 to 350 kcal/hr, for example: walking with moderate lifting
and pushing.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

109

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

[(A)(6):] “Light work” means up to 200 kcal/hr, for example: sitting or standing performing light
hand or arm work.
[(B):] Employees shall not be exposed to indoor environmental heat conditions in excess of the
values listed in Table 1. The values in Table 1 apply to fully clothed acclimatized workers.
TABLE 1. Two-hour time-weighted average permissible heat exposure limits.
Work Activity

WBGT, °F

Heavy work

77

Moderate work 80
Light work

86

[(C):] Employees with exposure to heat shall be provided training according to part 5206.0700,
subparts 1 and 3 [Department of Labor and Industry rules for training employees about harmful
physical agents.].
Nebraska
77 NEB. ADMIN. CODE § 001.01C (2015)
[Existing community residential facilities must have] Adequate heating and cooling systems to
insure a comfortable and healthful living and working environment that are [sic] appropriate to
the summer and winter comfort zones.
77 NEB. ADMIN. CODE § 006.07 (2015)
Heating and cooling systems [in newly constructed and renovated community residential
facilities] shall provide a comfortable and healthful living and working environment with
temperatures maintained between sixty-five (65) and eighty (80) degrees Fahrenheit.
81 NEB. ADMIN. CODE § 006.04 (2015)
“Heating and cooling systems [in newly constructed and renovated jail facilities] shall provide a
comfortable and healthful living and working environment with temperatures maintained
between sixty-five (65) and eighty (80) degrees Fahrenheit.”
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

110

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Nevada
NEV. ADMIN. CODE § 211.320(3) (2014)
Cells, dormitories, dayrooms and other areas of local correctional institutions used to house
inmates . . . must be provided with a ventilating system which is maintained to prevent the
inside air temperature from rising above 85 degrees Fahrenheit.
NEV. DEP’T OF CORR., ADMIN. REG. 493.02, § 3(A)(1) (2014)
Set all air conditioning space temperatures at 78 degrees Fahrenheit (summer cooling) during
daytime waking hours and 83 degrees Fahrenheit during nighttime sleeping hours in inmate
cells and staff offices and common areas. NRS 444.335/NAC211.320 states that a comfort level of
no more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit be maintained in inmate cells. In addition[,] Section 1028 of
the State Administrative Manual (SAM) states the following “Building temperature should be
kept at a minimum of 78°F in the summer”
New Jersey
N.J. ADMIN. CODE §§10A:4-10.4(a) (2015)
Ventilation and reasonable temperature shall be maintained on a 24 hour basis [in detention
areas].
N.J. ADMIN. CODE §§10A:5-2.12(a) (2015)
Proper ventilation, lighting, room temperatures, cleanliness and properly functioning sanitary
fixtures shall be maintained in cells within the [Management Control Unit] . . . .
N.J. ADMIN. CODE §§10A:5-3.4(a) (2015)
Ventilation and reasonable temperature shall be maintained on a 24–hour basis [in
administrative segregation, close custody units].
N.J. ADMIN. CODE §§10A:5-5.6(a) (2015)
Ventilation and reasonable temperature shall be maintained on a 24–hour basis [in protective
custody, close custody units].

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

111

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

New Mexico
N.M. CORR. DEP’T, POLICY CD-163000, § GG (2013)
Temperatures in indoor living and work areas shall be appropriate to the summer . . . comfort
zone.
N.M. CORR. DEPT., POLICY CD-171500 (2013)
PURPOSE: To establish the Standard of Care for the reduction of psychotropic medicationrelated heat pathology.
POLICY: Medications with anticholinergic effects, such as phenothiazines, tricyclic
antidepressants, antihistamines, etc., decrease sweating capacity. Neuroleptics affect the
thermoregulating mechanisms of the brain. Diuretics, such as furosemide (lasix),
hydrochlorathiazides [sic], etc., cause dehydration. Inmates on any of these types of
medications have increased sensitivity to heat and sunlight and are at high risk for developing
the following heat induced syndromes: muscle cramps, heat exhaustion and malignant
neuroleptic syndrome (heat stroke). Inmates taking any of these medications should not be
exposed to elevated temperatures, poorly ventilated areas, or direct sunlight for extended
periods of time.
N.M. CORR. DEPT., POLICY CD-171501 (2013)
PROCEDURE:
A. The prescribing physician will warn inmates taking diuretics or psychotropic medication of
the risks of developing heat-related illnesses.
B. Inmates will be advised to wear protective clothing and/or sunscreen when under direct
sunlight.
C. Inmates will be advised to avoid excessive exhausting activities in high temperatures during
the summer.
D. Native American inmates taking diuretics or psychotropic medication will be warned
regarding the risks of developing heat-related illnesses while participating in sweat lodges.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

112

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

E. Inmates will be advised to drink an adequate amount of fluids (8–12 glasses of liquid per
day) to avoid dehydration.
F. If the inmate needs special living or work conditions, the Facility Medical Director will issue
a written order (which may be a medical chrono) addressing the need to the facility
classification officer. At the beginning of each week, a list of all inmates that are subject to
developing heat pathology will be submitted to the Unit Manager.
G. The housing unit custody officer will check the inside and outside temperatures every two
hours, from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. beginning June 1 and continuing through September 30.
H. The following documents are to be maintained at the institution each month from June1 and
continuing through September 30:
1. Outside Temperature Logs,
2. Inside Temperature Logs,
3. Medical Rounds Logs,
4. Heat Incident Logs, and
5. Weekly Lists of Heat-Risk Inmates.
I. A heat pathology log must be maintained, reviewed and signed by the Warden or Deputy
Warden and the Health Service Administrator. It shall include the following information in
chronological order:
1. Inside Temperature of 90 Degrees and Above:
Include date, hour(s), temperature and location by housing unit(s). Indicate “None” if a
temperature of 90 degrees was not attained in the housing unit(s).
2. Medical Rounds Performed in Housing Unit(s) Reaching 90 Degrees or More:
Name of medical staff conducting rounds, name of inmate(s), NMCD number(s),
housing unit(s) and a brief summary of medical treatment ordered. Indicate “None” if
there were no heat-related illnesses identified.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

113

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

3. Outside Temperature Logs:
Include date, hour(s), temperature, and location by housing unit(s). Indicate “None” if
an outside temperature of 90 degrees was not attained.
4. Weekly List of Heat-Risk Inmates:
Note the distribution (as deemed appropriate) and availability of list on file at the
institution.
5. Heat Incident Log:
Include the name and inmate number of any inmate requiring attention because of heat
exposure; include the date, time, hour of incident, and housing unit.
J. If inmates housing area exceeds 90 degrees Fahrenheit, the following measures must be
instituted by the Unit Manager:
1. Notify the Health Services Administrator;
2. Provisions of increased fluids and ice;
3. Allowance of additional showers to provide cooling;
4. Increase ventilation to the area as much as possible to reduce housing area
temperatures to less than 90 degrees Fahrenheit;
5. If the housing area remains consistently above 90 degrees Fahrenheit, temporary
transfer of the inmate to an area of the institution or other institution that is more
compatible with the inmate’s clinical status.
K. Inmates who show signs of heat-related pathology, e.g. nausea, fatigue, headache, muscle
cramps, dry flushed skin, alteration in consciousness, must be immediately referred to the
Medical Department for evaluation and treatment, according to the “Protocol for Treatment of
Heat-induced Syndrome”.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

114

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

North Carolina
10A N.C. ADMIN. CODE 14J.1217(a) (2015)
Each [new] jail shall have heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems that are capable of
maintaining temperatures in confinement units not less than 68 degrees Fahrenheit during the
heating season and not more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit during the cooling season.
10A N.C. ADMIN. CODE 14J.1512(i) (2015)
Confinement areas [in existing jails and local confinement facilities] shall be cooled within a
range of not less than 75 degrees nor more than 85 degrees.
10A N.C. ADMIN. CODE 14J.1606(4) (2015)
[Mechanical systems in existing state-funded satellite work/work-release units must] Have
capability of maintaining temperatures in the confinement areas within 68 degrees Fahrenheit
minimum in the heating season and a maximum of 85 degrees Fahrenheit during the nonheating season.
10A N.C. ADMIN. CODE 14J.1743(a) (2015)
Each municipal lockup shall have heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems that are
capable of maintaining temperatures in confinement units not less than 68 degrees Fahrenheit
during the heating season and not more than 85 degrees Fahrenheit during the cooling season.
Ohio
OHIO ADMIN. CODE 5120:1-7-02(B)(17) (2015)
[Definition] “Fundamental rights”: Rights which may not be suspended for disciplinary or
classification reasons and which are to be guaranteed to all inmates except in times of
emergency or other such conditions beyond the control of the facility administrators. Such
rights may include . . . adequate ventilation, temperature control . . . .

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

115

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

OHIO ADMIN. CODE 5120:1-8-04(D) (2015)
(Important) Temperature is mechanically raised or lowered to acceptable comfort levels [in fullservice jails].
OHIO ADMIN. CODE 5120:1-10-04(C)(2) (2015)
[In single cells/rooms and multiple occupancy cells/rooms/dormitories of 12-day jails,]
Temperatures shall be maintained in a range between sixty-six to eighty degrees Fahrenheit.
OHIO ADMIN. CODE 5120:1-12-04(C)(2) (2015)
[In single cells/rooms and multiple occupancy cells/rooms of 12-hour facilities,] Temperatures
shall be maintained in a range between sixty-six to eighty degrees Fahrenheit.
OHIO DEP’T OF REHAB. & CORR., POLICY 67-MNH-07, § H (2015)
1. Inmates on psychotropic medication shall not be exposed to sustained elevated temperature
or direct sunlight for extended periods of time. Patients on certain psychotropic medications
have increased sensitivity to sunlight and are at higher risk of heat-induced syndromes:
heatstroke, hyperthermia, and heat prostration. In view of these factors, inmates and
correctional staff shall be provided the following information:
a. Inmates shall be directed to wear protective clothing and/or sunscreen when in direct
sunlight.
b. Inmates shall be directed to avoid excessive, exhausting activities outdoors in the heat
of summer.
c. Inmates shall be directed to consume an adequate intake of fluids (8–12 glasses of
liquid per day) to avoid dehydration.
2. Institutional staff, as designated by the Managing Officer, shall ensure that the following
steps are taken:
a. The temperature of the buildings and interior of the cells must be monitored regularly
during the summer months and logged on a temperature log . . . .

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

116

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

b. If the inmate housing areas exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit, the following “Heat Plan”
measures shall be instituted:
i. Provide increased ventilation to the area through utilization of fans to
improved air flow and reduce ambient temperature to less than 90 degrees.
ii. Make provisions for increased fluids and ice.
iii. Permit additional showers to provide cooling.
iv. Consideration shall be given by the Managing Officer or designee to permit a
temporary reassignment of the inmate to an area of the institution that is cooler
and more compatible with the inmate’s clinical status.
3. The temperature log shall also record whether any Heat Plan measures were implemented,
which measures were implemented, and how long they were in effect.
4. Completed logs shall be submitted to the MHA/MHM.
Oklahoma
OKLA. ADMIN. CODE § 310:670-5-6(27) (2015)
Air circulation and ventilation [in jail facilities and detention centers] shall be capable of
maintaining a temperature of at least eighty-five (85) degrees Fahrenheit or lower. If
temperature exceeds eighty-five (85) degrees Fahrenheit, positive air movement shall be
provided by use of fans, coolers, or air conditioning units. New facilities or substantially
remodeled facilities shall be equipped with central air conditioning or individual air
conditioning units which are capable of maintaining a temperature of eighty-five (85) degrees
Fahrenheit.
“Excessive Heat Warning—Contingency Planning,” Memorandum from Don Sutmiller, Chief
Medical Officer, to All Correctional Administrators & All Correctional Healthcare Professionals
(May 6, 2014), available at ok.gov/doc/documents/Heat warning 2011.pdf
In preparation for the upcoming summer temperatures, the following guidelines should be put
in place. When continued exposure to air temperatures or heat index readings, exceed 95
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

117

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

degrees Fahrenheit, this puts certain individuals at an increased risk for heat related illnesses.
Elderly offenders (over 55 years of age) and mental health patients on psychotropic medication have the
greatest risk potential. Other factors contributing to an individual’s risk include:
• Chronic illnesses, particularly respiratory and cardiovascular disease and diabetes
• Recent illness involving fluid loss from vomiting or diarrhea.
• Humid weather
• Working or residing in a hot environment
• Loss of body fluids from sweating and failure to drink sufficient quantities of
replacement fluids
• Heavy, restrictive clothing
• Fever
The effects of extreme heat can be insidious and may compromise an individual’s health status
even before it becomes apparent. Simple overexposure can cause heat exhaustion in elderly
persons. Recognizing the early onset of symptoms is essential. Signs and symptoms of heat
exhaustion include:
• Dizziness, fatigue, faintness, and headache.
• Skin that is pale and clammy.
• Weak rapid pulse.
• Breathing that is fast and shallow.
• Muscle cramps, usually of the abdomen or legs.
• Intense thirst.
People who do not receive adequate treatment for the symptoms of heat exhaustion will likely
develop symptoms of heat stroke. This condition is life threatening. Signs and symptoms of a heat
stroke include:
• Skin that becomes hot, dry, and appears flushed.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

118

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

• Perspiration ceases.
• Body temperature is elevated and may reach 107 degrees Fahrenheit.
• Rapid pulse.
• Mental confusion.
• Eventual loss of consciousness.
Offender mental health patients who are taking psychotropic medications are also at increased
risk for sun and heat sensitivity. They should avoid direct sun or extreme heat exposure. They
should receive a break every 30 minutes in shade, and should be encouraged to drink fluids
when the heat index temperature exceeds 85 degrees. Exercise should be encouraged only in the
early morning rather than in the highest heat of the day. Facility work crew supervisors should
contact Medical Services for recommendations regarding work crew restrictions.
Offenders should have access to hats and sunscreen as appropriate for their work assignment.
Treatment must be initiated when symptoms of heat exhaustion are identified. Immediate first
aid measures include:
• Get the person out of the heat and into a cooler environment.
• Place them in the shock position (lying on back with feet elevated) if indicated.
• Remove or loosen clothing.
• Cool them by fanning and/or with cold packs, wet towels or sheets.
• Offer water ( 4–5 ounces) every 15 minutes if they are conscious and can tolerate it.
Each facility must develop a contingency plan to ensure adequate protection for offenders who
have the greatest risk potential. Elements of this plan should include:
• Identification of offenders who meet the criteria for risk (i.e., over 55 or on psychotropic
medications).

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

119

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

• Routine assessment of offenders who are at risk when air temperatures or heat index
readings exceed 95 degrees Fahrenheit (unless the offender is housed on an airconditioned unit).
• An air-conditioned area available between sunrise and sunset if needed. Symptomatic
offenders at risk may be successfully managed in the air-conditioned area during day
light hours and returned to their housing units after sunset.
• Fans available to elderly offenders who have other risk factors and do not live on airconditioned housing units.
Please provide appropriate consultation and advisement to your facility head. It will require a
cooperative effort by medical and security to ensure that measures are implemented to protect
offenders who are at risk for heat related illnesses. Thank you for your assistance and prompt
attention. Feel free to call if you have any questions.
Pennsylvania
PA. DEP’T OF CORR., GENERAL SAFETY PROCEDURES MANUAL, POLICY 15.1.1, § I(D)(1)(b) (2014)
A Ventilation/Light/Sound/Temperature Testing Report (Attachment 1-F) shall be completed
annually by the Central Office Safety and Environmental Protection Division during the Annual
Operations Inspection.
PA. DEP’T OF CORR., GENERAL SAFETY PROCEDURES MANUAL, POLICY 15.1.1, § 20(C)(4) (2011)
Interior Environment
a. The temperature in all Department-owned facilities will be maintained at 67 degrees in the
winter and 75 degrees in the summer.
b. This excludes areas that are not heated or cooled and areas with unique environmental needs.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

120

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

South Dakota
S.D. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY 1.5.C.1 (2014) [scheduled for revision in 3/15]
[§ II:] Department of Corrections (DOC) staff will have inmates discontinue strenuous physical
activity when the heat index reaches a level considered unsafe.
[§ IV(1)(A):] The shift commander will ensure the heat index is monitored whenever weather
conditions warrant.
[§ IV(2):] Monitoring Heat Index and Declaring an Alert:
A. Any time the temperature is forecasted to be ninety degrees Fahrenheit (90ºF) or greater, the
shift commander or designee will periodically check the heat index, particularly from the hours
of 12 p.m. to 5 p.m.
1. Any time the heat index is between one hundred degrees Fahrenheit (100ºF) to one hundred
four (104°F), the shift commander or designee will check the heat index at least hourly. . . .
B. If the heat index reaches or exceeds one-hundred five degrees (105º F), the shift commander will
announce a heat index alert over the radio and staff will inform inmates and immediate
community service work supervisors of the alert. Staff will begin implementing the procedures
described below in Heat Index Limitation of Activities.
C. When declaring a heat index alert, the shift commander will direct staff to carefully observe
inmates for signs or symptoms of common heat related health problems . . . .
D. If an inmate shows signs of heat related distress, first aid will be administered immediately
and Health Services will be contacted. Responding staff will contact the shift commander as
soon as practical.
[§ IV(3):] Heat Index - Limitation of Activities:
A. Any time a heat index alert is announced, inmates will be restricted from performing nonessential outside strenuous work activity and/or outside strenuous recreation activity.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

121

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

B. Exceptions may be granted by the Secretary of Corrections or Director of Prison Operations
during an Emergency Response Operation, Deployment to a Natural Disaster or other activities
deemed essential, provided proper safety precautions are planned and exercised.
C. The shift commander and/or work supervisors will determine what constitutes non-essential
outside strenuous work and outside strenuous recreational activity. During a heat index alert,
inmates will either be sent back to their housing unit or may be allowed to perform limited
recreational activity or essential outside strenuous work activity, as approved by the shift
commander and/or work supervisor.
D. Outside strenuous recreation activity includes but is not limited to: weight lifting, jogging,
basketball and any other recreation type activity the shift commander deems excessive. Inmates
may remain outside at recreation during a heat index alert but for their own safety, activities
will be restricted.
E. Inmates assigned to essential outside strenuous work activity should be allowed time to
acclimate to the heat.
F. Inmates performing essential outside strenuous work activity or attending outside recreation
when a heat index alert has been announced will have access to chilled water and should be
encouraged to drink water frequently, (Recommended amount is approximately one cup every
15–20 minutes or about 1 quart an hour).
G. Inmates performing essential outside strenuous work activity when a heat index alert has
been announced will be offered frequent breaks in a cool and/or shaded area (when possible).
Tennessee
TENN. COMP. R. & REGS. 1400-01-.04(1)(d) (2015)
New and existing [local correctional] facilities shall have a temperature of not less than sixtyfive (65) degrees Fahrenheit and not more than eighty (80) degrees Fahrenheit in sleeping and
activity areas.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

122

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Texas
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.256 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new lockup facilities] shall be reasonably maintained between 65 degrees
Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.350 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new medium-security jails] shall be reasonably maintained between 65
degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.446 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new minimum-security jails] shall be reasonably maintained between 65
degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.517 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new jail temporary housing (tents)] shall be reasonably maintained
between 65 degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.617 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new jail temporary housing] shall be reasonably maintained between 65
degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.762 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new long-term-incarceration jails] shall be reasonably maintained
between 65 degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 260.154 (2015)
Temperature levels [in county correctional centers] shall be reasonably maintained between 65
degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

123

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 261.160 (2015)
Temperature levels [in existing maximum-security jails] shall be reasonably maintained
between 65 degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 261.255 (2015)
Temperature levels [in existing lockup facilities] shall be reasonably maintained between 65
degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 261.350 (2015)
Temperature levels [in existing minimum-security jails] shall be reasonably maintained between
65 degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in all occupied areas.
47 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 259.160 (2015)
Temperature levels [in new maximum-security jails] shall be reasonably maintained between 65
degrees Fahrenheit and 85 degrees Fahrenheit in occupied areas.
TEX. DEP’T OF CRIM. JUST., CORRECTIONAL MANAGED HEALTH CARE POLICY MANUAL D-27.2
(2014)
[p. 1:] It is the responsibility of the facility medical staff to provide guidelines to assist the facility
administration in the determination of safe and healthful work conditions. Every reasonable
effort shall be made in the interest of preventing heat-related injuries in the workplace.
Problems of heat stress are more common than those prevented by very cold environments.
Heat stress is best prevented by acclimatizing staff and offenders to working under hot and
humid climate conditions, assuring adequate fluid intake and, to a lesser extent, assuring
adequate salt intake. Proper treatment of heat stress should begin at the work site, but severe
heat stress is a medical emergency which must be treated in a medical facility. Salt tablets should
not be used in the treatment or prevention of heat stress.
[p. 2:] PROCEDURES:
I. Whenever the temperature is 85°F or higher, the Warden (or designee) will use the Heat and
Humidity Index . . . to determine safe hot weather working conditions. Prior to exposing workers to
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

124

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

extremely hot working conditions, the Warden or designee should consult with medical staff to
evaluate the hazard of the effective temperature.
II. Acclimatization. Offenders newly assigned to jobs which require strenuous work under
conditions with an apparent air temperature of 90°F or greater . . . must be acclimatized before
assuming a full workload. They should work no more than 3–4 hours at a time, separated by at
least one hour rest in a cooler environment for the first week. After the first week, they may
assume a normal work schedule. Acclimatization can be lost in as little as two weeks, so
anybody who has been away from a hot work environment for more than two weeks should be
reacclimatized. Acclimatization is not necessary for persons assigned to the same job when
temperatures vary with seasonal changes.
III. Fluid Intake. Offenders and staff working at apparent air temperatures over 90°F should
maintain an intake of at least 16 oz of fluids per hour of work. Under extreme conditions, work
should be interrupted every 15–20 minutes and offenders instructed to drink fluids even if they
are not thirsty. Drinking water will always be available to workers in hot weather conditions.
IV. Work-rest Cycle. Whenever the apparent temperature . . . is 90–95°F, a 5-minute rest break
should be given every hour. If the apparent temperature is 96–120°F, a 5-minute rest break
should be given every 30 minutes, and work intensity be reduced by 1/3. If the apparent
temperature is over 120°F, work should be curtailed, or, if work must continue, a 10-minute rest
period should follow every 20 minutes of work, and work intensity should be decreased by 1/2
to 2/3.
V. Newly-assigned workers who are not acclimatized to the heat should be evaluated by the
medical staff before being subjected to significant heat stress, and should be monitored by
supervisors for signs of heat stress during the acclimatization period.
VI. Offenders on Medications. Work assignments for offenders on medications classified as
anhidrotics, poikilothermics or potentiators . . . should be considered carefully. In general,
offenders on antipsychotic drugs should not be allowed to work or recreate in environments
where the apparent air temperature is 95°F or higher. This restriction should also be considered
for offenders who are on other drugs classified as anhydrotics [sic] or poikilothermics or
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

125

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

potentiators if they are on more than one such drug or if they also have an underlying medical
condition that places them at increased risk . . ., particularly at higher dosage levels of the
drugs. Decisions about suitability of work assignments for these offenders will be made by
facility medical staff. Documentation shall be made in the patient’s health record on the HSM18, Health Summary for Classification, form.
Infopac Report #IMS042 lists all offenders with heat sensitive medical restrictions, including
offenders on psychotropic medications. This list is to be reviewed at least once a week during
the summer months of May through September and a determination made that the listed
offenders have appropriate HSM-18 restrictions.
VII. Transportation. Units are to refrain from transporting psychiatric inpatients to another
facility via chain bus. Offenders on the Infopac medication list should be transported during the
coolest hours of the day. Outgoing chain screens should be reviewed against the unit Infopac
Report to ensure that the offenders on medication are traveling on the appropriate mode of
transportation. Please note that the Transportation Department adjusts their schedule during
the summer months so that routes are run during the coolest part of the day.
VIII. Training. Facility medical staff shall provide initial and annual training in the prevention of
temperature extreme injury to all supervisory personnel who manage employees and offenders.
Documentation of completed training shall be maintained by the Facility Health Administrator.
Training should generally be accomplished in March or April of each year.
IX. Reporting. Facility medical staff shall complete the “Heat-Related Illness Reporting Form” . . .
for each case of heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heat stroke or neuroleptic malignant
syndrome. . . .
TEX. DEP’T OF CRIM. JUST., ADMIN. DIRECTIVE AD-10.64 (2008)
[p. 1:] POLICY:
The TDCJ shall establish guidelines to assist unit administration in adapting offender work
assignments to temperatures in the work environment that cannot be controlled by the
Agency. . . .

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

126

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

Every reasonable effort shall be made to prevent extreme temperature-related injuries in the
workplace. . . .
PROCEDURES:
Prior to exposing offenders to extreme temperature conditions (i.e., cold/heat), the Warden and
involved Department Supervisors shall ensure appropriate measures are instituted which
prevent extreme temperature-related injuries. The Warden and involved Department
Supervisors are encouraged to consult medical staff to ascertain specific hazards. In all cases of
temperature-related incidents or injuries, the unit medical staff and the unit Risk Manager shall
be notified immediately. Upon arrival on the scene, medical staff shall take control of the
individual’s medical care. The injured offender shall be removed from the environment by the
most expeditious means available to receive proper medical treatment.
[§ I(A):] During work assignments, offenders shall be exposed to no more than three (3) or four
(4) hours at a time, until acclimated to existing weather conditions. Work periods may then be
extended as the offender physically adjusts to the weather conditions. Appropriate clothing
shall be worn to protect the offender from extreme temperature conditions at all times.
[§ I(B):] Unit staff shall monitor the temperature once every hour between 6:30 a.m. and 6:30
p.m. The temperature shall be announced over the radio and documented on the Temperature
Log . . . . If conditions warrant, the Warden may also request additional readings.
[§ III(A):] 1. . . . When the temperature is over 85°F, the Warden shall use the Heat and Humidity
Matrix [similar to the NWS Heat Index] to determine the heat index. The heat index shall be
used as an indicator of the risk for heat-related injury.
2. At any point when the Heat and Humidity Matrix indicates the possibility of heat exhaustion
or heatstroke [i.e., at a heat index of 90°F or above], the Warden shall instruct the appropriate
staff to immediately initiate the precautionary measures identified in the Heat and Humidity
Matrix [i.e., regular rest breaks, increased water intake, reduced work pace].

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

127

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

3. If guidance is needed, medical staff shall be contacted prior to exposing offenders to
extremely hot working conditions to evaluate the hazards of the current temperatures and
humidity . . . .
4. Offenders shall be provided and required to wear clothing appropriate for the effective
temperatures and the hazards imposed by UV radiation (e.g., light-colored hats can be used to
an advantage in high heat and direct sunlight).
5. Drinking water shall always be available to offenders in conditions of hot weather. According
to individual medical advice, liquids containing sodium may be used depending on an
offender’s state of acclimatization to hot weather conditions.
6 . Newly assigned offenders, who may not be acclimated to the heat, shall be medically
evaluated prior to exposure to significant heat stress and closely monitored by supervisors for
early evidence of heat intolerance.
7. High water intake . . . shall be enforced.
8. Offenders under treatment with diuretics or drugs inhibiting sweating require special
medical evaluation prior to assignment to work in extreme heat.
[§ IV(C):] In [medical emergencies due to] extreme heat conditions, staff shall:
1. Immediately begin an attempt to decrease the offender’s temperature by placing the offender
in a cool area;
2. Only force oral fluid intake if the offender is conscious and able to safely swallow;
3. Remove heavy clothing or excess layers of clothing; saturate remaining lightweight clothing
with water. Position the offender in the shade with air movement past the offender. Fan the
offender if necessary to create air movement;
4. If ice is available, place ice packs in armpit and groin areas;
5. Take all of these measures while moving the offender in the most expeditious means available
to continue with and obtain proper medical treatment; and

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

128

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

6. Ensure, whenever medical staff are on-site, to continue treatment as directed by the physician
or medical staff.
[§ V:] Training
A. Each Warden shall ensure training in the prevention of temperature extreme injury is
provided by unit medical staff to all supervisors designated by the Warden. . . . Heat Training
shall be completed in May of each year.
...
2. Non-work assigned offenders shall be notified of heat awareness via the dayroom bulletin
boards and/or other common use areas . . . .
Vermont
VT. DEP’T OF CORR., PROTOCOL 361.01.14, § V(G) (1997)
Inmates on psychotropic medications should not be exposed to sustained elevated temperature
or direct sunlight for extended periods of time. Patients on psychotropic medications have
increased sensitivity to sunlight and are at higher risk of heat-induced syndromes including
heatstroke, hyperthermia and heat prostration. In view of these factors, the following
recommendations should be made:
1. When under direct sunlight, inmates should wear protective clothing and/or sunscreen.
Provisions should be made for suntan lotions and protective clothing (i.e., shirts) for such
inmates.
2. Excessive exhausting activities in the heat of summer should be avoided;
3. An adequate intake of fluid (8–12 glasses of liquid per day) should be maintained to avoid
dehydration;
4. The temperature of the SRTP must be monitored regularly and logged on a temperature log
in accordance with specific directives issued by the Director of Clinical Services at Central
Office. If inmate housing areas exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit, the following measures must be
instituted:
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

129

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

a. increased ventilation to the area through utilization of fans to improve air flow and
reduce room temperature to less than 90 degrees;
b. provision of increased fluids and ice;
c. allowance of additional showers to provide cooling;
d. recommendation to the Superintendent to permit temporary transfer of the inmate to
an area of the institution that is more compatible with inmate’s clinical status.
Virginia
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-40-1160(C) (2015)
Air conditioning or mechanical ventilation systems, such as electric fans, shall be provided
when the temperature exceeds 85°F [in jails and lockups].
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-45-10 (2015)
“Appropriate heating” [in private prisons] means temperatures appropriate to the summer and
winter comfort zones.
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-45-870 (2015)
Special housing cells or units [in private prisons] shall be well ventilated, adequately lighted,
and appropriately heated and maintained in sanitary conditions at all times. A general log shall
be kept and the temperature shall be recorded at least once each shift. Inmates shall be housed
in an environment in which the temperature does not fall below 65°F, and when the
temperature exceeds 85°F, mechanical air circulation shall be provided.
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-80-10(B) (2015)
“Climate control” [in local correctional facilities] means temperature appropriate to the summer
and winter comfort zones.
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-80-360 (2015)
All cells [in housing units at secure local correctional facilities] shall be provided with . . .
climate control.
Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

130

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-80-370 (2015)
All dormitories [in housing units at secure local correctional facilities] shall be provided with . . .
climate control.
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-80-420(B) (2015)
Heat and air conditioning or mechanical ventilation shall be evenly distributed in all rooms [in
housing units at secure local correctional facilities] so that a temperature not less than 65°F nor
more than 85°F is maintained. Air conditioning or mechanical ventilating systems shall be
provided to maintain temperatures of not more than 85°F.
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-80-430(C)(7) (2015)
[In temporary holding cells or areas in central intake units at secure local correctional facilities,]
climate control shall be provided.
6 VA. ADMIN. CODE § 15-80-1270 (2015)
[In lockups at local correctional facilities,] climate control shall meet the requirements . . . [for
secure local correctional facilities] in these standards.
Washington
WASH. ADMIN. CODE § 137-28-370(4)(a) (2015)
[(4)(a):] An inmate placed in disciplinary segregation shall be . . . Confined to an environment
with healthful temperatures in cells substantially similar to those used for general population.
[(5)(a):] An inmate placed in isolation shall be . . . Confined to an environment with healthful
temperatures in cells substantially similar to those used for general population.
WASH. ADMIN. CODE § 137-32-30(1)(a) (2015)
An inmate placed in an intensive management or administrative segregation unit shall, unless
safety or security considerations dictate otherwise, be . . . Confined in an adequately . . .
ventilated environment at a reasonably comfortable temperature for the season, unless
mechanical or other problems prevent such conditions on a temporary basis.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

131

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

WASH. DEP’T OF CORR., POLICY DOC 890.170 (2012)
[p.2:] POLICY:
I. The Department recognizes the danger associated with outdoor work during periods of
extreme heat. This policy is intended to protect workers in outdoor work environments from
the potential effects of heat related illness through local procedures and annual training.
II. These requirements apply to workers who will work in a heat exposure environment
between May 1 and September 30. For the purposes of this policy, heat exposure environments
are outdoor work areas in which workers will be exposed to heat at or above the temperature
action levels identified in W[ashington] A[dministrative] C[ode] 296-62-09510 [which defines
thresholds for action based on workers’ clothing and personal protective equipment].
[specifics of local procedures and training are laid out on pp. 2–3.]
West Virginia
W. VA. CODE R. § 95-1-8 (2014)
[for jails]

[.5:] Temperatures [in all activity areas] shall be maintained appropriate to the summer and
winter comfort zones with consideration for the activity performed.
[.9(g):] [All rooms or cells shall have] Temperatures appropriate to the summer and winter
comfort zones.
[.10(j):] [All multiple-occupancy rooms shall have] Temperatures appropriate to the summer
and winter comfort zones.
[.11(h):] [All segregation rooms shall have] Temperatures appropriate to the summer and winter
comfort zones.
W. VA. CODE R. § 95-2-8 (2014)
[for correctional facilities]

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

132

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

[.8.7:] [All rooms or cells shall have] Temperatures that are appropriate to the summer and
winter comfort zones.
[.9.10:] [All multiple-occupancy rooms shall have] Temperatures that are appropriate to the
summer and winter comfort zones.
[.10.6:] [All rooms in minimum-security areas or facilities shall have] Temperatures that are
appropriate to the summer and winter comfort zones.
[.11.8:] [All segregation rooms shall have] Temperatures that are appropriate to the summer and
winter comfort zones.
[.23:] Sufficient space shall be provided for equipment needed for . . . ventilating, air
conditioning, . . . etc.
W. VA. CODE R. § 95-3-8 (2014)
[for holding facilities]
[.5:] Temperatures [in all activity areas] shall be maintained appropriate to the summer and
winter comfort zones with consideration for the activity performed.
[.7.g:] Temperatures are appropriate to the summer and winter comfort zones [in all rooms or
cells].
[.8.j:] Temperatures are appropriate to the summer and winter comfort zones [in all multipleoccupancy rooms].
W. VA. CODE R. § 95-3-25 (2014)
[for holding facilities]
[.8.g:] [All holding rooms or cells shall have] Temperatures that are appropriate to the summer
and winter comfort zones.
[.9.g:] [All multiple-occupancy rooms shall have] Temperatures appropriate to the summer and
winter comfort zones.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

133

Heat in US Prisons and Jails: Corrections and the Challenge of Climate Change

W. VA. DIV. OF CORR., POLICY DIR. 203.00, § V(E) (2010)
1. Temperatures in indoor living areas shall be appropriate to summer and winter comfort
zones.
2. Temperatures in indoor work areas shall be appropriate to summer and winter comfort
zones.

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law | Columbia Law School

134